Open consultation

Vehicle recovery options assessment: amends to police vehicle recovery legislation (accessible)

Updated 29 May 2025

© Crown copyright 2025

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/amends-to-legislation-on-vehicle-removal-storage-and-disposal/vehicle-recovery-options-assessment-amends-to-police-vehicle-recovery-legislation-accessible

Title: Vehicle Recovery Legislation Proposal: Amendments to disposal timeframes and terminology and increasing vehicle recovery charges

Type of measure: Secondary Legislation

Department or agency: The Home Office

IA number: HO COA 1009

RPC reference number: Not applicable

Contact for enquiries: Vehicle_Recovery@homeoffice.gov.uk

Date: 20/05/2025

1. Summary of proposal

1. This proposal is to support the government’s Safer Streets Mission[footnote 1] to crackdown on anti-social behaviour (ASB) with tougher powers to deal with persistent ASB through quicker seizure and disposal of vehicles being used anti-socially.

2. Police vehicle removals are necessary to enforce the law and to remove obstructions and potential dangers from the roads. Vehicle removals can include vehicles that have been driven/ridden anti-socially or driven without insurance or a driving licence. Vehicle removals also help prevent theft[footnote 2] of abandoned vehicles, their use for criminal purposes, environmental degradation and their being driven whilst in a dangerous condition (which may not be immediately apparent). In some cases, the police may need to remove a vehicle for forensic examination. Vehicle removal also is an important law enforcement tactic allowing the police to seize vehicles from uninsured, unlicensed or anti-social drivers.

3. The police have the following four powers to remove vehicles under certain circumstances:

  • Section 59 of The Police Reform Act 2002 (PRA 2002)[footnote 3] provides the police with the power to remove vehicles that are driven carelessly or inconsiderately on road or without authorisation off-road and in a manner causing, or likely use, alarm, distress or annoyance.

  • Section 165A of The Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988)[footnote 4] provides the police with the power to remove vehicles if they have reasonable grounds to believe that it is being driven without appropriate licence or insurance.

  • Section 62 of The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJPOA 1994)[footnote 5] provides the police with the power to remove vehicles if they are being used in unlawful trespass.

  • Section 99 of The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (RTRA 1984)[footnote 6] applies to vehicles that are illegally, dangerously or obstructively parked, broken down or abandoned, including those abandoned after theft to maintain the flow of traffic on the highway, ensure public safety or to “clear the Queen’s Highway”. Local authorities also have corresponding powers to RTRA 1984 under the Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978 (RDAA 1978)[footnote 7].

4. The physical tasks of removal, storage and subsequent disposal are carried out on behalf of the police by contracted recovery operators; or in the case of the Metropolitan Police by their own in-house managed scheme.

5. Police are empowered to charge the vehicle owner or registered keeper a prescribed statutory fee to prevent the police or the taxpayer more widely having to shoulder the financial burden. The charges vary according to the size of the vehicle, whether it is on or off-road, whether or not it is substantially damaged and whether or not it is carrying goods. The police can waive the statutory fee at their operational discretion.

6. The statutory fees are subject to principles relevant to the managing of public resources.

7. The Home Office is responsible for setting the levels of the statutory fee the police can charge by way of secondary legislation which will be referred to in this document as “the vehicle recovery regulations[footnote 8]”. The statutory fees were last increased in April 2023 to take account of inflation and various operational changes. Secondary legislation also includes regulations that prescribe timeframes on vehicle disposal, release and seizure notice methods and timeframes.

8. The Home Office is seeking consultation feedback on the following proposals:

  • Adjusting the statutory fees for vehicle recovery and storage.

  • Adjusting the minimum time that a vehicle must be stored for before it can be disposed of.

The evidence from this consultation will also support future advice and guidance on the use of section 59 of PRA 2002[footnote 9] in dealing with ASB involving vehicles.

2. Strategic case for proposed regulation

9. The strategic objective is to support the government’s Safer Streets Mission[footnote 10] to crackdown on ASB with tougher powers to deal with persistent ASB. Alongside a review of vehicle recovery powers for vehicular ASB, Home Office will also consider other vehicle recovery disposal timeframes and an inflationary increase to vehicle recovery statutory fees. Police vehicle recovery operations represent an important capability and law enforcement tool against anti-social vehicle use, uninsured and unlicensed vehicles.

10. Vehicle recovery powers are also important in removing unauthorised encampments and dangerously and obstructively parked cars. An unobstructed strategic road network is important to the economy[footnote 11].

11. ASB involving vehicles is a real concern to communities and is frequently raised with the government, MPs, Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and Chief Constables. ASB involving vehicles takes place on and off road, in urban and rural areas. It ranges to lower-level offending such as excessive noise to dangerous driving and drug dealing. It is a highly visible crime type which blights communities. There is concern among some police partners and communities[footnote 12] that offenders may recover their seized vehicles from the police and go on to reoffend.

12. The ease with which offenders can reclaim the vehicles can mean that there is a risk that there is insufficient deterrent to stop persistent offenders. Prior to the General Election the now Home Secretary spoke about wanting to allow the police to crush vehicles that have been driven/ridden anti-socially within 48 hours to try to prevent reoffending of ASB involving vehicles.

13. For the police to optimise use of vehicle recovery powers to enforce the law against anti-social vehicle use, these vehicle recovery operations need to be financially viable. This is why the government is reviewing the statutory vehicle recovery fees which the police charge vehicle owners to cover their costs for vehicle recovery and storage. The Home Office previously increased the statutory fees in April 2023 by 28 per cent to reflect inflation that had occurred between 2008 and 2021. The Home Office consulted on this increase and the consultation[footnote 13] feedback from policing and industry was that this would ease some of the pressures on the industry. The Home Office previously agreed to holding the next review of the statutory fees in 2025.

14. Despite the 2023 increase, police and industry stakeholders have expressed significant concerns that the current statutory fees no longer cover costs. The Home Office have been informed that this is because of the raising costs of fuel, vehicles, spare parts for vehicles and labour and that this has resulted in some vehicle recovery companies going out of business. Operators have expressed these concerns during vehicle recovery conferences attended by policing and industry, stakeholder meetings with the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) vehicle recovery leads and in writing.

15. Each police force will draw up its own procurement contracts for vehicle recovery services. The NPCC and Home Office do not hold data on the specific costs which are incurred by police forces or the vehicle recovery operators or how this has changed since 2023. This means it is currently no known by how much costs have increased. The government will aim to collect more evidence on costs from the consultation, and if required from further engagement with policing and the industry.

16. The Home Secretary and Policing Minister[footnote 14] have spoken publicly about plans to reducing disposal timeframes to allow the police to put an immediate stop to offending and quickly dispose of vehicles which are used anti-socially. The Home Office will consult on a reduction in disposal timeframes across other vehicle recovery powers.

17. ASB involving vehicles is a concern to communities throughout the country. ASB is consistently cited as a top local concern. In a community safety survey commissioned by the Home Office in 2022[footnote 15], 60 per cent of adults selected ASB as the crime issue that they were most concerned about in their local area.

