Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Plan Would Use CCTV To Stop Uninsured Drivers From Refueling

Posted by timothy on from the if-you-don't-see-the-problem-you're-the-problem dept.

Mr_Blank writes "Cameras at UK petrol stations will automatically stop uninsured or untaxed vehicles from being filled with fuel, under new government plans. Downing Street officials hope the hi-tech system will crack down on the 1.4 million motorists who drive without insurance. Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras are already fitted in thousands of petrol station forecourts. Drivers can only fill their cars with fuel once the camera has captured and logged the vehicle's number plate. Currently the system is designed to deter motorists from driving off without paying for petrol. But under the new plans, the cameras will automatically cross-refererence with the DVLA's huge database."

9 of 691 comments (clear)

  1. Riiiight by chronosan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's to stop someone from filling a jerry can with gas and then fuelling their car, or can lawnmower and chainsaw operators no longer buy gas?

    1. Re:Riiiight by Dhalka226 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is it that geeks always need something to be flawless before they find it worth consideration?

      If the worst this system produces is people using gas cans, it's a victory. There will be people who will find the inconvenience enough incentive to get their insurance which is exactly the goal. Since the technology is largely already there, the database check shouldn't be a significant additional cost. (Who knows with government mandates though.)

      If there is a reason to oppose this it would be the fears of Big Brother and the ability of government to know almost exactly where you are every moment you are in country. Still, with due respect to our British friends, it seems like that ship sailed a while ago. If they're (going to be) doing it, it won't require this program.

  2. Doesn't sound workable to me by prefect42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This would work just fine if the database was correct, which it simply isn't. Delays in getting information updated would mean you having a fully licenses, taxes, MOTed, and insured car that you couldn't fill up with petrol. So there'd need to be a way of overriding it, which puts a whole lot of pressure on the vendor.

    Nice in theory, but I don't see it working. That doesn't mean I don't see it happening.

    --

    jh

  3. Correction by Manip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The UK already uses CCTV cameras on a massive scale to catch uninsured cars. Our motorways have cameras over every lane which track the numberplate and this information can both be used to calculate average speed over a section of road (to enforce speed limits) and also to check for insured, banned drivers, or stolen vehicles.

    This is less a new idea as the /. summary implies and more just an expansion of an existing project.

  4. Can't put politics and bureaucracy aside by tepples · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not, politics and bureaucracy aside, make the "mandatory" insurance something you pay with your vehicle registration?

    Because large companies and trade associations in the private sector who have successfully captured the regulators find it unprofitable to put "politics and bureaucracy aside". For another, there'd still be tons of "politics and bureaucracy" in figuring out the premium that applies to each driver-vehicle pair.

  5. Re:ground effects lighting by denis-The-menace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Add Canadians to the list.

    We are currently going through our "Bush" phase.

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  6. Re:ground effects lighting by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The law is the law - you must have insurance in your EU or US state. Whether that law is enforced with human eyes or camera eyes really makes no difference (IMHO). I have to waste ~$300 a year to insure other drivers & their cars in case I hit them..... I don't see why anyone else thinks they shouldn't have to pay the bill too.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  7. Re:ground effects lighting by Theophany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fucking A. However, I'd be more excited if this initiative resulted in falling car insurance premiums, which I doubt it will. Just yesterday I was quoted between £4,000 and £12,000 for car insurance for a 7 year old Honda S2000, despite having over 5 years NCB, never having had a speeding ticket, never having had any motoring convictions AND agreeing to have a tracker box fitted to the car.

    People who drive uninsured don't do it just because they're all dicks (admittedly, many of them are), but because they're priced out of the freaking market by companies with a license to print money.

    On an unrelated note, fuel prices are ~70% tax ffs. And these government shitheads honestly cannot work out why people break the law?

  8. Re:ground effects lighting by miltonw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure! Why worry? You've already "agreed" that the government can track your car's movements, what's wrong with this next step: Allowing the government to control your car's movement. With this system they can automatically deny you fuel, what could possibly go wrong? You are "not doing anything wrong" so "you have nothing to worry about", right?

    It's all controlled by computers and they never have glitches, they never have bad data. No government employee would accidentally or on purpose screw with your data. The government would never use this to deny fuel to innocent (but "suspicious") people. No!

    Nothing to worry about. Go back to sleep.