Home of N2D.

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



31-1-2017 6:15 pm  #81


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Congratulations

 

31-1-2017 6:49 pm  #82


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Well done!

JMK

 

31-1-2017 7:59 pm  #83


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Thanks guys will post when ive calmed down :/

     Thread Starter
 

31-1-2017 8:18 pm  #84


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Congratulations


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.
 

01-2-2017 3:00 pm  #85


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Get in there thbourne just heard. And well done you people who took the time to support him both advice and personal wise.
I know he has been over the moon with the support you have all given him.
Maybe after all the shit he has been put through...will not elaborate on here as do not want to identify him...maybe it was meant to be.
Feel like I have won all over again myself with this news because I know the stress it causes.
EIEIEIO .

 

01-2-2017 3:44 pm  #86


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

toniviolet wrote:

Get in there thbourne just heard. And well done you people who took the time to support him both advice and personal wise.
I know he has been over the moon with the support you have all given him.
Maybe after all the shit he has been put through...will not elaborate on here as do not want to identify him...maybe it was meant to be.
Feel like I have won all over again myself with this news because I know the stress it causes.
EIEIEIO .

Actually his posts were identified by the officer when they spoke outside the court. The secret though is not to give them forewarning of how you will conduct your defence. Hence, apologies to forum members, a lot of advice has to be done privately until the case is over.
 


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

01-2-2017 4:05 pm  #87


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

eezyrider wrote:

toniviolet wrote:

Get in there thbourne just heard. And well done you people who took the time to support him both advice and personal wise.
I know he has been over the moon with the support you have all given him.
Maybe after all the shit he has been put through...will not elaborate on here as do not want to identify him...maybe it was meant to be.
Feel like I have won all over again myself with this news because I know the stress it causes.
EIEIEIO .

Actually his posts were identified by the officer when they spoke outside the court. The secret though is not to give them forewarning of how you will conduct your defence. Hence, apologies to forum members, a lot of advice has to be done privately until the case is over.
 

 

02-2-2017 5:40 pm  #88


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Congratulations! I know how you feel. 
 

 

12-2-2017 11:17 am  #89


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Congrats to you too BP and yes!!

     Thread Starter
 

12-2-2017 4:28 pm  #90


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

After 3 adjournments finally on the 4th attempt, my day in court.
Representing myself aginst HMRC and there barrister.

We all went in, introduced ourselves. The Judge spoke a few words then the barrister outlined the case. Judge asked barrister how long case would last, barrister answered easily over 2 hours. Case lasted approximately 1hr 40 mins plus 30 mins deciding.
Judge did query the limits as a guideline.

Dibble got on stand and barrister asked question mainly about the seizure, why i was stopped etc
Judge asked a few questions and made notes

Then it was my turn to cross ex dibble.
I had approx 35/40 questions to ask and 23 pages of evidence in my bundle.

I questioned him on some a-j questions, they went ok
After i went on to my questions the judge did get a little upset with me as i used the words "do you recall". He said "how can i expect dibble to recall when it was so long ago". I had to skip a few questions bcos judge started shaking his head.
I also mentionned the notebook seizure amount being wrong but the judge said that the amount was establishes and asked what the relevence was. I replied that his notebook evidence was there only evidence against me and that mistakes where made, He let me continued
I brought up both the eu directive and hoverspeed. Niether Judge or barrister argued with it so i never refered them to it.
Dibble was fairly evasive on some questions ie did you offer me pen, paper or calculater when yo asked me how long my goods would last? He replied, i did not ask for them!
I asked him, do you believe i was going to use my tobacco for a commercial purpose, he replied yes!
I then said, did you take into account that i was driving over a 600 mile round trip and paying over the standard price for the ticket when i could have sailed from a port a lot closer?? Dibble just shrugged his shoulders.
Other questions i asked:
Your saying i can't afford to buy these goods?
Do you have any formal accountancy qualifications or specialist knowledge which allows you to use my figures as evidence against me?
Do you recall me telling you that i bought a pack of tobacco on my 15 day holiday to Spain 6 MONTHS PREVIOUS, smoked it and brought back what was left, 2-3 single 50g packets? (one of the "do you recall")
You asked me if i was stopped previously which i told you yes but nothing of interest was found (which is know as a negative stop) but when you checked, you said there was no record of this, is this true?
Are all stops recorded, including negative stops where nothing of interest is found?
Have you any proof that I purchased goods on my previous trips..just please answer yes or no?
So you have limits that you allow people to bring in?
So what is the purpose of these limits?
What limit does the law say you are allowed to bring back?
When you interviewed me did you have handcuff and various other things around your waist?
So did you expect me to supply an accurate mental calculation in a stressful situation?
If you bought 12 x 400grm jars of coffee would you know how long it would last you?