18. Overall ASB features consistently in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)[footnote 16] as the public’s biggest crime concern locally; and it is gradually rising.

  • In the year ending March 2024, the CSEW showed that around 36 per cent of respondents personally witnessed or experienced ASB in their local area. ​

  • ASB is a concern that consistently features highest nationally. The CSEW showed that vehicle related behaviour accounts for the second highest problem at 10.6 per cent, being one of the concerns driving individuals’ perception of ASB being a ‘problem in their area’.

19. The government’s intention is to make it easier for the police to dispose of seized vehicles which have been used in an anti-social manner, to allow the police to react firmly and immediately to vehicular ASB offending. This will support the Home Office’s wider missions to improve public confidence in policing and reduce ASB overall.

20. Police generally arrange for private recovery operators to carry out vehicle removal on their behalf. Using industry contractors to carry out vehicle removal, storage and disposal on their behalf is generally more cost-effective than providing an in-house service. The police and vehicle recovery industry have reported to the Home Office that these businesses are impacted by increased operating costs. Police and recovery operators have stated that there is a risk that many operators will go out of business because operating costs continue to climb through the impact of fuel and similar inflationary costs. If this happens, the police will have to provide an in-house service or pay the operators from the general policing budget, which would mean redirecting resources from other priorities. It would also prohibit police’s ability to swiftly dispose of seized vehicles, including those being used anti socially. The contracts between the vehicle recovery operators and the police are operational matters for policing.

21. The Home Office has engaged with policing and industry stakeholders on the implementation of the 2023 amendments to the vehicle recovery regulations[footnote 17]. The increase was welcomed by stakeholders, but the Home Office has been informed that costs continue to rise. The Home Office plan to carry out a targeted consultation on the detailed proposals.

22. The Home Office consulted vehicle recovery policing stakeholders on proposals to shorten current timeframes for disposal. Stakeholders were supportive of the changes and said that this would reduce storage costs. NPCC vehicle recovery policing leads advise that the majority (75%) of vehicles are claimed by day 7 ahead of the maximum 14 days.

3. SMART objectives for intervention

23. The policy objective will support the government’s Safer Streets Mission[footnote 18] to crackdown on ASB with tougher powers to deal with persistent ASB through quicker seizure and disposal of vehicles being used anti-socially. The review will help to ensure that police vehicle recovery operations can charge statutory fees that remain financially sustainable – that is, set at level which allows the police to recover at least some of their costs. This will mean that police recovery operations are affordable within the police budgets. It is not intended for the police services to use vehicle removal as a revenue generation exercise. The Home Office will achieve this by increasing the statutory charges applied to vehicle recovery operations, adjusting for the effects of inflation and changes to disposal timeframes.

24. The Home Office intends to amend secondary legislation vehicle disposal timeframes to meet government aims to deal with vehicular ASB[footnote 19] and align all other vehicle recovery disposal timeframes. This aims to reduce reoffending and deter offenders. The reduced timeframes for vehicle disposal will also assist in easing storage capacity pressures.

25. The Home Office consider that the proposed changes to the vehicle recovery regulations are reasonable. The previous change to the regulations resulted in an inflationary increase to the 2008 statutory fees calculated from 2008 to 2021/22 for 28 per cent that was implemented as the 2023 fees. The government proposal will consider an inflationary increase calculated between 2021/22 and 2025/26 to be 16.2 per cent[footnote 20]. This proposed uplift uses the same methodology as the previous uplift. This will mean that the police continue to use vehicle recovery as an effective law enforcement tool.

26. The government intends to lay the amended regulations in March 2026 in line with the Common Commencement Date in April 2026.

Measuring outcomes

27. The aim of the reduced timeframes will be to deal with those who commit motoring offences by enabling quicker disposal of seized vehicles to deter reoffending/offending. The Home Office monitor levels of vehicle related ASB.

4. Description of proposed intervention options and explanation of the logical change process whereby this achieves SMART objectives

28. The shortlisted options for consultation are as follows, options are explained in detail in section 6: Description of shortlisted policy options carried forward:

  • Option 0: ‘Do nothing’ - Maintain at current 2023 statutory fees – The current fees will remain at levels as set out in ‘The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023’[footnote 21].

  • Option 1: Inflationary increase to current statutory fees only. Uplift the current fees following the same methodology used for the uplift in 2023. This leads to an increase of 16.2 per cent to fees.

  • Option 2: Inflationary increase, reduction to minimum storage times and terminology change. Alongside the inflationary increase described in option 1, reduce in the minimum amount time a vehicle must be stored for before it can be disposed either through auction or by crushing from 14 days to 7 days. In addition, amend terminology for the time unit measurement from ‘working days’ to ‘days’.

  • Option 3: Inflationary increase, reduction to minimum storage times, terminology change (as outlined in options 1 and 2) and a 48-hour minimum storage time for vehicles used in ASB. As well as Option 1 and Option 2, vehicles recovered under Section 59 of PRA 2002[footnote 22] would have a further reduction from the current 14 day minimum storage to 48 hours to deal with ASB.

29. If the current fees in Option 0 remain at the current 2023 levels, and if operational costs rise beyond the fees that operators receive, it may become financially challenging for recovery operators to sustain their services, potentially leading them to withdraw.

30. An increase of the current statutory fees of 16.2 per cent, as set out in Option 1, would assist recovery operators in keeping up with rising costs and ensure that recovery operators can continue to provide their recovery service. The objective is to safeguard businesses, reduce costs to the police and prevent market failure.

31. An increase to the current fees and reducing the existing timeframes for vehicles to be reclaimed before disposal can occur, as set out in Option 2, would assist recovery operators in keeping up with rising costs and ensure that recovery operators can continue to provide their recovery service. Reducing disposal timeframes and amending the terminology for the time unit measurement for vehicle storage days from ‘working days’ to ‘calendar days’ across all legislation will.

32. Option 3 - an increase of the current statutory fees of 16.2 per cent, as set out in Option 1, will assist recovery operators to keep up with rising costs and ensure that recovery operators can continue to provide their recovery service. Reducing disposal timeframes and amending the terminology will enable consistency across police recovery operations. Reducing disposal timeframes to 48 hours will meet the government’s objective to reduce vehicular ASB by allowing vehicles to be disposed quicker. This will assist in the government’s plans to deal with vehicular ASB as part of the Safer Streets Mission[footnote 23].

33. The evidence from this consultation will also support future advice and guidance on the use of section 59 PRA 2002[footnote 24] powers in dealing with ASB involving vehicles.

34. The proposed legislative options aim to increase the statutory fees by inflation and reduce disposal timeframes for the police in England and Wales (also includes Scotland for the Road Traffic Act 1988), a logic model is presented below:

Table 1: Logic Model of intervention

Issue Intervention Method Short term Longer term
Police recovery operators have reported to be struggling to recover costs because of inflationary pressures. The industry is currently unsustainable – risk to an important law enforcement capability. An inflationary increase to current 2023 statutory fees. Consultation - seeking views on operational feasibility and any foreseeable implementation additional costs. The government would seek to learn of potential consequence for police when they dispose of an unclaimed vehicle or a vehicle which was used without the owner’s permission.

