Home of N2D.

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

24-9-2013 4:41 pm  #1

11340 cigarettes case - won on appeal

For new users, for those who lost goods recently and did`t make them mind yet if it is worth to appeal.
The answer is - yes, it is.
I lost 11340 cigarettes in Aug 2012, lodged Notice of Claim, of course review officer rubber stamped it.
My first court hearing in magistrates Court was on 15 May 2013 (as far as I remember), I lost it. I was going to court with hope, I did believe in justice. But Magistrated did let me down and rubber stamped my case again.
But it was`t end of the war, it was another battle I have lost. lodged appeal in Magistrates Court, case was forwarded to Crown Court. On the day I was sitting outside court room and thinking `what the hell am`I doing here, they will do the same what they done in Magistrates Court`. Nearly gave up, but when there, told my story, showed my bundle to the judge.
And I have won it, it was worth all the hassle, prosecution barrister was really suprised when Judge said `appeal allowed`, the same as me.
Could`t believed it, but it is a fact.
Now another battle, battle for compensation for destroyed goods.
Good luck to anyone, never give up, fight them to the dead end. It is worth it.
Thanks for all the support to all member, this board is very helpull, without it I would lost it at the beggining and will have to pay £2000 in court costs and another £3300 in duty.

The reasons for seizure of the cigarettes were:

1.Large quantity (11,340) of cigarettes well in excess of the minimum indicative level of 800
cigarettes. Appeared to be a commercial quantity, not the usual amount brought back from
holiday for personal use.
2. Income is not commensurate with the money paid out for the cigarettes. Mr K paid
nearly a month's earnings for the cigarettes.
3. There were no other items packed with the cigarettes- no clothing, personal effects or
toiletries that is normal for holidaymakers to be carrying.
From the interview with Mr K two further points need to be considered. Firstly, Mr
K brought back about 1,000 cigarettes from Minorca in May 2012 an amount
commensurate with personal use and yet has now brought back 11,34O cigarettes, over
fourteen times the minimum indicative level of 800 cigarettes. Secondly, Mr K had only
vague details about the courier he was using to bring his baggage back as part of his
explanation for not having clothing/personal effects/toiletries in his bags.

My defence bundle included:
1. Copy of relevant EU Directive highlighting that there is no limits on EU duty paid goods.
2. Letter from my accountant showing my disposable income for 12 months before seizure and calculations made by him.
3. Letter from my wife stating that 5000 cigarettes werefor her.
4. Letter from my mother-in-law stating that she posted our clothes by courier from Poland.
5. Courier ticked - prove that parcel has been send.
there was some other papers like boarding passes for my flights, my wife and kids flights, but those were not really important.

Last edited by piotrek (24-9-2013 6:10 pm)

Please ensure you do not divulge any information which could identify you as Border Force will use your posts here as evidence against you in court.

29-12-2015 9:40 pm  #2

Re: 11340 cigarettes case - won on appeal



Board footera


Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum

Disclaimer:- This forum is an open forum, and anyone can post their thoughts here (within reason). Therefore the views expressed here are those of individuals and not necessarily those of Nothing 2 Declare. We try to allow as much freedom of speech as possible, including views that some may find objectionable. This includes the views of UKBA, Border Force, HMRC, legitimate cross-border shoppers, non-legitimate importers, general public and anyone else that wishes to post.
Regarding ourselves, we categorically do not condone smuggling and neither do we condone the current tactics used against legitimate cross-border shoppers by UKBA/Border Force and HMRC. The current tactics benefit both Customs and smugglers alike.
Although some people use real names, there is no guarantee that they are who they say they are; it is impossible for us to verify identities of all members.