Car registration lookup

Forums › Off topic › Car registration lookup

1 | 2 | 3

2805 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#710418 1-Nov-2012 14:01

gzt:
scuwp: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/registration-licensing/information-who.html

The info is on the above page, and there is a link to the application form.

I reckon just report it to the Police as a suspicious vehicle. They will note the details and if anything dodgy will then have a reference for enquiries.

+1 on that. When someone else calls with the same thing they will have reason to investigate.

Why anyone would bother doing this when google street view is available I don't know.

The reason that its not so cut and dry in our case is that we recently applied for resolution via the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service. While we have had all pending inspections undertaken already, and the driver of the car wasn't one of the inspectors assigned to our case, I cannot rule out the driver's actions being related to this.

I was hoping there was a legal way to determine who the driver was, so I could ascertain whether I needed to be concerned or not.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#710420 1-Nov-2012 14:02

I presume from your post that they took a photo of your house. Thus I presume you don't think your house isn't worth taking a photo of? I have taken lots of photos of peoples houses, but only those that were interesting or designed by architects. But from your post you also thought they were behaving suspiciously? I am not sure if the police would be interested in someone just taking a photo of a house, as there is no crime in that. Also could have been a realestate agent looking for prospects for a client, and they may have taken yours to show the type of house to someone. Could have also been an architectural student doing a project on different types of houses. Heaps of valid reasons. Remember Google also takes photos of peoples houses.

Bung

5427 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#710429 1-Nov-2012 14:14

gzt:+1 on that. When someone else calls with the same thing they will have reason to investigate.

Why anyone would bother doing this when google street view is available I don't know.

That Google street view exists is probably a clue as to how seriously the Police would take any report.

If the photographer was driving something expensive or ridiculously sized he's likely to be a real estate agent.

bigal_nz

635 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#710446 1-Nov-2012 14:51

I see lots of debate here about whether this could be criminal or not.

It could be either and we will never know until it is reported to the Police and they are given the opportunity to ring the owner of the vehicle and find out.

Questions?

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#710450 1-Nov-2012 14:54

bigal_nz: I see lots of debate here about whether this could be criminal or not.

It could be either and we will never know until it is reported to the Police and they are given the opportunity to ring the owner of the vehicle and find out.

Questions?

But would the police put resporces into doing that, just becuase someone has taken a phto of your house. Suspicious behavior is probably worth reporting, but not phtographing a house by itself. Your could take a photo of the house driving by it, and not stopping, and noone would ever know...which is what google does. Because it is done from a public street I don't think there are any problems or privacy concerns. If there was I am sure we would have heard about it. Capturing wifi data though is another matter.

Bung

5427 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#710458 1-Nov-2012 15:06

"A question that often comes up is whether a building or object in a public place or that can seen from a public place is able to be photographed without a release from the owner or creator of the work (architect or sculptor etc). The answer here is ?yes'. In the case of buildings there is a specific exemption for photographing buildings in the Copyright Act." http://clendons.co.nz/photography-law-in-new-zealand.html

If the photo wasn't being taken of the house but a person who had an expectation of privacy then that would be a different matter. dclegg didn't mention that he was entertaining the Duchess of Cambridge topless on his balcony.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#710461 1-Nov-2012 15:16

Most definitely report it to the police. They will file the rego and if other calls are made they can get a pattern and a reason to look further.
It doesn't take long, and its not wasting resources. For all you know it could lead to a potential rapist being interviewed and stopped. If it'd nothing, no harm done.

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#710465 1-Nov-2012 15:26

Bung: "A question that often comes up is whether a building or object in a public place or that can seen from a public place is able to be photographed without a release from the owner or creator of the work (architect or sculptor etc). The answer here is ?yes'. In the case of buildings there is a specific exemption for photographing buildings in the Copyright Act." http://clendons.co.nz/photography-law-in-new-zealand.html

If the photo wasn't being taken of the house but a person who had an expectation of privacy then that would be a different matter. dclegg didn't mention that he was entertaining the Duchess of Cambridge topless on his balcony.

Wouldn't it also depend on who owns the building or sculpture. eg if a sculpture was purchased by the people / coucil and was located in a public space, verses a sculpture that has been purchased privately inside someones property

Bung

5427 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#710477 1-Nov-2012 15:59

INAL but the operative woods seem to be "can seen from a public place is able to be photographed without a release from the owner or creator of the work (architect or sculptor etc)"

I have a house on a downhill section. There is a great view and people often take photos from the front fence. I've forced a degree of privacy for the house by planting stuff that keeps the average person about 2m back from the fence without blocking the wider view.

PS the people I ring the Police about aren't the photographers but the ones that knock on the door looking for an empty house. If you do answer they claim to be looking for somebody you know doesn't live in the street.

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#710480 1-Nov-2012 16:10

Bung: INAL but the operative woods seem to be "can seen from a public place is able to be photographed without a release from the owner or creator of the work (architect or sculptor etc)"

I have a house on a downhill section. There is a great view and people often take photos from the front fence. I've forced a degree of privacy for the house by planting stuff that keeps the average person about 2m back from the fence without blocking the wider view.

PS the people I ring the Police about aren't the photographers but the ones that knock on the door looking for an empty house. If you do answer they claim to be looking for somebody you know doesn't live in the street.

I would also be wary of people knocking on your door to do odd jobs such as tree trimming. They may just be checking to see if anyone is around. The more private your house is, the more attractive it is to burglars.

bigal_nz

635 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#710542 1-Nov-2012 17:52

mattwnz:
bigal_nz: I see lots of debate here about whether this could be criminal or not.