Change to secondary legislation.		 The statutory fees are increased.

Risk to police vehicle recovery operations is reduced.		 Supports Safer Streets and Growth Missions[footnote 25]

Reduction in anti-social vehicle use.
The police are unable to quickly dispose of vehicles, they incur storage costs. Owners can reclaim vehicles and reoffend. Timescale for disposal reduction for seven days in PRA 2002, RTA 1988 and harmonise CJPOA 1994.

(Only RTRA 1984 / RDAA 1978 have a disposal fee).		 Consultation

Change to secondary legislation		 The police can more quickly dispose of seized vehicles.

The objective is to prevent some reoffending and deters some offending.

Some of the cost pressures on police from vehicle storage are reduced.		 Supports Safer Streets and Growth Missions

Reduction in anti-social vehicle use.
The police are unable to quickly dispose of vehicles, they incur storage costs. Owners can reclaim vehicles and reoffend. Amend disposal timeframes so that they are measured in ‘calendar days’ rather than ‘working days’ as is currently the case. Consultation

Change to secondary legislation		 The police can more quickly dispose of seized vehicles.

The objective is to prevent some reoffending and deters some offending.

Some of the cost pressures on police from vehicle storage are reduced.		 Supports Safer Streets and Growth Missions

Reduction in anti-social vehicle use.

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis

5. Summary of long-list and alternatives

35. Non-regulatory options have been explored fully and are not sufficient as the statutory fees and minimum storage times can only be changed through amendments to legislation[footnote 26] [footnote 27] [footnote 28]. Non-legislative changes to vehicle recovery would not meet Home Office’s objective to increase fees and improve the efficiency of the system.

Fee uplift

36. The proposed changes in this consultation options assessment (COA) fall into two main categories; increasing statutory fees and changes to the length of time that vehicles are stored for. A long list of options has been created for each of these variables which can be used in any combination between the two variables.

37. Several options have been considered for how to increase the statutory fees:

  • Increase statutory fees by GDP deflators in line with the 2021/22 uplift (shortlisted).

  • Increase statutory fees by the consumer price index (CPI) (discounted)

  • Increase statutory fees by the retail price index (RPI) (discounted)

  • Create a new cost model to update costs that changed differently to inflation. (discounted)

37. GDP deflators has been shortlisted as the main option as this maintains the precedent set out in in the 2023 uplift[footnote 29]. Adjusting fees by CPI and RPI has been calculated and would lead to a higher increase in the fees compared to GDP deflators. Maintaining the precedent set out in the previous fees uplift will be beneficial. CPI and RPI also focuses on consumer goods whilst GDP deflators are a broader measure of inflation across the UK.

38. Creating a new cost model has been discounted as this has been seen as disproportionate for the level of impact it will have at this time. This is because this will mean that the fee increases will take longer to come into effect which is not practical for operators, the police and government objectives.

Minimum storage times

39. For adjusting the length of time vehicles are stored for before they are disposed of a range of options have been considered:

  • Maintain the current storage days of 14 days. (shortlisted)

  • Reduce the maximum number of storage days to seven days. (shortlisted)

  • Reduce the maximum number of storage days to two days. (discounted)

40. Maintaining the current storage days of 14 days has been shortlisted as a basic option to show the impact of only increasing the statutory fees. Reducing the maximum number of storage days has also been shortlisted as an option as it achieves most of the government objectives.

41. Reducing maximum storage days to two days has been discounted as the practicality of this short time frame for individuals to pick up their vehicles due to work/childcare responsibility could prove a challenge and businesses will have a high turnover rate that could lead to operational difficulties.

42. The option to reduce the maximum number of storage days to seven days may balance government objectives to reduce the amount of time that vehicles are stored for, whilst also leaving a practical amount of time for vehicles recovered under other circumstances.

Minimum storage time for vehicles that have been driven/ridden anti-socially

43. For addressing ASB, a range of options have been considered:

  • ‘Do nothing’. Add no provision specifically for ASB. (shortlisted)

  • Reduce the maximum number of storage days to 48 hours for vehicles under Section 59 of PRA 2002 which focuses on ASB[footnote 30].

44. The option to reduce the maximum number of storage days to two days for vehicles used for ASB may achieve government objectives to reduce the amount of time that vehicles are stored for and reduce ASB. Adding no provision has been included as a shortlisted option to assess the impact of increasing fees and changing the maximum number of storage days.

6. Description of shortlisted policy options carried forward

Option 0 – ‘Do nothing’: Maintain at Current 2023 Statutory Fees

43. Under this option, the Home Office will fail to meet commitments[footnote 31] to reduce vehicle recovery disposal timeframes for vehicular ASB part of Safer Streets Mission[footnote 32].

44. Under the ‘Do nothing’ option, statutory fees and storage times will remain unchanged. Businesses dealing with vehicles recovery, storage and disposals will continue receiving the same fees they have since 2023 which does not consider the inflationary pressures of recent years.

45. The current fees will continue to be prescribed as set out in ‘The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023’[footnote 33] and as set out in Annex C.

46. This would result in a risk to the continuing financial viability of the vehicle recovery operators and a potential market failure.

Option 1: Inflationary increase to current statutory fees only

47. The Home Office proposes an inflationary increase to apply to the current statutory fees across all the legislation to ensure that police vehicle recovery operations remain sustainable. This will allow the police operators to charge the statutory fees and enable the police’s recovery operators and in the case of the Metropolitan Police’s in-house managed recovery scheme to remain financially viable.

48. Increasing fees by GDP deflators will contribute to the Home Office objective to reduce the risks to the sectors financial sustainability. For 2025/26 the increase in fees from 2021/22 is 16.2 per cent which will be applied to vehicle recoveries, disposals and storage[footnote 34]. The full methodology is available in Annex A.

49. The last increase to the statutory fees was in 2023 using 2021/22 data. This proposed fee increase uses forecasted 2025/26 deflators which will be confirmed before the regulations come into effect.

50. This option accounts for an increase of the current fees with an inflationary increase of 16.2 per cent from 2021 with the new charges as set out in Annex D.

Option 2: Inflationary increase, reduction to minimum storage times and terminology change.

51. This option will also uplift the fees as outlined in Option 1.

52. Reducing the timeframes, as prescribed in secondary legislation, that the police must retain a recovered vehicle before they can dispose of it. This option aims to aid reduction in some reoffending, deter some offending and decrease storage costs for policing. This will be achieved by aligning all the secondary legislation disposal timeframes for the PRA 2002[footnote 35], RTA 1988[footnote 36] and CJPOA 1994[footnote 37].

53. The RTRA 1984[footnote 38] and the RDAA 1978[footnote 39] prescribe statutory fees to include disposal timeframes specific to the circumstances necessary to deal with abandoned or obstructively parked vehicles of seven days. The Home Office does not propose any changes to these disposal timeframes.

54. By increasing fees by GDP deflator and decreasing storage time to seven days. Adjusting the phrasing to seven days is crucial to allow for consistency across different businesses that storage is contracted to with different opening hours. This option will best safeguard the businesses and police forces to increase revenue generated from vehicle recoveries and free up capacity across the country.

