A driver's license stating a living address is a basic for establishing enough ID points to set up something like a bank account, however it seems ridiculously easy to change the address on a license to whatever you like without necessarily getting the permission of the rightful owner or tenant of that address. As the owner of a property one cannot even get any information from the Roads and Traffic Authority as to how many license holders might hold licenses nominating your address.
If you contact the complaints department of the RTA suggesting you are concerned about persons nominating your address on their license, when they do not live at the address, then you may get an ungrammatical response suggesting you contact the police if you suspect any kind of fraud is taking place, and/or get some legal "advise". But hang on....was that not the reason you contacted them in the first place, because something fishy was going on?
So what is the role of the RTA? Seems that after the initial issuing of a license the RTA are not interested in verifying that a person's contact address is for real. Any report to them of suspicious activity thereafter is fobbed off on the Police who are then responsible for investigating if the millions in Australia are actually living where they say they are. This task is in addition to the serious job they have of solving murders in Belanglo, quelling riots, making sure enough speeding fines are issued and attending domestic disputes.
So despite the use of expensive facial recognition technology a face and license details can quite easily be attached to any address in the country and just as easily changed. Correct address details are slightly important when accidents occur, and driving licenses and other proof of identity and presumably address are required to set up bank accounts. Information on who is using your address is however hard to get. Access to information on who, other than owners or rightful tenants, is using an address is not freely available to property owners because of privacy rights. Whose privacy? What kind of privacy do you have when you have no right to find out what your address is being used for without your permission? Now your computer is different, programs can be installed to try to prevent unauthorized use of your IP address, but your street address is open slather, the whole of Facebook could be using it as the address on their licenses and you wouldn't have a right to know.
In my opinion it's not too hard for the licensing body to organise to notify an owner or manager of a property of any applications to register significant ID documents using the relevant location details. Likewise with bank accounts and other billing accounts. If banks can organise to sms transfer authorisation codes they could let you know if someone not a registered occupant sets up a bank account billed to your address. Wouldn't you like to know? It should be as simple as an email.
|
|
Love letter from Love coach, carolindahlman.com |
|
|
| "If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change your attitude." Maya Angelou |
| Check out my weekly blog at ninemsn. Welcome |
|
|
|
| HOMEWORK Eat well, exercise, take care of your heart and your body through meditation, prayers and love. |
|
Have a fabulous time until we meet again and remember you are never alone
/Carolin
About me: I am a professional love coach and author. I have coached thousands of people all over the world to happiness and published several books. Get personal help with your issues, read more here www.thelovecoach.info |
|
IF YOU WANT TO UNREGISTER PLEASE EMAIL: CAROLIN@COACHING2LOVE.COM
Welcome with your feedback as well - I want this letter to be inspiring and useful and if it´s not,
I want to know how to make it better :) Your insights are highly valued.
I didn’t take this of course and I don’t know who did but if it was you this is a gorgeous photo. Tell me who you are?
http://www.acq.edu.au/Courses/DIGA-advanced-digital-photography-course-outline.html
Fun with styrofoam and cocktail sticks!
Have electronic gas detection systems really worked out cheaper than canaries in the long run? The events of the NZ mine disaster seems to suggest otherwise. There is a bit of date inaccuracy in this article should it be 1996 or 1811?
1986: Coal mine canaries made redundant
More than 200 canary birds are being phased out of Britain's mining pits, according to new plans by the government.
Modern technology is being favoured over the long-serving yellow feathered friend of the miner in detecting harmful gases which may be present underground.
New electronic detectors will replace the bird because they are said to be cheaper in the long run and more effective in indicating the presence of pollutants in the air otherwise unnoticed by miners.
The gas detectors will be hand-held and carry a digital reading which appears on a screen alerting miners to the extent of the gases.
The birds' replacement will be introduced gradually next year.
Miners are said to be saddened by the latest set of redundancies in their industry but do not intend to dispute the decision.
The removal of the canaries will end a mining tradition in Britain dating back to 1911, since when two canaries have been employed by each pit.
Signs of distress
They are so ingrained in the culture miners report whistling to the birds and coaxing them as they worked, treating them as pets.
The canary is particularly sensitive to toxic gases such as carbon monoxide which is colourless, odourless and tasteless.
This gas could easily form underground during a mine fire or after an explosion.
Following a mine fire or explosion, mine rescuers would descend into the mine, carrying a canary in a small wooden or metal cage.
Any sign of distress from the canary was a clear signal the conditions underground were unsafe and miners should be evacuated from the pit and the mineshafts made safer.