I did have to explain to the Judge that my usage cals where based on one 50g pack (lasting 7.5 months) and that if i had based it off of 2 packs, i would have been a different result. Like you don't drink the exact same amount of coffee each day.

My turn on the stand.
Judge asked me to tell the court how things happened from my point of view. Then the barrister cross ex me.
I was asked questions which centered on a friend who was going with me but did not and on the gift part of my goods. As my bundle was posted to court before the first adjournment i could not add any evidence so as advised i took anything i could find with me and handed copies to the judge and barrister to answer some questions.
Judge asked me if i was going there with the intent of buying tobacco. I replied no, i was hoping to buy gifts for my children but did not see much there. The judge got quite loud with me saying it was nonsense, that he had lived there a year studying law and there where hundreds of places to shop for children. After he had finished i relied "but i was only there for a day (7 hours)".
Judge also asked me what time of the day i bought my goods (strange because dibble was not expected to remember what i said at interview). I could only recall that it was in the afternoon. Judge then spoke while writing down "carrying goods around all day"

Final Statement
After i sat down judge asked me if i had anything more, i replied no and he did ask me again probably bcos i never got to give my final statement in mags in which i put in a formal complaint.I replied no again. Basically i completely forgot about my final statement, and it was good... my bad.

The decision
The judge asked dibble to stick around as he may need to speak to him later then we all left the court while the judge made his decision.
Basically, i felt i had lost. Mainly because i felt the judge had took a dim view of me which was quite frustrating considering i had not done anything wrong and had the evidence to prove this.
30 minutess later we returned. The judge spoke to dibble for approximately 5 minutes saying that he had done a good job and was in his right to seize my goods based on the evidence he had at the time.
Then he turned to me and said i had won my appeal on the fact i had driven a 600 mile round trip when i could have gone from a port nearer. There were other things but cant remember but the judge was fair in the fact he based his decision on the evidence before him.

So i won and the judge noticed that i had cost sheets in the bundle which was posted before the first adjournment. I told the judge that those cost sheets were out of date as this case had been adjourned 3 times since. I was awarded costs on travel to court and hotel for this case and the 3 previous adjournments of this case. Food no, loss of earnings no. Then the judge signed the s144 cert.

Outside Court
Outside dibble approached me, shook my hand and said it was the right decision. Also said that i like to tinkle with the keys and that i have refered to him as "dibble" meaning he knows who i am on this forum .

Dibble also said outside court that he deserves respect - for what, wearing the uniform? What about the respect for all the decent law abiding shoppers who innocently go about their business with absolutely no intention of doing anything wrong and end up with the loss of their tobacco, £££'s out of pocket, months of stress etc. Respect is a 2 way thing - respect my rights and I'll respect your authority. Anyway respect was using a pseudonym for the officer rather than naming him.

I big thanks to eezyrider for all the hard work he as done in helping me through this and also to smoking hot for him being there for me
Also a thanks to toni for his experience and to shaky and his foi and to the rest of you on the forum... the info here helped tremendously!!

Hope this helps others



 

Last edited by thebourne (02-3-2017 7:58 am)

     Thread Starter
 

12-2-2017 4:52 pm  #91


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Great news mate. I think Eezy and SH are the only ones who deserve the thanks for all the time and effort they put in to this board. I just sit there and help out as and when I can with some of the more tedious stuff to allow them to concentrate on the cases.

WELL DONE 


I am Homer of Borg, resistance is.............hmmmm doughnuts http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

12-2-2017 6:14 pm  #92


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Shaky wrote:

Great news mate. I think Eezy and SH are the only ones who deserve the thanks for all the time and effort they put in to this board. I just sit there and help out as and when I can with some of the more tedious stuff to allow them to concentrate on the cases.

WELL DONE 

Your work in helping to transform the forum and retrieve lost FOI's etc was invaluable. Doubt we could have done it without you.


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

12-2-2017 8:12 pm  #93


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

A couple of points here and in Black Panther's case worthy of mention.

