Gang steals over 5000 cars per year with total impunity

Ok, well not exactly a gang ... the UKBA. They confiscate over 5000 cars per year from people who have brought back tobacco from the EU in their vehicles. What the actual figure is we have no idea ... they just say over 5000. