Change of registered keeper
13. Before we decide whether we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found any signs that something has gone wrong.
14. Mr Y complains about the DVLA changing the recorded registered keeper of his car from being in his name to that of his estranged wife in March 2022. He says that after he received the letter from the DVLA informing him of the application, he contacted the DVLA by phone on a number of occasions, each time explaining he did not agree to the change in registered keeper. He says he was told to reply to the DVLA’s letter within the 14-day timeframe given. He says he did this, but the DVLA went ahead and changed the registered keeper. Mr Y told us he had a personalised registration number on the car. He has owned the entitlements to the private registration for over 35 years, but he lost those rights with the change in registered keeper.
15. In its response dated 7 April 2022, the DVLA says:
‘We received a processed a valid application to update our records. I appreciate Mr [Y] states that he called us to respond to the letter he received. As Mr [Y] called our Contact Centre (CC) and not the number provided on the letter he was advised to post the information to us. I understand he sent his letter Recorded Delivery, I am unable to check the status of letter without the track and trace number. However, we have an agreement with Royal Mail whereby they sign for the mail, when it is received at their Depot, the mail is then transported to our mail sorting office, to be sent to the relevant business area. Unfortunately Mr [Y]’s response to our V712 was not received before our records were updated with the new keeper details and a V5C was issued to them.
I note Mr [Y]’s comment that under no circumstances should we change the registered keeper. We record the “keeper” of a vehicle, that is, the person who has the vehicle in their possession and is responsible for making sure it is properly registered and taxed. The V5C Registration does not prove ownership, and we cannot be involved in any disagreement about who legally owns the vehicle.’
16. In its response dated 25 April 2022, the DVLA says:
‘Mr [Y] has now confirmed the vehicle is not in his possession because his ex-wife is currently using it temporarily as agreed between them, therefore he cannot be recorded as the keeper of the vehicle and no V5C will be issued to him at this point. When he has the vehicle back in his possession, he can then apply for the V5C in his name so we are able to add him back as the registered keeper…
I can also confirm Mr [Y] has lost the rights to use the personalised registration number.
The rights to the registration number lie with the vehicle and if the vehicle is transferred before a retention application is completed, the new keeper is entitled to keep the registration number, should they wish to do so. As the vehicle was passed to a new keeper before a retention application was completed by Mr [Y], the rights to it cannot be returned to him without the permission of the new keeper.’
17. In its letter to Mr Y dated 16 June 2022, the ICA says that:
‘the effect of your letter would have been to trigger further enquiries by the DVLA which would have revealed (as per your response to the DVLA of 19 April 2022) that the vehicle was in the possession of your wife – albeit, in your view, temporarily – for which reason you could not supply the vehicle’s VIN [vehicle identification number].
This is all very unfortunate. Indeed, I note that you had the rights to the registration [number] before your marriage, and it is apparent why you think the service offered by the DVLA has been poor. But the plain fact of the matter is that your estranged wife is the current “keeper” of the vehicle (in that it is in her possession), and the registration details are for the time being correct.
The DVLA also has a long-standing (and entirely understandable) policy of not becoming involved in civil disputes over the ownership of vehicles, not least in the very difficult circumstances of marital breakdown.
In these circumstances, it cannot be maladministrative for the DVLA to apply the legislation on vehicle registration as Parliament intended.’
18. The Regulations say:
‘Change of keeper: registration document issued in Great Britain on or after 24th March 1997 and the new keeper not a vehicle trader
22.—(1) This regulation applies where— (a) there is a change in the keeper of a vehicle; (b) a vehicle registration document has been issued in respect of the vehicle in Great Britain on or after 24th March 1997; and (c) the new keeper is not a vehicle trader.
(2) The registered keeper of the vehicle— (a) if the registration document issued in respect of the vehicle is in his possession, shall deliver to the new keeper that part of the document marked as the part which is to be given to the new keeper; and (b) shall forthwith deliver the remainder of the registration document to the Secretary of State, duly completed to include the following— (i) the name and address of the new keeper; (ii) the date on which the vehicle was sold or transferred to the new keeper.’
19. The Regulations also explain that the definition of keeper ‘in relation to a vehicle means the person by whom that vehicle is kept’ and registered keeper ‘in relation to a vehicle means the person for the time being shown in the register as the keeper of that vehicle’.
20. Our ‘Principles of Good Administration’ state: ‘All public bodies must comply with the law and have regards for the rights of those concerned. They should act according to their statutory powers and duties and any other rules governing the service they provide. They should follow their own policy and procedural guidance, whether published or internal.’