The bourne's account shows that no matter how much you rehearse things can go wrong. I refer to the closing statement which he forgot. Understandable when you are nervous, in a hostile environment.

Nevertheless the closing statement in my opinion rates as one of the most important parts of the case. It's your chance to summarise the case, emphasising in your favour the evidence you have supplied and the lack of proof on the part of BF.

It is probably the last part where anyone speaks so should be fresh in the judge's mind when he retires.

When it comes to compiling a list of q's for cross ex, make your list and then do what they say you should do when packing a suitcase - throw half of it away. A lot of Crown Court judges in condems are used to spending their time trying murderers and violent offenders. They are not in the mood to accommodate LIP's who are not familiar with court procedure. One of the most important factors in winning is showing that you a ''credible witness'', a term often used when addressing appellants. 

Consequently My advice for cross ex is keep the q's relevant and to the point. Don't use it as an opportunity to vent your outrage at the officer. If the judge looks bored, starts to pick his nose or something, you are pissing him off. If he asks the relevance of a question make sure you have your answer ready, as the bourne did or apologise and move on.

In both these cases Shaky's FOI about negative stops was used. In Black Panther's case she asked how they could know she had brought goods on previous trips when they do not record negative stops. She then produced the FOI which caused the judge to say to the officer ''Oh so you do not record all stops?...In that case you cannot say that she had previously bought goods''. 
The bourne also produced the FOI and said they had no proof of previous purchases.

In both cases I advised the inclusion of a costs sheet as an appendix in the bundle. It has been pointed out that strictly speaking you cannot use evidence in your closing summary that has not been discussed in court. However a sneaky little mention of how much the case has cost you ''as shown in the appendix Your Honour'' may well work to your advantage.

The 2 cases were different in a number of ways. In BP's case thereasons for seizure were specific making it easier to form a specific argument. The bourne's case centred mainly around the quantity of goods. This type of case is more difficult when there are no specific reasons. Also one judge was sympathetic and the other was hostile. Who knows, could be something as simple as one is a smoker and the other is not.

 


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

12-2-2017 8:35 pm  #94


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Another couple of points that come to mind.

In both cases the judges were not interested in EU directive 2008/118 which contains the a-j questions. The same set of q's are enshrined in the Excise Goods (Holding & Movement) Act so I would advise to use that in future.

Customs Notice 1 states unlimited goods can be purchased for own use. This was accepted in both cases so use that as opposed to EU Directives which can be cumbersome.


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

13-2-2017 6:24 pm  #95


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Well done thebourne, Eezy, SH and Shaky and thanks for taking the time to post up the detail.

JMK

Last edited by Johny_MK (14-2-2017 2:52 pm)

 

15-2-2017 3:25 pm  #96


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Well done everybody. Thanks for update thebourne.

 

15-2-2017 8:13 pm  #97


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Well done plus a well done to all to all the folks that helped you.

 

15-2-2017 8:26 pm  #98


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

Some might ask is it worth the stress.

To put it in perspective I reckon the bourne has saved himself about £5000 in duties, penalty and court costs by winning his appeal and of course has cleared his name.

Black panther, with a smaller amount, has probably saved potentially about £3500. 


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

22-2-2017 12:51 pm  #99


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

In both these cases Shaky's FOI about negative stops was used. In Black Panther's case she asked how they could know she had brought goods on previous trips when they do not record negative stops. She then produced the FOI which caused the judge to say to the officer ''Oh so you do not record all stops?...In that case you cannot say that she had previously bought goods''. 
The bourne also produced the FOI and said they had no proof of previous purchases.

Which brings a question.  Can that quote of the judge be used as an attachment to the FOI in anyway? Maybe even to be presented at Magistrates? Is that possible?

Last edited by NoMoTax (22-2-2017 12:52 pm)

 

22-2-2017 1:58 pm  #100


Re: They will take it nomatter what!!

I did wonder about that. I think normally, a court is bound by a higher court's decision but I don't know the ins and outs.

If I'm right then the judge's words could be used in a mags court and they would have to abide by that decision. The first thing we would need is a transcript of the hearing, or at least the relevant paragraph. That would be very, very expensive and can only be obtained by someone involved in the case or a legal professional.

I'll stand corrected but I think transcripts are priced in blocks of 70 words at something like £70.

As regards a SOT I don't think it would be of benefit as they are at that stage, conducting an investigation.


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
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.

 
 

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.