55. Amending the terminology for the time unit measurement for vehicle storage days from ‘working days’ to ‘calendar days’ to across all legislation will ensure consistency across all police recovery operations.

Option 3: Inflationary increase, reduction to minimum storage times and terminology change and a 48-hour minimum storage time for vehicles that have been driven/ridden anti-socially

56. This option will also uplift the fees as outlined in Option 1.

57. This option will adjust minimum storage times and change terminology as outlined in Option 2

58. Vehicles recovered under Section 59 of PRA 2002[footnote 40] would have a further reduction from the current 14-day minimum storage to 48 hours to deal with vehicles used in ASB.

7. Monitoring and evaluation

59. If the options which involve changes to “the vehicle recovery legislation” are taken forward, the Home Office intends to introduce the amended legislation to increase the fees and reduce the disposal timeframes as early as May 2026 and no later than October 2026. The Home Office will begin the process for another formal review and stakeholder consultation of the statutory fees by 2028.

60. Success will be measured by the police continuing to be able to contract vehicle recovery operators to provide a sustainable service to keep roads free from obstructions caused by abandoned, damaged or broken-down vehicles. The Home Office will gauge this through close engagement with the police vehicle recovery leads and vehicle recovery operators on their financial stability and the extent to which they are able to recover costs. A spike in inflation or operational pressures (such as supply chain problems or new Health and Safety regulations) could mean that an earlier review is necessary.

61. Success will also be measured by the volume of section 59 of PRA 2002[footnote 41] seizures to deal with ASB involving vehicles in line with the government’s Safer Streets Mission[footnote 42]. Police forces collect data on their vehicle recovery management system on volumes broken down by the legislative power under which the vehicle was seized. This data is collated centrally by NPCC Vehicle Recovery leads. The Home Office will be able to monitor overall levels of vehicle seizures and disposals.

62. The increase in statutory fees will have a small adverse effect on the insurance industry. Some vehicle owners may be insured to the extent that the cost of vehicle recovery is covered, meaning insurance companies may see a small additional burden. It is expected that any additional cost observed by insurers will be offset by them moving the burden back upon the individuals insuring their vehicle to cover costs and maintain profits. The Home Office will engage with the motoring insurance industry and Department for Transport to monitor the impacts.

63. The police may dispose of vehicles before the rightful owner has a chance to reclaim a vehicle (particularly relevant if the vehicle has been stolen). This could result in and increase in police complaints, compensation payments and legal challenges. The Home Office will monitor with NPCC Vehicle Recovery leads and discuss how the Home Office can ensure that this is captured at force level and reported to the National Policing Chiefs’ Council Roads Policing Leads.

64. The Home Office will work with policing and the industry to monitor the outcomes of the “do nothing” option.

8. Minimising administrative and compliance costs

65. There would be no administrative but some compliance costs with all of the options which would involve a change to ‘the vehicle recovery regulations’. As this is a well-established process then there would no additional costs for expenses on office space, supplies and technology and software costs. The police’s recovery operators have established systems, equipment and employers would not require a lot of time understanding and implementing new regulations that adjust existing timeframes and existing fees.

66. Policing stakeholders have indicated that they require 12 weeks to update their vehicle recovery management system to reflect the change in fees and timeframes. The police would also have to adjust their electronic seizure notice forms to reflect change in timeframes. This would be completed by updating the police‘s internal vehicle recovery software system, ELVIS.

67. Introducing the statutory fee increase at the same time as the changes to the disposal timeframe will reduce the administration burden for police in updating systems and in familiarisation with the changes.

68. The ‘Do nothing’ option will have no direct administrative or compliance costs.

Declaration

Department: Home Office

Contact details for enquiries: Vehicle_Recovery@homeoffice.gov.uk

Minister responsible: Minister Malhotra

I have read the Options Assessment and I am satisfied that, given the available evidence, it represents a reasonable view of the likely costs, benefits and impact of the leading options.

Signed: S. Malhotra

Date: 28 May 2025

Summary: Analysis and evidence

Price base year: 2025/26

PV base year: 2025/26

0. Maintain at Current 2023 Statutory Fees (Do nothing) 1. Inflationary increase of 16.2 per cent to the current statutory fees. 2. Reducing timeframes, inflationary increase to Vehicle Recovery and terminology change to calendar days

3. Reducing timeframes and additional reduction to PRA 2002, inflationary increase and terminology change to calendar days
Net present social value (with brief description, including ranges, of individual costs and benefits) £0 Central Estimate £105,100 (£45,000 to £332,800) The fees uplift is a transfer so only the familiarisation costs will be considered for the NPSV. The increase to the fees is estimated to lead to an increase of £130.4 million in transfers over the appraisal period. Central Estimate £105,100 (£45,000 to £332,800) The fees uplift is a transfer so only the familiarisation costs will be considered for the NPSV. The increase to the fees and the changes to storage times are estimated to lead to an increase of between £56.9 million and £109.2 million with a central estimate of £93.7 million. in transfers over the appraisal period
Public sector financial costs (with brief description, including ranges) £0 Familiarisation Costs of £105,100 (£45,000 to £332,800) Familiarisation Costs of £105,100 (£45,000 to £332,800)
Significant un-quantified benefits and costs (description, with scale where possible) Increased pressure on businesses and the police force to cover the costs of vehicle recovery. Reallocation of police funds to other areas of policing.

Option 1 and the impact of shorter storage times to operational requirements.		 Option 2 and deterring ASB by making it harder to reclaim vehicles could also have an unmonetised benefit. This will also impact the criminal justice system.
Key risks (and risk costs, and optimism bias, where relevant) Increase in the number of businesses failing. Operational pressures and volumes of vehicles not keeping up with the number of storage facilities.

Forces being lenient with reduced storage time leading to operational pressures and volumes remaining high. Operational pressures on the number of vehicles or quick turnover of vehicles. The current average days a vehicle is stored for is 7.4 days so there is a small risk to the operational capability of vehicle storage.		 Forces being lenient with reduced storage time leading to operational pressures and volumes remaining high. Operational pressures on the number of vehicles or quick turnover of vehicles. The additional reduction for PRA 2002 vehicles only accounts for around 0.5 per cent of the total vehicles recovered so is not expected to have a significant increase to resourcing requirements.
Results of sensitivity analysis none None Sensitivity analysis has been applied to assess the impact of a significant drop in the total days of storage. This is to examine a scenario in which the increase in fees acts as a strong deterrent leading to an unexpected fall in vehicles recovered. This is a highly unlikely scenario.

A 50% reduction in volumes will lead to a reduction of £133 million less storage fees over the appraisal period. This is more than the total value of increasing the fees of 16.2 per cent.

This is an unlikely scenario as storage site as the number of vehicles on the road will increase over the next 10 years and the assumed consumer behaviour for how quickly individuals will collect their vehicles. The impact from changing RTA 1988 to 48 hours has a negligible effect on the sensitivity analysis.