21. According to the Regulations, the DVLA’s role is to record the registered keeper of the vehicle – the person who is in possession of it and is therefore responsible for its upkeep, tax, insurance and any fines incurred while driving it. The registered keeper is different from the vehicle owner, who is the person who bought the vehicle. The Regulations explain it is expected that when a vehicle is transferred to a new keeper, action is taken by the registered keeper to inform the DVLA of the new keeper’s personal information.
22. We acknowledge that Mr Y replied to the DVLA’s letter within the 14-day deadline, but it did not reach the relevant team in time. We asked the DVLA what difference it would have made if Mr Y’s letter had been received before the deadline. It said that as it appears from the written responses the vehicle is not in Mr Y’s possession, it would not have prevented the application processing. We have seen Mr Y’s initial written response, which reads: ‘I will remain the registered keeper + owner of this vehicle until further notice by myself only. Please ignore the request you have received from someone else.’ We have also seen he contacted the DVLA on 19 April 2022 with further evidence and to ask it to make him the registered keeper again. He explained on the form: ‘As my wife currently has temporary use of this car, I am unable to provide the VIN.’
23. While we do not wholly agree Mr Y’s initial written response clearly states the vehicle is not in his possession, we agree with the ICA that, had the letter been received in time, it would have prompted further investigation, which would have highlighted that the vehicle was not in Mr Y’s possession at the time. We fully appreciate Mr Y’s view that he had not intended to transfer keepership of the car to his wife but to allow her use of it. We do not consider the outcome would have been any different, as the DVLA had ultimately received a valid application, which it processed accordingly. This is in line with our principles quoted above, as the DVLA’s actions are in line with the regulations governing it. These events led to Mr Y also losing his entitlements to his personalised registration number. We consider this to be an unfortunate consequence of the circumstances, through no fault of Mr Y or the DVLA, as the entitlements lie with the vehicle. Mr Y would only be able to remove the registration from the car with the agreement of the registered keeper.
24. We fully understand that this has been a difficult and frustrating experience for Mr Y. We also understand his concern that his estranged wife was able to change the registered keeper of the car, in his view, so easily. The loss of his entitlement to his private registration number has also added to his upset. We cannot say the DVLA has done anything wrong in processing the change of registered keeper.
Complaint handling
25. Mr Y complains the DVLA ignored all his letters of complaint and responded only to his MP. Although it did acknowledge his initial complaint, it has failed to contact Mr Y directly in relation to his complaint.
26. Mr Y first raised his complaint with the DVLA on 29 March 2022, and this was acknowledged on 31 March 2022. Around the same time, Mr Y also raised his concerns with both his MP, who wrote to the DVLA on 30 March, and his MSP, who wrote to the DVLA on 1 April 2022. The DVLA replied to the MP on 7 April 2022. The letter says, ‘Mr [Y] has also raised the same concerns with [name] MSP on 1 April and directly to our Complaints Team on 31 March. This response will cover each enquiry received by us and a copy of this letter has also been sent to [name] MSP’.
27. We can see from the evidence Mr Y provided that his MP wrote to him on 8 April 2022 with a copy of the DVLA’s response. Mr Y wrote to the DVLA’s complaints team on 10 and 14 April. He received no response, so he wrote to his MP again on 17 April. The MP wrote to the DVLA on 19 and 20 April. The DVLA responded to the MP on 25 April, and we can see from the evidence that the MP forwarded the response to Mr Y on 26 April. On 22 May, Mr Y wrote to the DVLA to ask it to escalate his complaint to the ICA. On 7 June, the DVLA wrote to him to confirm it would action his request.
28. Our ‘Principles of Good Complaint Handling’ say all public bodies should be customer-focused. This means they should ‘deal with complaints promptly, avoiding unnecessary delays and in line with published service standards where appropriate. Resolving problems and complaints as soon as possible is best for both complainants and public bodies’.
29. We asked the DVLA why it did not provide a response directly to Mr Y. It told us it had received multiple letters raising the same issues, so the case handler decided to respond only to the MP, and it is within their discretion to do so.
30. We understand why Mr Y was frustrated at not receiving a direct response from the DVLA. We agree this is not ideal and that it would have been more customer-focused if the DVLA had also sent a copy of its response to him, or indeed chosen to reply to him directly. We cannot say this falls so far short of our principles that it amounts to a sign of maladministration. This is because he did ultimately receive a response and was not disadvantaged by the DVLA responding to his MP, as on both occasions his MP sent the response to him the day after receiving it. We do understand why this added to an already stressful time for Mr Y.