Home of N2D.

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



06-11-2018 3:13 pm  #1


Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

This information was required to support a case. It was applied for as an FOI.

Dear Home Office,
Is a Border Force officer required to enter reasons for seizure in his notebook.

Yours faithfully,

 Please be aware that we have decided to handle your correspondence of xxxxxx2018 outside the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. This is because it does not meet the criteria for a Freedom of Information request, as it does not ask for recorded information.

 Thank you for your e mail of  xxxxxxxx 2018.    I confirm that Border Force officers are required to enter in their
notebooks reasons for seizure of goods.  

Sincerely,   
Duty  Officer.
 

Last edited by eezyrider (06-11-2018 3:15 pm)


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.

 
 

06-11-2018 3:51 pm  #2


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

i suppose the 'reasons for seizure' are written in afterwards,and certainly not before a passenger has signed the notebook?


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.
Better to live one day as a lion than a thousand days as a sheep'

http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

06-11-2018 4:28 pm  #3


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

Not really. Maybe you are confusing that with reasons for the stop which are written in after and not given.

The member concerned has absolutely nothing stating the reasons for seizure. In his SAR there is an internal memo which states insufficient reasons to proceed to condems. How can he possibly argue the case when he does not know the reasons his goods were seized?

A notebook copy for another case includes the reasons after the interview record and before the signature.


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.

 
     Thread Starter
 

06-11-2018 10:28 pm  #4


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

normally when a seizure is made , the passenger is asked to sign the note book, so in theory agreeing what was asked and answered, so i doubt many would agree to signing a notebook were the reasons for seizure was entered and they are expected to agree with them.   Ive never seen a note book with reasons for seizure already written in before the passenger signed it . But ive seen quite a few with things added after the passenger has signed.


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.
Better to live one day as a lion than a thousand days as a sheep'

http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

06-11-2018 11:52 pm  #5


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

Yep see what you mean, but I'll email copies to you, then tell me what you think.


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.

 
     Thread Starter
 

09-11-2018 8:40 pm  #6


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

eezyrider wrote:

The member concerned has absolutely nothing stating the reasons for seizure. In his SAR there is an internal memo which states insufficient reasons to proceed to condems. How can he possibly argue the case when he does not know the reasons his goods were seized?
.

No PCAL?

 

09-11-2018 9:16 pm  #7


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

I do not believe a PCAL was sent. We have a copy of the NPSU internal progress sheet included in the SAR, stating the various steps taken and there is no mention there either of a PCAL.


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.

 
     Thread Starter
 

09-11-2018 9:42 pm  #8


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

Well if the member has never been given any reasons for seizure, and there is none cited on the court summons, there could  be an argument that the complaint should  be struck out on the grounds that there is no case to answer.

I am doubtful whether this course of action  is feasible for a Litigant in Person, however.
 

 

09-11-2018 11:09 pm  #9


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

turbulentupstart wrote:

Well if the member has never been given any reasons for seizure, and there is none cited on the court summons, there could  be an argument that the complaint should  be struck out on the grounds that there is no case to answer.

I am doubtful whether this course of action  is feasible for a Litigant in Person, however.
 

Initially that was my advice for the prelim hearing. However having thought about it, if he applied for the case to be struck out would it be tantamount to asking for the case to be withdrawn? The goods would be forfeited and he would not have an option to win his case?

I suggested saying in court he has not been able to properly prepare a case because he has no reasons for seizure to argue. (we have of course carefully prepared the case) and hope the mags see it as a serious failure on the part of BF.

Just checked through all the paperwork again and the only thing on the summons is ''quantity in excess of the guidelines''
 

Last edited by eezyrider (09-11-2018 11:16 pm)


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.

 
     Thread Starter
 

10-11-2018 5:47 pm  #10


Re: Officers Notebook - reasons for seizure

eezyrider wrote:

Initially that was my advice for the prelim hearing. However having thought about it, if he applied for the case to be struck out would it be tantamount to asking for the case to be withdrawn? The goods would be forfeited and he would not have an option to win his case?
 

No it would be a request that the magistrates summarily dismiss the application for condemnation. As I said, however, I'm not sure that it would be a wise course for a unrepresented litigant to take. Perhaps if a similar situation arises in the future, it might be possible to get advice from a solicitor on that specific point.

eezyrider wrote:

Just checked through all the paperwork again and the only thing on the summons is ''quantity in excess of the guidelines''
 

The Hoverspeed case would suggest that this is, in itself, a legally insufficient reason to condemn the goods as forfeit.
 

 

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.