Annex

A. Evidence base

General assumptions and data

57. The general assumptions used in this COA which is in line with the guidance set out in HM Treasury (2022) Green Book[footnote 43]:

  • The appraisal period used is 10 years from 2025/26 to 2034/35

  • The Price Base year used is FY 2025/26

  • The Present Value base year 2025/26

  • A social discount rate of 3.5 per is used to obtain present values.

  • All figures have been rounded to two decimal places.

58. Data and assumptions have been drawn from several sources including;

  • Police Force Data

  • Published ONS, Department for Transport and Treasury Data

  • Internal

  • Reading Speed Data

Monetised impacts

59. In the modelling for this COA, familiarisation costs on the police for reading new guidance and the transfer of fees from individuals to police and businesses have been assessed. The transfer of the fees does not impact the Net Present Social Value.

60. The government does not currently have any cost data from the vehicle recovery operators and therefore is not able to assess the scale of the impact of the reported cost increases at this time. Therefore all increase in fees are interpreted as a benefit to business. It is not expected that this would form additional profit but instead ensure fees rise to cover rising costs and secure the financial sustainability of the supplier market. Further data will be collected to assess this.

Costs

Familiarisation costs

61. Police officers will need to read new guidance the changes to fees and the changes to the maximum on the amount of time that vehicles can be stored for and the increase in fees so that members of the public are aware.

62. The familiarisation costs apply to Options 1, 2 and 3.

63. Due to an absence of data, it is assumed that 75 per cent of constables and 50 per cent of sergeants will read the new guidance for the central estimates. This is adjusted by 25 per cent for the low and high estimates. It is estimated that the new guidance will be 500 words long based on guidance issued for the previous uplift in 2023[footnote 44].

64. It is assumed that the guidance will be approximately the same length in all options.

65. To calculate the cost of familiarisation the estimated reading time of the guidance was multiplied by the labour cost of those required to read it. The estimated reading time for each document was found by using reading speeds from readingsoft.com[footnote 45].

66. Table 2 below shows the estimated reading times (hours) of the guidance and the opportunity costs expected from reading the guidance.

Table 2, Breakdown of Police Familiarisation Costs
Estimate Number of staff Proportion of staff (%) Hourly rate (£) Reading Speed (wpm) Time spent reading (hours) Cost (£)
Constables: Central 114,976 75 34.74 400 0.03 89,900
Constables: Low 114,976 50 34.74 800 0.02 39,900
Constables: High 114,976 100 34.74 240 0.07 279,600
Sergeants: Central 22,091 50 45.85 400 0.03 15,200
Sergeants: Low 22,091 25 45.85 800 0.02 5,100
Sergeants: High 22,091 75 45.85 240 0.07 53,200

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis and Readingsoft.com

67. The total familiarisation costs can be seen in Table 3 below. All costs are assumed to be incurred in year zero (2025/26).

Table 3, Total Police Familiarisation Costs (£)
Scenario Total Cost
Central 105,100
Low 45,000
High 332,800

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis

68. Familiarisation costs for new vehicle recovery guidance for the police are estimated to lie in a range of £45,000 to £332,800, with a central estimate of £105,100. Familiarisation costs are incurred in year one only.

Benefits

69. There are no monetised benefits modelled for any of the options.

Transfers

70. The remaining monetised impacts are transfers from individuals to the vehicle recovery businesses and the police. These are not considered as part of the NPSV calculation. These additional impacts come from increasing the statutory fees and changes to the minimum amount of time a vehicle is stored for before it can be disposed of.

Costs to individuals from the fees uplift

71. As the fees increase the cost to individuals will increase for all options except Option 0 of maintaining the current statutory fees where the additional cost will be zero. In all other options that were shortlisted fees rise according to GDP deflators as this measure of inflation looks at the economy in the broadest sense.

72. The total costs to individuals vary between each option and is impacted by the fees uplift as well as the changes to storage times. Option 1 only considers the fees uplift and Options 2 and 3 considers both factors.

Fee uplift

73. The fees uplift is calculated for 2025/26 using GDP deflators[footnote 46]. This is done by taking the figures from the previous uplift in 2021/22 and using the GDP deflators to give an increase of 16.2 per cent. This increase is then applied to each of the different cost categories for vehicle recoveries which depend on the size and level of damage of the vehicles.

74. The proposed new fees can be seen in Annex D of this options assessment as a part of the shortlisted options.

Changes to length of time in storage

75. The number of times fees have been collected by the police for vehicle recovery operations is taken from data obtained from the Police’s internal recovery software system, ELVIS for the year 2023. These volumes have been used across the appraisal period to estimate the total cost to individuals for the increase in statutory fees. It is assumed that volumes will remain at approximately the same levels in Option 1.

76. Under option 2 and option 3 volumes do not remain the same due to the changes to minimum storage times from 14 to 7 days. The current average days that a vehicle is stored is 7.4 days meaning that the total number of storage days will need to decrease.

77. Currently, there is no data that can be used to estimate the change in total storage days. A range of scenarios have been considered given the uncertainty:

a. Central Scenario – 10 per cent reduction in the total number of vehicle storage days. This represents a reduction in total volumes between the high and low scenario described below.

b. High Scenario – a fall in the average time a vehicle is stored for from 7.4 days to 7 days leading to 5.8 per cent reduction in total volumes. This is the smallest change that is possible under the proposed changes.

c. Low Scenario – 20 per cent reduction in the total number of vehicle storage days. The assumption of 20 per cent was used to estimate a scenario in which the average time a vehicle is stored falls to 6 days. This represents a scenario in which the changes lead to more substantial reductions in vehicle storage times.

Increase in disposals

78. When maximum storage days are reduced there is expected to be an increase in the number of disposals from storage facilities. These disposed vehicles are mainly sold but can be scrapped or recycled depending on the condition of the vehicle. The value of the vehicle minus the fees are sent back to the owner which makes the fees the only monetised impact and will be a cost to the individual. This cost impacts individuals who will need to pay these fees.

79. There is not expected to be a large increase in the number of disposals as this is mainly used for damaged vehicles or if the vehicle is being used for ASB such as for illegal raves. There is a central estimate of a 10 per cent increase in the total number of disposals with a high estimate of 20 per cent and a low estimate of 0 per cent is used in to estimate the impact of the proposed changes. The estimate was calculated the same way as fees uplift except with the percentage increase in the number of disposals has been applied to the total number of disposals.

