Home of N2D.

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

General Discussion » compensation for seized goods. » 02-5-2019 10:21 am

That quick? Dear God, man that's so fast its obscene. Say what you like about our hard working Great British Civil Servants , they don't half get things done 'PDQ' (Civil Service slang for 'Pretty Damn Fast' as opposed 'TDL' or 'Too Damn Late').

General Discussion » Cue That Guy Whistlin' In Every Spag Western Ever.... » 05-4-2019 9:25 pm

eezyrider wrote:

The £1000 thing is if you are carrying cash through the port they are likely to seize it if you don't have proof where it's come from or going to. Another reason some of use cards now.

Actually some of my coach travelling companions have said the reason for seizure was, in a couple of cases at least, the fact that the person had spent over £1k. Personally I think maybe they got muddled up (stories of seizures tend to 'grow' IME-as I'm sure you know) but my gut was telling me not to risk it for the sake of an extra kilo of baccy because had I been stopped and had I had my baccy and car seized then there would have been absolutely no point in my going over again before brexit. Unless things have changed? Is it still the case that anyone who answers 'yes' to the 'have you had goods seized previously?' question and HASN'T WON in court already, will automatically have their stuff taken? Think that is even mentioned in the Hoverspeed as being the standard practice.

General Discussion » Cue That Guy Whistlin' In Every Spag Western Ever.... » 05-4-2019 4:43 pm

I had booked to go on a coach trip to Adinkerke last Wednesday (03.04) but because the coach firm(s) keep cancelling due to lack of numbers I took the precaution of booking myself a ticket on the Dover-Dunkerque just incase they did cancel AGAIN. They did. So  sunrise on Wednesday saw me crossing the border into England driving my own car    to Adinkerke, with some help from DFDS across the watery bit, inorder to stock up before the 12th and Brexit (aren't you glad we have such decisive politicians , not like Johnny Foreigner who would spend the whole time handwaving and shoulder shrugging?). Also I had a lot of help from Eezy in composing a 'new' style 'Witness Statement' and other documents.  
First surprise was on the ferry out. I had a car deck to myself-well there were 2 other cars. 3 cars on the entire car deck. Even when i used to travel late at night in the dead of winter the car deck was at least half full. No coaches went on as far as I could see either.
Got to Adinkerke, pulled in opposite "REAL VILLAGE" on the dyke and surprisingly all the parking spaces there were empty. Usually there is at least one coach taking up half the spaces. Went in and there was one other customer, a Brit OAP. Their Cafe and even their Smokers Cage were empty. Persuaded the 12year Walloon behind the counter to sell me my 4 kgs- was going to be five but I watched as the numbers on the till leapt alarmingly towards a grand and decided that discretion was the better part as Customs, so I am told, get really upset by people spending more than £1000 -even people who have well paid jobs and I don't.  Whilst my car being seized wouldn't be the end of the world , it would be more hassle and stress then I need right now and assuming Brexit doesn't happen for a few more weeks/months/years I hope to get another coach trip in.
To get back onto the motorway its easiest. I find, to drive round the block (drive down the dyke, turn left at Real XL and then left ag

General Discussion » Frequency of Travel » 31-3-2019 4:32 pm

eezyrider wrote:

If you work 10 hour shifts in a warehouse where you can't smoke it defies logic that you will smoke 35 per day.

BOLLOCKS! (in the nicest possible way ). I used to find I actually smoked more a day when I had 12 hour shifts in places I couldn't smoke. A cigarette a mile on the way into work , same back, and one every 15 minutes or so when I finally got home before going to bed. 

...then again I used to smoke in the shower even.
Its all a question of dedication to one's art , either one IS a 40 -60 a day man or one is just playing at it and there are cheaper hobbies.

Help Section » Help / Advice » 21-3-2019 7:51 pm

Congrats Wolfy ! (and a tip of the Blocked Dwarf Horned Helmet to Eeze)

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 21-3-2019 6:23 pm

Silly question time Eeze, for the 'trip log' part of the Wit.State , obviously I need to list the dates and amounts but do I need to include copies of the REAL receipts in the actual statement or would a "receipts shown to officer" type comment be enough? Following your advice about keeping their Worship's minds focused I don't know if filling the statement with various photocopies of receipts, bank statements etc is a good idea- but rather have them with but separate? 

