Pinnacle, Eladene, Fred, Yard Base: is your yard system on Defra's list?
Most yards already run software they trust. Pinnacle for parts and inventory. Eladene for listings. Fred or Yard Base on the scrap side. So the most sensible question in the trade right now is the one we keep hearing at the gate: does the system I already pay for handle the Defra reporting that becomes mandatory on 1 October 2026? It has a checkable answer, and for most of the installed systems the answer today is no.
The one minute check
Defra publishes a list of software providers it has confirmed meet the digital waste tracking requirements. The page is public, it is updated as providers pass testing, and it held 63 names when we checked it on 22 August 2026. Open it, press find on the page, and type your supplier's name. That is the whole check. If they are on it, Defra has confirmed their product can file your waste receipts. If they are not, the only safe reading is that today it cannot, and the question to send your account manager in writing is: will you be on the list before 1 October?
Pinnacle, from Hollander International
Pinnacle is the yard management system much of UK dismantling grew up on, built around interchange, inventory and parts pricing. Nothing here says stop using it.
But Hollander International does not appear on the GOV.UK list of confirmed providers as of 22 August 2026, under Hollander, Pinnacle or its parent Solera, and we could find no public announcement of a Defra waste reporting module anywhere in its materials. A yard assuming its DMS quietly covers the mandate is making an assumption its supplier has not made in public.
Eladene, now part of eBay
Eladene Systems built a cloud platform for dismantlers focused on parts listing, and in April 2026 eBay bought the company.
It is not on the GOV.UK list as of 22 August 2026, and we could find no public announcement of digital waste tracking support. Listing parts and filing waste receipts are different trades. Today only one of them is Eladene's.
Fred and Yard Base made the list. Ask what the module covers.
Two systems from the scrap world now appear on the GOV.UK list. Increase Computers is there with FRED and BrandBuilt is there with Yard Base. Both grew up in metal, not vehicles.
An ATF runs on more than waste receipts, so before relying on a scrap system for vehicle compliance, get plain answers to four questions. Does it record the Certificate of Destruction and the DVLA notification? Only DVLA's own service can issue the CoD, so the question is whether the record of it lives with the vehicle. Does it record depollution and move the vehicle from hazardous to non hazardous on the record? Does it code an undepolluted car as hazardous waste in the receipt it files? And does it keep working at the gate when the signal drops? Those four are the difference between reporting scrap and running a legal ATF.
The rest of the stack
WILMA, the newer ELV operations platform, makes no digital waste tracking claims we could find and is not on the list as of 22 August 2026. Weighbridge software upgrades reach the yards that own the kit, but they live at the desk, not at the gate where the vehicle arrives. And the spreadsheet route Defra offers is a stopgap by its own description, built for operators with no software at all.
Keep the system you like. Add the layer that reports.
Nothing in the law says one program must run your whole yard. The mandate asks for exactly one new thing: every vehicle you take in, reported digitally to Defra as a waste receipt. So the practical architecture for October is the one the numbers on the list already point to. Keep the DMS that knows your parts. Put a listed compliance system at the gate.
BreakerHQ is on the GOV.UK list, as 1Z Digital Ltd, and it is built only for this trade: reg in at the gate, DVLA lookup fills the record, the receipt files itself, CoD and depollution and the site register in the same place, and it works with no signal. We checked every provider on the list one by one and published the whole matrix, so you can see the comparison rather than take our word for it: every provider compared.