80. Tables 4 and 5 show the volumes of vehicle recovered and disposed of as well as the total number of storage days for 2023. Tables 4 and 5 show the unchanged figures whilst the remaining tables show the estimated impact to the number of disposals and storage days that arise from the proposed changes

Table 4 – Number of storage days expected per vehicle recovery type under Option 1
Total Road Traffic Regulation Act Total Section 165A RTA 1988 Total Section 59 PRA 2002 Total Section 62 CJPOA 1994 Total
Recovery 145,111 70,170 1,673 484 217,438
Disposal 694 196 0 0 890
Storage 1,197,756 279,201 2,012 2,962 1,481,931

Source Home Office Analysis and Insight

Table 5 - Number of storage days expected per vehicle recovery type under Options 2 and 3
Total Road Traffic Regulation Act Total Section 165A RTA 1988 Total Section 59 PRA 2002 Total Section 62 CJPOA 1994 Total
Central: Recovery 145,111 70,170 1,673 484 217,438
Central: Disposal 763 213 0 0 979
Central: Storage 1,077,980 251,281 1,811 2,666 1,333,738
Low: Recovery 145,111 70,170 1,673 484 217,438
Low: Disposal 694 196 0 0 890
Low: Storage 958,205 223,361 1,610 2,370 1,185,545
High: Recovery 145,111 70,170 1,673 484 217,438
High: Disposal 833 235 0 0 1,068
High: Storage 1,128,286 263,007 1,895 2,790 1,395,979

Source Home Office Analysis and Insight

Total increase in costs to individuals

81. The transfer is larger in option 1 with an annual cost of £15.1 million. The reduction to minimum storage days in options 2 and 3 leads to a reduction in the total annual cost to individuals as they have to pay for fewer days of storage. Under option 2 and 3 the disposals cost is higher than option one, due to the expected increase in disposals, but this is not substantial enough to outweigh the reduction in storage days.

82. It should be noted that under option 3 there is an additional expected reduction in of storage times. This could not be quantified due to the small number of vehicles that this currently affects. Vehicles recovered under Section 59 of PRA 2002[footnote 47] only make up 0.5 per cent of all vehicles. The impacts of the ASB measure on option 3 are discussed in the non-monetised impacts section (See paragraph 108).

83. Table 6 below shows the additional costs to individuals under each option. Note that there is only one scenario for option 1 as there are no measures that would impact the amount of time vehicles spend in storage.

Table 6 - Total Cost to Individuals across 10-year appraisal period (£m)
Option Scenario Annual Recovery Cost Annual Disposal Cost Annual Storage Cost Annual Total Cost Discounted 10-year Cost
Option 1 Option 1 9.2 0.01 5.9 15.1 130.4
Option 2 and 3 Central 9.2 0.02 1.7 10.9 93.7
Option 2 and 3 Low 9.2 0.01 -2.6 6.6 56.9
Option 2 and 3 High 9.2 0.03 3.5 12.7 109.2

Source: Home Office Analysis and Insight

84. Option 3 is estimated to cost individuals between £56.9 million and £109.2 million with a central estimate of £93.7 million (PV).

Additional income to policing and businesses from the fees uplift

85. The increase costs to individuals of the fees uplift are transferred to the recipients of the fees, the police and businesses. This represents the other half of the transfer which is why the transfer nets out and does not count towards the NPSV.

86. It is assumed that there is a 40 per cent split of the fees to the police and 60 per cent to business this assumption is derived from the 2023 impact assessment for the previous fees uplift[footnote 48].

87. Option 1 benefits only consider the increased fees that the police and businesses receive from changed the statutory fees.

88. The police and businesses will benefit from the increase in the fees being charged for vehicle recoveries, disposal and storage and is estimated to be £52.1 million for Option 1 and £37.5 million for Option 2 and 3 with a low estimate of £22.8 million and a high estimate of £43.7 million.

89. Vehicle recovery businesses and will benefit from the increase in the fees being charged for vehicle recoveries, disposal and storage and is estimated to be £78.2 million for Option 1 and £56.2 million for Option 2 and 3 with a low estimate of £34.2 million and a high estimate of £65.5 million.

90. The total benefits for the Option 2 and Option 3 are estimated to be between £56.9 million and £109.2 million with a central estimate of £93.7 million.

91. Table 7 shows the total discounted costs for the 10-year appraisal period.

Table 7, Total Additional income to policing and business 10 years (£m, 2025/26)
Scenario Police Business Total
Option 1 Option 1 52.1 78.2 130.4
Option 2 and 3 Central 37.5 56.2 93.7
Option 2 and 3 Low 22.8 34.2 56.9
Option 2 and 3 High 43.7 65.5 109.2

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis

Value for money

Option 1

92. Table 12 shows the overall metrics that impact businesses and households as well as the Net Present Social Value for Option 1.

Table 12, Option 1 Overall Impact 10 years rounded, FY 2025/26 (£m)
Central Low High
NPSV -0.1 -0.0 -0.3
Business NPV 77.2 77.2 77.2
EANDCB -9.0 -9.0 -9.0
Household NPV -128.6 -128.6 -128.6
EANDCH 14.9 14.9 14.9

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis, rounded.

93. The NPSV is estimated to be between -£45,000 and -£332,800 with a central estimate of -£105,100. The small negative NPSV is due to there being no monetised benefits and the only monetised cost being familiarisation.

94. The positive BNPV and negative Equivalent Annual Net Direct Cost to Business (EANDCB) are due to most fees being collected by businesses who will receive more under the proposed changes to statutory fees. Due to a lack of cost data from businesses it is unclear whether the fees increase will lead to only additional profit however based off current engagement it is expected to account for the inflationary pressures since the last time the statutory fees were increased. The negative Household NPV and positive Equivalent Annual Net Direct Cost to Households (EANDCH) are negative as individuals will pay more statutory fees during the vehicle recovery process and will be an additional cost to any individuals affected.

Option 2 and 3

95. Table 13 shows the overall metrics that impact businesses and households as well as the Net Present Social Value.

Table 13, Option 2 and 3 Overall Impact 10 years rounded, FY 2025/26 (£m)
Central Low High
NPSV -0.1 -0.0 -0.3
Business NPV 56.2 34.1 65.5
EANDCB -6.5 -4.0 -7.6
Household NPV -93.7 -56.9 -109.2
EANDCH 10.9 6.6 12.7

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis, rounded.

96. Given that the storage time change for vehicle using Section 59 of the PRA 2002[footnote 49] cannot be monetised, the value for money figures for option 2 and 3 are the same. As in option 1 above, the NPSV for options 2 and 3 is negative due to there being no monetised benefits and the only monetised cost being familiarisation. The NPSV is estimated to be between -£45,000 and -£332,800 with a central estimate of -£105,100.

97. The BNPV and EANDCB are smaller compared to Option 1 due to the reduction in storage days. The Household NPV and the EANDCH are also smaller due to the changes in the amount of time that a vehicle can be stored for, reducing the amount of storage days that are used.

98. Option 3 will include the provision of reducing the amount of time a vehicle must be stored for if it is recovered due to it being used for ASB from seven days to two days. This has been considered in paragraph 9.

Sensitivity analysis

99. Sensitivity analysis has been completed to examine the potential impact of the assumed reduction of total vehicle storage days. Currently it has been assumed there will be a 10 per cent reduction in the total number of storage days.

100. The impact of this change is presented in table 14 below where the total number of storage days falls by 50 per cent. This is because the proposed change of reduce the maximum time a vehicle can be stored for is from 14 days to 7 days. In this scenario it assumed that individuals will collect their in half the time they would do under the current 14 days.

101. This leads to a reduction in the income from fees to both businesses and police. It leads to a reduction in the fees charged to individuals.

102. In this case the transfer represents and additional £132.6 million being transferred to individuals from the police and businesses over the 10-year appraisal period. This is because in this scenario, far few vehicles are stored, and they are stored for less time leading to a reduction in the demand for storage.