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 20-3-2019 10:27 am

eezyrider wrote:

My thoughts .....
Another thing is that you are not quoting points that were appealed so he can't prove you wrong.

That makes a lot of sense, thanks. Although I will keep a copy of relevant Appeal paragraphs in my other 'FOI' folder just incase it comes down to a full interview...t'would be just my luck...

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 19-3-2019 10:12 pm

eezyrider wrote:


I would suggest you copy from here:-


Copy from the top, reads.....Neutral Citation and then down to and include para(iii) . That covers the necessary.

That seems to be the Original Hoverspeed judgement (or am I having a senior moment)? Would not quoting from the Appeal be better or both? I'm concerned a knowledgeable officer (they must have some) might say 'the hoverspeed ruling is irrelevant cos HMRC appealed and won'?

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 19-3-2019 5:20 pm

eezyrider wrote:

I'm working on a full reply but just back from a trip so bear with me.

Of course and I really appreciate your taking the time to
Thank you for the links/tips so far.

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 19-3-2019 12:33 pm

*edit 15:53 OH POOH! Just realised you said this " include para iii of the Hoverspeed ruling which states that customs cannot seize goods based on quantity alone" in a previous comment! So please ignore my first question. Still unclear about Customs Notice 1 though.

Eezy, I was unsure whether to start a new thread or not but this does continue on from your reply. I did also consider asking the following questions in a PM but thought it might be better 'in public' for the sake of googlers.

I am now preparing my 'paperwork' for Saturday's 'stocking-up-before-zombie-apocalypse' coach trip to A'kerke. Having studied intently your 'new style SOT'/Witness statement , I have a couple of questions as to the additional documentation to be affixed thereto.
I couldn't find the full text of the Hoverspeed Appeal here. There is a very good summary and explanation but for a 'legal document' I would want to attach the actual judgement....which I found here: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5b46f1f52c94e0775e7ef15e
It is rather long so my question is would it, do you think, be acceptable to only attach the last page or so (particularly relevant I feel for me as I am 'stocking up')? : 

[i]65. Summary regarding articles 8 and 9 of 1992 Directive: Having considered the scope of the Directive with the benefit of the full submissions that we have had on this topic, we can summarise the position as follows: i) The concepts of "products acquired by private individuals for their own use" in article 8 and "products held for commercial purposes" in article 9 of the Directive are antithetical, in the sense that, if an individual acquires (or having acquired for his own use subsequently decides to hold) products for a purpose other than his own use, such products are to be regarded as held for commercial purposes (paragraph 64). ii) The Divisional Court's reasoning and conclusion regarding the scope of articles 8 and 9 were therefore correct; and there is no room for a conclu

General Discussion » The most blatant misinterpretation yet. » 17-3-2019 1:04 pm

eezyrider wrote:

 Then again it makes it easy to put our case together. 

One would hope that the lawyers for BF would pick up on it before the hearing, they get paid enough. Maybe even pull the case?


Help Section » Goods seized last month » 16-3-2019 3:55 pm

eezyrider wrote:

Mind you it usually raises a chuckle when I go in Real T and ask for say, 1200  café crème which do not come in sleeves of 200. Their faces are a picture trying to work out how many packets/packs that is 

I have long suspected that the majority of the 12 year olds behind the counter at REAL , don't actually smoke themselves. 

Help Section » Goods seized last month » 16-3-2019 1:58 pm

Andyg wrote:

When asked how many packets of amber leaf i had whem he opened bag i said 15.. ( meaning 15 10 packs) i quickly chamged that to 12.. by saying sorry my mistake i put 3 packs back at the till because i only had a grand .

I was reticent to reply to your post because you'll be getting all the right advice from Eazy but then it occurred to me that someone else might stumble across/google the above sentence and I should therefore add my 2p , as i have witnessed several such 'amount' mistakes and have even made them myself.

