Security issue: Vehicle theft

Vehicle with broken window from forced entry

Vehicle theft is the crime of theft, or attempt of theft of or from a motor vehicle (automobile, truck, bus, motorcycle, etc.).

Description

This category includes both theft of and from vehicles, because the measures against it would be very alike from the viewpoint of an urban planner.

This category does not include: carjacking/joyriding, theft with access to keys, fraudulent theft, or opportunistic theft

Contributing circumstances

Known circumstances to influence the likelihood or effect of robbery are presented in the table below:

Contributing Circumstance	Influence	Description
Car park near stores or manufacturing premises	Increases likelihood of being selected target	Retailing and manufacturing premises have a much greater chance of falling victim to vehicle crime than domestic premises.
Lack of surveillance.	Decreases risk of detection.	A low level of surveillance, particularly round-the-clock surveillance, decreases the perceived risk of detection for a perpetrator and thereby increases the attractiveness. For cars parked along the street, a high level of natural surveillance can significantly reduce the attractiveness of such cars for thieves.
Large, publicly accessible parkings	increases attractiveness	Larger parking facilities generally have higher theft rates than smaller facilities do. This may be due to the fact that it is easier for thieves to find attractive targets here.
High levels of vehicle theft in the vicinity.	Increases likelihood of targeting.	Car thieves select targets typically several miles from their place of residence.
High levels of unemployment	Increases likelihood of targetting	High levels of unemployment are correlated with higher levels of property crime .
High expected levels of drug- or alcohol abuse	Reduces inhibitions for crime	The presence of regular abusers of alcohol or drugs has a strong correlation with the occurrence of robbery, often thought to be caused by the need for financing an addiction. Studies show that about 35% of all robbery is committed under the influence of alcohol.
Vehicles parked along road in residential area	Increases vulnerability	Studies have shown that cars parked along the street have a significantly larger risk of being stolen than vehicles parked in a garage or a car port. Risk of Car Theft by Parking Location in England and Wales (1982-1994) Location Thefts per 100,000 cars per 24 hours Home garage 2 Home carport/drive 40 Home street 117
Large amounts of passing traffic	Increases visibility of target	A large amount of traffic passing the vehicle means a large exposure to potential car thieves.
Multiple exits from the area	Decreases likelihood of apprehension	A car thief wants to have a fast exit route once the theft is done or he is discovered. Multiple exits increase the chance of a clean getaway.

Impacts

Social impact

The risk of car thefts varies with the social functions of public spaces. Urban areas with more vacant lots, restaurants/bars, youth hangouts (theaters, arcades, and schools), retail stores, manufacturing/storage facilities, apartments, single family households, and/or lower media household income typically have increased car theft rates. Large parking lots (> 100 parking spaces, such as common with commuter transit stations, nighttime entertainment venues, retail stores or shopping malls) create big risk of auto theft.

• Car theft correlates with street life culture as well as with as aspects of the culture if (in)security, such as criminal mind sets. Preventive measures to which urban design could contribute should heed those cultural aspects. For example, thieves generally steal cars for one of four reasons – and urban planning should identify which of those reasons prevail in the area in question in order to tailor-size protective measures:

“1. For sale abroad - Stolen cars are often immediately packed – with their vehicle identification numbers (VINs) still intact – and shipped abroad, where they are sold for many times their original market value.

2. For sale to unsuspecting consumers – Stolen cars may be given a new identity with false VINs, and then sold to unsuspecting consumers. They can also be dismantled and sold for parts.

3. To get somewhere – This is commonly, but inappropriately, referred to as 'joyriding.' Auto theft of any kind is still a crime, and innocent people do get hurt or killed as a result.

4. To commit another crime – Stolen cars used to commit other crimes are often recovered – abandoned and badly damaged – within 48 hours of their theft.”

• Another aspect is to foster public security culture to prevent car theft. Examples of related programmes include the following:

“1. Programs that inform and educate the community about the vehicle theft problem through block club organizations, neighborhood watch programs, and schools.