Table 14, Option 2 and 3 Impact of 50 per cent reduction in storage days over 10 years rounded, FY 2025/26 (£m)
Scenario Reduction in costs to individuals Reduction in income to Police Reduction in income to Business
50 per cent 132.6 53.0 79.5

Source: Home Office Internal Analysis

103. In this ‘maximum’ scenario, the NPSV will remain the same as only the transfer is impacted. The total NPSV is estimated to be -£105,100 with a low estimate of -£45,000 and a high estimate of -£332,800. This negative NPSV is driven solely by familiarisation costs.

104. The EANDCB and Business NPV will be significantly impact with a EANDCB of £3.7 million and Business NPV of -£31.4 million. This is compared to -£6.4 million and £55.5 million for Option 3 which shows that this change would have a negative impact on business compared to the central estimate’s positive impact.

105. The EANDCH will fall to -£6.1 million with a household NPV of £52.7 million. This is compared to the central estimate of £10.7 million and -£92.5 million which means that the individuals would pay less overall in fees than the current level of fees and storage time regulations as well as the Option 3.

Non-monetised impacts

106. There are several non-monetised impacts of these regulation changes that will be evaluated after implementation.

Non monetised benefits

Deterrence of ASB

107. A benefit of adjusting the regulation surrounding vehicles used of ASB align with the government’s Safer Streets Mission[footnote 50] to deter ASB. Police forces collect data on their vehicle recovery management system on volumes broken down by the legislative power under which the vehicle was seized which will be able to be used in future to monetise the impacts of these proposed changes. This has not been monetised as the number of vehicles that are seized for ASB is very low and data availability is limited so will appraised further through monitoring and evaluation.

Potential improvements due to additional income to policing

108. The increase fees will reduce the pressure from the costs of vehicle recoveries on policing. Reducing this burden will allow this resource to be used elsewhere in policing. It is not possible to monetise this benefit as it is not known how this additional income would be used and will likely vary substantially between forces.

Non-monetised costs

Increase Disposal costs due to Option 3’s minimum storage time for vehicles that have been driven/ridden anti-socially

109. The impact to individuals of ASB measure has not been monetised as there is not suitable data available as disposals data for the PRA 2002 does not help to estimate the impact of these changes. Vehicles recovered under the act only make up 0.5 per cent of the total so it will be negligible in terms of the total cost to individuals and businesses.

Impact on the insurance industry

110. There is a cost of increasing the statutory fees on the insurance industry. Some vehicle owners may be insured to the extent that the cost of vehicle recovery is covered, meaning insurance companies may see a small additional burden. This has not been monetised as the impact is considered to be negligible.

Expected overall impacts

111. There is not expected to be a significant overall impact on social welfare. The increase in fees is expected to benefit business and the police who will be able to reallocate funding for other areas of policing. Households will bear the cost of the increased fees but the marginal impact for each vehicle recovery or storage will be very small.

Distributional Impacts

112. The vehicle recovery operators are expected to benefit from this change by receiving 16.2 per cent higher revenue for police contracted work. This will help these businesses to remain viable. The operators are mostly small and medium sized businesses they are not adversely impacted by these changes and will benefit.

113. Low-income individuals will need to pay a greater share of their income towards statutory fees than high income individuals. This is not expected to be significant as the fees uplift for a car is £31 for a vehicle recovery and £4 per storage day. This will only impact 0.5 per cent of drivers per year although there is no data available for how this is split socio-economically.

114. There are not expected to be any regional impacts as the fees are statutory.

Impacts on wider government priorities

Business environment

115. There are not considered to be any significant wider business environment considerations from the proposed legislation.

International considerations

116. There are not considered to be any international considerations from the proposed legislation.

Natural capital and decarbonisation

117. The proposed legislation will not impact the UK’s natural carbon or decarbonisation.

B. Statutory Equalities Duty

All Consultation OAs are required to have the Statutory Equalities Duty reviewed by the SRO before signoff.

Mandatory specific impact test - Statutory Equalities Duties

Complete: Yes

The proposals on police vehicle recovery charges involve increasing the current statutory fee charges and reducing the provisions on timescales for reclaiming a vehicle before disposal can take place for all police recovery, storage and removal of vehicles in England and Wales. In the case of Road Traffic Act 1988, this also includes Scotland. The Home Office gave due regard to the Public-Sector Equality Duty when considering all options and developing the proposals.

The Home Office intend to hold a targeted consultation to seek views from relevant stakeholders with a professional, commercial or official interest on all the options under consideration to understand policing sector views on the proposed amendments and to learn of the impact from the proposals and of any potential unintended consequences. The Home Office has decided that a targeted consultation, rather than a public consultation, would be the most effective way to gather the best evidence to review the current statutory fees and timescales, and to ensure that fees are adequate to cover the costs and reduced timescales provide a sustainable service for vehicle recovery. The Home Office wants to hear from those with a good awareness of the costs and operational needs of police and vehicle recovery operators, which these proposals specifically seek to meet.

The Home Office have been in regular communication with the NPCC since the last review was completed in 2023. The NPCC have not yet raised any equality impact issues associated with any of the options under consideration as part of the development of these proposals.

During police vehicle recovery operations, action is taken against a vehicle – for example, because it has been abandoned or is obstructing a highway, driven without a driving licence or insurance, driven anti-socially and illegal trespass with a vehicle - rather than an individual person. Any protected characteristics of the motorist should not influence the decisions that the police make on the recovery of seized vehicles.

The SRO has agreed these findings.

C. The current fees will continue to be prescribed as set out in ‘The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023’[footnote 51] as follows

Removals

Vehicle position and condition Vehicle equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes Maximum Authorised Mass (MAM) Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
Vehicle on road, upright and not substantially damaged or any two wheeled vehicle whatever its condition or position on or off the road £192 £256 £448 £448
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, on road but either not upright or substantially damaged or both £320 £832 Unladen-£2561
Laden-£3842		 Unladen-£3842
Laden-£5763
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, off road, upright and not substantially damaged £256 £512 Unladen-£1281
Laden-£1921		 Unladen-£1921
Laden-£2561
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, off road but either not upright or substantially damaged or both £384 £1089 Unladen-£3842
Laden-£5763		 Unladen-£5763
Laden-£7684

Storage (for each period of 24 hours starting from midday following the date of seizure)

Two wheeled vehicle Vehicle, not including a two wheeled vehicle, equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
£13 £26 £32 £38 £45

Disposal

(Only chargeable to contained within The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023)

Two wheeled vehicle Vehicle, not including a two wheeled vehicle, equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
£64 £96 £128 £160 £192

D. This accounts for an increase of the current fees with an inflationary increase of 16.2 per cent from 2021 with the new charges as set out as follows –

