Reply from P&O

The reply stated that they wished to maintain good relations with their passengers and HMRC. They also wished to provide the passengers with correct and up to date information.

My letter was being forwarded to the director who maintains relations between the Onboard Services and HMRC.

No mention that the leaflets and signs were out of date and gave the wrong information. l'll give them the benefit of the doubt for the moment and wait for the reply from this other director. Maybe they want definite answers off HMRC first?

However ....

Maintaining good relations with HMRC??? This is the HMRC that is preying on their passengers and effecting their own business? ls this the HMRC that supplies leaflets that are false and totally out of date to them? What is the point?

l think P&O should look how Hoverspeed fared with HMRC

l also wrote to the Vice Director of HMRC at same time as the CEO of P&O ... not got a reply yet. :)


  1. Got similar letter from customer service manager Mike Webb but nothing about been friendly with HMRC.l wote to them to ask if your blog was true. Keep up good work. Luv the blog.

  2. Thanks Danny, glad you did. Wonder what P&O think about 'wot i wrote'? :)

  3. My reply from p/o

    Dear Mr Bryant,

    Thank you for your enquiry.

    This matter is being dealt with by our more Senior Managers, and we are in the process of obtaining new forms for our vessels. In the meantime, I can only apologise for any negative impression that has been created and I hope that these forms will be in place when you next travel with us.

    If we can help you with anything else, please don't hesitate to contact us at the address below or by email at the following address:


    Laura Welch

    Customer Services

    They HOPE customs leaflets will be in place! What bollocks!

  4. No, l don't agree Danny. l think that's a good reply. For it to be in Senior Managers hands shows they are taking it seriously. The use of the word 'hope'is not negative in my eyes and l don't think it was meant the way you see it. Thanks for posting.


"In the eyes of the Tribunal the review letter contained several preconceptions, prejudgments and non-sequiturs"

"the absurdity of this reason is demonstrated by simply stating it"

"We therefore find that Mr Sked misdirected himself as to the Policy in carrying out the review and his decision is therefore one that no reasonable review officer could have arrived at."

... commonly known here at N2D as 'Skeds' ... that is to say these are Judges comments regarding UKBA Review Officer Ian Sked's reasons for rejecting peoples appeals against seizures.

Comments are now moderated to keep out spam and those with malicious intent. The author of this blog is not liable for the content of any comments ... period!