4 ms·

>fwiw, they didn't solve the issue during that session Sure, that's normal, they could not. It is anyway (even if caused by a different issue) a case of "homo

by jaclaz 7y ago

>fwiw, they didn't solve the issue during that session Sure, that's normal, they could not. It is anyway (even if caused by a different issue) a case of "homocody". These can only be solved by the Agenzia delle Entrate or - in some cases - they cannot even be solved by them and you need to resort to other means. And yes, being on the wrong side of bureaucracy is never a good place to be in, the Italian one (but more generally that of any nation with a similar approach, let's call them "Latin", I have personal experience with Spain and Portugal besides Italy, and they are rather similar) is a bit more complex than corresponding anglo-saxonish or germanish ones, but it depends a lot on the specific cases. The Italian Motorizzazione Civile suffers historically from lack of personnel and the intertwining of "traffic Laws" with "General Law", things - recently - are getting a little better because of simplifications on the legal definition of car as property, but until a few years ago a "simple" change of ownership of a vehicle (what you normally do in the UK by mail and in Germany by going to the nearest Police station) was a terrible experience, usually taking months to obtain the new certification.

ithkuil 7y ago
In this case the central registry couldn't solve the problem, because it was not their fault. Both persons had two distinct personal codes, issued officially by the "agenzia delle entrate" office. It's when the motor vehicle driving license of person A has been registered, that a transcription error happened. Whether that instance could have been avoided with a more careful check or not misses the point. The point is that data entry errors are possible. As this little anecdote exemplifies, having a unique citizens code doesn't prevent the confusion of identities. It makes it less frequent which in turn makes it a worse experience for those to whom it happens (since officials have no training to solve the issue). E.g. the software at the "motorizzazione civile" is likely to treat the CF field with a "unique" constraint, which turns out to be a problem when a new user enters the system with a strong proof of legitimate ownership of a code that was likely erroneously used in the past.
- jaclaz 7y ago
  Ah, well, then it was not a "homocody" issue, only a "bad transcription" or "human error". It is not surprising that having a unique citizens code doesn't prevent the confusion of identities when the transcription/inscription is not accurate. But with all due respect, it is only a truism. Which however opens the usual dicotomy between frequency of the problems and procedures designed to fix them, it is likely that an extremely rare problem has no "easy fix" exactly because it is rare and maybe it was the first time it happened to the DMV employees involved and there was not an already actually "coded" resolution. On the other hand, when a problem happens often enough, there will be a ready made, "common" solution to it and even if the high frequency of the problem is actually a sign of an original bad implementation, the public will not perceive it as an issue.

by jaclaz 7y ago

ithkuil 7y ago

In this case the central registry couldn't solve the problem, because it was not their fault. Both persons had two distinct personal codes, issued officially by the "agenzia delle entrate" office. It's when the motor vehicle driving license of person A has been registered, that a transcription error happened. Whether that instance could have been avoided with a more careful check or not misses the point. The point is that data entry errors are possible. As this little anecdote exemplifies, having a unique citizens code doesn't prevent the confusion of identities. It makes it less frequent which in turn makes it a worse experience for those to whom it happens (since officials have no training to solve the issue). E.g. the software at the "motorizzazione civile" is likely to treat the CF field with a "unique" constraint, which turns out to be a problem when a new user enters the system with a strong proof of legitimate ownership of a code that was likely erroneously used in the past.

jaclaz 7y ago
Ah, well, then it was not a "homocody" issue, only a "bad transcription" or "human error". It is not surprising that having a unique citizens code doesn't prevent the confusion of identities when the transcription/inscription is not accurate. But with all due respect, it is only a truism. Which however opens the usual dicotomy between frequency of the problems and procedures designed to fix them, it is likely that an extremely rare problem has no "easy fix" exactly because it is rare and maybe it was the first time it happened to the DMV employees involved and there was not an already actually "coded" resolution. On the other hand, when a problem happens often enough, there will be a ready made, "common" solution to it and even if the high frequency of the problem is actually a sign of an original bad implementation, the public will not perceive it as an issue.