Removals

Vehicle position and condition Vehicle equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes Maximum Authorised Mass (MAM) Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
Vehicle on road, upright and not substantially damaged or any two wheeled vehicle whatever its condition or position on or off the road £223.10 £297.47 £520.58 £520.58
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, on road but either not upright or substantially damaged or both £371.84 £966.78 Unladen - £2,975.88
Laden - £4,464.40		 Unladen - £4,464.40
Laden - £6,696.61
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, off road, upright and not substantially damaged £297.47 £594.94 Unladen - £1,488.52
Laden - £2,232.20		 Unladen – £2,232.20
Laden - £2,975.88
Vehicle, excluding a two wheeled vehicle, off road but either not upright or substantially damaged or both £446.21 £1,265.42 Unladen - £4,464.40
Laden - £6,696.61		 Unladen - £6,696.61
Laden - £8,928.81

Storage (for each period of 24 hours or part thereof)

Two wheeled vehicle Vehicle, not including a two wheeled vehicle, equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
£15.11 £30.21 £37.18 £44.16 £52.29

Disposal

Two wheeled vehicle Vehicle, not including a two wheeled vehicle, equal to or less than 3.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 3.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 7.5 tonnes MAM Vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes MAM but equal to or less than 18 MAM Vehicle exceeding 18 tonnes MAM
£74.37 £111.55 £148.74 £185.92 £223.10

E. This sets out the current disposal and storage timeframes for recovered vehicles across the police powers the proposed changes will impact.

Current disposal timeframes

PRA 2002 gives the Secretary of State the powers to prescribe regulations[footnote 52] in respect of the removal and storage of those vehicles.

Under these regulations – the authority may not dispose of a vehicle until

  1. 14 days from the seizure date
  2. 7 working days from date of delivery of the seizure notice or
  3. 7 working days from the date it was claimed

RTA 1988 gives the Secretary of State the powers to prescribe regulations[footnote 53] in respect of the removal and storage of those vehicles.

Under these regulations – the authority may not dispose of a vehicle until:

  1. 14 days from the seizure date
  2. 7 working days from date of delivery of the seizure notice or
  3. 7 working days from the date it was claimed.

CJPOA 1994 gives the Secretary of State the powers to prescribe regulations[footnote 54] in respect of the removal and storage of those vehicles.

Under these regulations – the authority may not dispose of a vehicle until:

  1. 3 months from the seizure date

  2. 21 days from date of delivery of the seizure notice or

  3. 7 days from the date it was claimed.

RTRA 1984 and RDAA 1978 gives the Secretary of State the powers to prescribe regulations[footnote 55] [footnote 56] in respect of the removal and storage of those vehicles.

Under these regulations – the authority may not dispose of a vehicle until:

  1. 24 hrs in which a seizure notice must be affixed to a vehicle before removing it for destruction.

  2. 7 days during which owner may remove vehicle from when the notice was served before disposal.

  3. 7 days during which owner may remove vehicle before disposal.

  1. Safer Streets - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  2. Abandoned vehicles can be stolen again or vandalised or set alight. ↩

  3. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  4. See section 165(A) of the Road Traffic Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/165A ↩

  5. See section 62 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/section/62 ↩

  6. See section 99 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/99 ↩

  7. See section 5 of the Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/3 [7] See section 5 of the Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/3 ↩

  8. The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/331/contents/made ↩

  9. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  10. Safer Streets Mission - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  11. Economic Role of National Highways - An Overview: cre24_0135-srn-economic-overview-final.pdf ↩

  12. Antisocial Behaviour and Illegal Bikes - Hansard - UK Parliament: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-03-05/debates/C34A8230-9ED6-4022-BE91-1F437ADA2E2E/AntisocialBehaviourAndIllegalBikes ↩

  13. Government response to consultation on charges for the removal, storage and disposal of vehicles (accessible) - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charges-for-the-removal-storage-and-disposal-of-vehicles-under-road-traffic-law/government-response-to-consultation-on-charges-for-the-removal-storage-and-disposal-of-vehicles-accessible ↩

  14. Antisocial Behaviour and Illegal Bikes - Hansard - UK Parliament: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-03-05/debates/C34A8230-9ED6-4022-BE91-1F437ADA2E2E/AntisocialBehaviourAndIllegalBikes ↩

  15. Public polling on community safety - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-polling-on-community-safety/public-polling-on-community-safety ↩

  16. Crime in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/latest ↩

  17. The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/331/contents/made ↩

  18. Safer Streets Mission - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  19. New powers to clamp down on anti-social behaviour - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-powers-to-clamp-down-on-anti-social-behaviour ↩

  20. Calculated using GDP deflators (by doing 2025/2026 divided by 2021/22 and using that figure as a multiplier for the increase in statutory fees). Data available GDP deflators at market prices, and money GDP - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/gdp-deflators-at-market-prices-and-money-gdp ↩

  21. The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/331/contents/made ↩

  22. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  23. Safer Streets Mission - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  24. Section 59, Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  25. Safer Streets - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets

    Kickstarting Economic Growth - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/economic-growth ↩

  26. The Police (Retention and Disposal of Vehicles) Regulations 1995: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/723/made ↩

  27. The Road Traffic Act 1988 (Retention and Disposal of Seized Motor Vehicles) Regulations 2005: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/1606/contents/made ↩

  28. The Police (Retention and Disposal of Motor Vehicles) (Amendment) Regulations 2005: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2702/made ↩

  29. Impact Assessment, vehicle recovery fee increase 2021 / 22 (accessible) - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charges-for-the-removal-storage-and-disposal-of-vehicles-under-road-traffic-law/impact-assessment-vehicle-recovery-fee-increase-2021-22-accessible#d-options-considered-and-implemented ↩

  30. Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  31. Antisocial Behaviour and Illegal Bikes - Hansard - UK Parliament: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-03-05/debates/C34A8230-9ED6-4022-BE91-1F437ADA2E2E/AntisocialBehaviourAndIllegalBikes ↩

  32. Safer Streets Mission - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  33. The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/331/contents/made ↩

  34. Calculated using GDP deflators (by doing 2025/2026 divided by 2021/22 and using that figure as a multiplier for the increase in statutory fees compared to the current fees calculated on 2021/22). Data available: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/gdp-deflators-at-market-prices-and-money-gdp ↩

  35. Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  36. Road Traffic Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/contents ↩

  37. Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/contents ↩

  38. Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/contents ↩

  39. Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/3 ↩

  40. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  41. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  42. Safer Streets Mission - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  43. The Green Book (2022) - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and-evaluation-in-central-government/the-green-book-2020 ↩

  44. Impact Assessment for the Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023 - GOV.UK: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukia/2023/37/pdfs/ukia_20230037_en.pdf ↩

  45. Free Speed Reading Test: How fast do you read? (readingsoft.com): https://readingsoft.com/ ↩

  46. GDP deflators at market prices, and money GDP - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/gdp-deflators-at-market-prices-and-money-gdp ↩

  47. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  48. Impact Assessment for the Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023 - GOV.UK: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukia/2023/37/pdfs/ukia_20230037_en.pdf ↩

  49. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  50. Safer Streets - GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/missions/safer-streets ↩

  51. The Removal, Storage and Disposal of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2023: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2023/331/contents/made ↩

  52. Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/section/59 ↩

  53. See section 165(A) of the Road Traffic Act 1988: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/165A ↩

  54. See section 62 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/section/62 ↩

  55. See section 99 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/99 ↩

  56. See section 5 of the Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/3 ↩

Back to top