2. Programs to stimulate public awareness about the economic, social, and public safety consequences of vehicle theft.

3. Programs to inform and encourage public participation in theft prevention and enforcement efforts.

4. Partnership programs among local government, law enforcement agencies and community organizations directed at preventing vehicle theft and educating members in vehicle theft prevention measures.

5. Programs to identify and promote the use of effective vehicle anti-theft devices.”

Economic impact

In terms of economic impact, the costs of vehicle theft, the parties on whom those costs fall, possible secondary economic impact, and a cost-effectiveness analysis of prevention measures should be assessed.

Although vehicle theft is not as intrusive as violent crime, it is both quite common and costly for society. The direct costs of vehicle theft are for about 16% attributable to costs in anticipation of vehicle theft (e.g. anti-vehicle theft measures and insurance administration). Although this is considerable, the major part (almost 80% of the costs of vehicle theft are attributable to the consequence of vehicle theft, e.g. the value of the stolen vehicles (±45%), physical and emotional impact on victims (±15%), the costs of property recovered (±10%). The remaining 4% can be attributed to the costs in response of crime by the public authorities (policing and the criminal justice system). The average cost per event is with £4,000 (2003 prices), slightly higher than the average costs of a burglary. This is mostly the result of higher preventive expenditures and the average value of the stolen vehicle and recovered vehicles.

Vehicle theft does not just create direct costs, but also creates secondary economic effects on society-at-large. First of all, victims of vehicle theft have to deal with opportunity costs as a result of the necessary administrative activities and a temporary unavailability of their vehicle (including companies who own transport vans or trucks), which could lead to a reduction in working time hours. Secondly, there is the opportunity costs of police and other public services. On top of that, there will be some very minor effects for the market for vehicles since there will be more demand for new vehicles and more supply of second-hand vehicles. In total, however, the secondary economic effects of vehicle theft are not that significant in comparison to for instance burglary of a dwelling. Theft from a vehicle that leaves broken glass, on the other hand, can have more negative effects on the neighbourhood since it negatively influences the perception of security for people living in the neighbourhood.

Security measures mitigate the economic costs of vehicle theft, but also demand investment in time and money (which are quite significant compared to other types of property crime such as burglary). In general, though, standard anti-vehicle theft measures make sense from a social-economic point of view. Note, however, that since most victims are insured for vehicle theft, some experts argue that there should be "government-mandated standards" of security applied to all vehicles because an individual incentive is lacking. One has to bear in mind, however, that vehicle thieves will adapt quickly to preventive security measures in accordance with the the economics of criminal behaviour, including how to deal with immobilisers and VIN numbers.

Mobility impact

Vehicle theft is more likely to occur in areas where the thief is well-known in order to be able to flee quickly. Therefore, as for robbery, the risk will be reduced when there are few fleeing possibilities and when accessibility of the area is bad.

The police can chase a vehicle thief by car or even by helicopter. A helicopter has a better overview of the streetmap and of the person fleeing and can see and go everywhere and give instructions to the police in the car on the ground

An anti-theft gps tracking device can be placed in a car in order to locate the car after robbery.

As soon as a car is stolen, the license plate will be registered as belonging to a stolen car in the national registry and in the Schengen Information System. Currently, this registry can take up to 5 days. In the Netherlands, a test has been started to reduce this time to only 2 hours [[1]]. Another way of detecting if a car has been stolen is to check the chassis inscription.

Safety impact

As car theft happens in absence of the owner, there is little safety risk involved with this crime.

Measures

Potential measures that can mitigate the likelihood or impact of vehicle theft and that can be taken or influenced by urban planners include:

• Access control to parkings
• Directing traffic flows to minimize passing traffic
• Assuring good conditions for surveillance, either natural or by dedicated observers to parked vehicles
• Assuring the conditions for fast reaction of intervention forces
• Target removal by minimizing parking facilities that are most likely to suffer from vehicle theft, such as providing monitored parking garages instead of unmonitored parking lots, or designing residential areas with car ports or garages instead of parking along the street.