On the coach trips I use, most passengers reckon in 'pouches' or 'packs' and use both terms interchangeably (as I suspect do UKBF precisely to catch out those like yourself). Same goes for 'packs' and 'cartons'/'sleeves' of cigarettes.  So when the nice UKBF officer asks that first or second question 'how much/how many?' I make a point of replying in 'point.wtf kilos' ,for example  "IN TOTAL I purchased 3.75kilos , 3 kilos for myself and 750g as presents".  I find that works best -works best because I always double check the amount when filling in the SOT on the return journey (thank go for calculator functions on smart phones, cos I still count on my fingers) so I am unlikely to say something wrong when asked. Also a 3.75 kilo type answer tends, i find, to inform the Officer that one is perhaps a little pedantic and has taken the trouble to 'gen' up on things. 
Also bear in mind that in many EU countries tobacco pouches are no longer always 50gs. 

Of course , dear Visitors to this site, depending on what happens on the 29th, this may all be moot but should we get a 'transition period' or an extension then perhaps worth bearing in mind. 

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 10-3-2019 2:53 pm

I keep my SOT and the border force copy along with the receipts from that trip's purchases on the front cover of my file (I have a file with a clear plastic sleeve on the top, business presentation style) so its the very first thing the Officer sees...and so far no one has ever asked me to take it out from that sleeve so they can read the full document its glory.  My but that was a bit unclear, here a photo to aid understanding: 
Then I like to have anything with a 'border force' notepaper heading or 'sot' or legal heading so that is the next thing the officer sees. Then I have the wallets with the previous SOTS and receipts from the last 12 months together in lieu of a trip log.

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 10-3-2019 1:57 pm

Thanks, that looks really helpful. 

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 10-3-2019 12:34 pm

" and the above mentioned legislation".- Easy

Yes, the other things already form part of my SOT, but any further pointers as to layout and wording to incorporate that legislation would be appreciated if you have chance/inclination.    

"The commonest problem I have to deal with is travellers not knowing or properly declaring the amounts of goods they have bought on previous trips."   Colour me somewhat surprised...although thinking about my average Norfolk travelling companions I shouldn't be surprised I suppose. When I say to one of them that I am bringing back, say, '3 kilos' then you can bet their next question will be 'hew many pouches ois tha 'hen?!?!' .

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 10-3-2019 5:54 am

Excellent advice Easy, thanks. I shall amend my SOT accordingly. 
"I know it is totally against the principles upon which the forum was founded"
Hardly. The principle principle for telling people to always have an SOT was to stop them, to stop people like me, saying something 'stoopid', having a script or framework to hold tight to. From the very start some always felt they were confident using a 'mental SOT'. As i said in my own thread on baking an SOT, everyone is different. 
I doubt there is anyone better 'qualified' than you to write a new style SOT and should we get a 'transition period' and still be able to shop for the next couple of years then I would urge you to compose one.

General Discussion » Legal Confirmation? » 09-3-2019 10:48 pm

I went to REAL on Thursday last which meant 6 hours of delays due to weather and the Douane working to rule (at least it let me wind up the Brexiteers on the coach). Only brought back a kilo because I brought back 3kg a month ago. By the time we finally got to Dover, Border Force had gone home for the night. I'm trying to stockpile before the Zombie Apocalypse hits, of course, and I plan to go again in 2 weeks time and buy several kilos again.

So I was wondering, do you guys see any mileage in my going to a solicitor/commissioner of oaths/notary with the 13 or so tubs of tobacco I will have left by then and paying him actual real money *shudders* to witness that I still have such and such an amount of tobacco in my possession ?  "and that *flicks through SOT*  Officer is a witnessed 'deed' from my solicitor attesting he has seen the unopened 2.5 kilos remaining tobacco from that 3kg I declared in my previous SOTs, and that I obviously haven't sold it on" 
Maybe just a late night brain fart.....


General Discussion » Signing officers notebook » 05-3-2019 5:11 pm

Back from when Smoking Hot first charged those UKBA windmills, the advice has always been NEVER SIGN, if for no other reason than the overpriced barristers they would send to the magistrates court would invariably declare one had 'signed a written confession' and the whimsical darlings on the bench would nod in sage agreement/ case closed. One hopes in the intervening time they, UKBF's lawyers, have stopped using that particular lie. 

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.