It could be either and we will never know until it is reported to the Police and they are given the opportunity to ring the owner of the vehicle and find out.

Questions?

But would the police put resporces into doing that, just becuase someone has taken a phto of your house. Suspicious behavior is probably worth reporting, but not phtographing a house by itself. Your could take a photo of the house driving by it, and not stopping, and noone would ever know...which is what google does. Because it is done from a public street I don't think there are any problems or privacy concerns. If there was I am sure we would have heard about it. Capturing wifi data though is another matter.

Ok, two issues:

1. is it suspicious? Well clearly the OP thinks so. Do I think its suspicious? Well that would probably depend a bit more on the background information, like time of day, recent burglaries in area etc etc etc. We dont know the answers to all these questions, but I always trust my gut and I encourage the OP to do the same.

Further, I read recently in the local paper of a old guy who rang up about a speeding car - thats pretty minor, but it turned out to be stolen, so little things can lead to big things!

2. Waste of Police resources: Well to determine if the car warrants further investigation requires a phone call by the OP to the cops and the cops to look at the car on the computer. Is it wanted for other things? Is it stolen? Or is it owned by Mrs Brown who is 78 years old and lives down the road?

All that can be done in a matter of minutes over the phone. I dont think a few computer checks are free and only take a few taps on the keyboard. Not a expensive resource or one in short supply.

-Al

mattwnz

19378 posts

Uber Geek

#710548 1-Nov-2012 18:02

bigal_nz:
mattwnz:
bigal_nz: I see lots of debate here about whether this could be criminal or not.

It could be either and we will never know until it is reported to the Police and they are given the opportunity to ring the owner of the vehicle and find out.

Questions?

But would the police put resporces into doing that, just becuase someone has taken a phto of your house. Suspicious behavior is probably worth reporting, but not phtographing a house by itself. Your could take a photo of the house driving by it, and not stopping, and noone would ever know...which is what google does. Because it is done from a public street I don't think there are any problems or privacy concerns. If there was I am sure we would have heard about it. Capturing wifi data though is another matter.

Ok, two issues:

1. is it suspicious? Well clearly the OP thinks so. Do I think its suspicious? Well that would probably depend a bit more on the background information, like time of day, recent burglaries in area etc etc etc. We dont know the answers to all these questions, but I always trust my gut and I encourage the OP to do the same.

Further, I read recently in the local paper of a old guy who rang up about a speeding car - thats pretty minor, but it turned out to be stolen, so little things can lead to big things!

2. Waste of Police resources: Well to determine if the car warrants further investigation requires a phone call by the OP to the cops and the cops to look at the car on the computer. Is it wanted for other things? Is it stolen? Or is it owned by Mrs Brown who is 78 years old and lives down the road?

All that can be done in a matter of minutes over the phone. I dont think a few computer checks are free and only take a few taps on the keyboard. Not a expensive resource or one in short supply.

-Al

Totally agree. A speeding car though is illegal, so the person who reported that were reporting an illegal activity that could easily cause harm to other people, and I think police would take immediate action on that.

bigal_nz

635 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#710557 1-Nov-2012 18:07

mattwnz:
bigal_nz:
mattwnz:
bigal_nz: I see lots of debate here about whether this could be criminal or not.

It could be either and we will never know until it is reported to the Police and they are given the opportunity to ring the owner of the vehicle and find out.

Questions?

But would the police put resporces into doing that, just becuase someone has taken a phto of your house. Suspicious behavior is probably worth reporting, but not phtographing a house by itself. Your could take a photo of the house driving by it, and not stopping, and noone would ever know...which is what google does. Because it is done from a public street I don't think there are any problems or privacy concerns. If there was I am sure we would have heard about it. Capturing wifi data though is another matter.

Ok, two issues:

1. is it suspicious? Well clearly the OP thinks so. Do I think its suspicious? Well that would probably depend a bit more on the background information, like time of day, recent burglaries in area etc etc etc. We dont know the answers to all these questions, but I always trust my gut and I encourage the OP to do the same.

Further, I read recently in the local paper of a old guy who rang up about a speeding car - thats pretty minor, but it turned out to be stolen, so little things can lead to big things!

2. Waste of Police resources: Well to determine if the car warrants further investigation requires a phone call by the OP to the cops and the cops to look at the car on the computer. Is it wanted for other things? Is it stolen? Or is it owned by Mrs Brown who is 78 years old and lives down the road?

All that can be done in a matter of minutes over the phone. I dont think a few computer checks are free and only take a few taps on the keyboard. Not a expensive resource or one in short supply.

-Al

Totally agree. A speeding car though is illegal, so the person who reported that were reporting an illegal activity that could easily cause harm to other people, and I think police would take immediate action on that.

Agreed - but the point is he reported something minor at it led to something bigger. This could be nothing, but he thinks it suspicious, so report it anyway. It only takes two seconds, and you just never know when you might hold the missing peice to a investigation.....

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#710561 1-Nov-2012 18:14

Its a no brainer..... Police are always asking people to report suspicious behaviour.
As I stated before, it's a simple process to do your bit to reduce crime. I wish more would do it.

alasta

6229 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#710643 1-Nov-2012 21:01

When the wing mirror on my car got vandalised last year I went into the police station thinking that it wasn't realistically worth them investigating but they would probably want to take a couple of minutes to record it on their database in case it could end up providing evidence in relation to some other crime or spate of crimes.

I was wrong.

They made it very obvious that they weren't even going to bother formally recording it unless I needed them to do so in order to make an insurance claim. So, I would highly doubt that they would make a record of an incident like this.

1 | 2 | 3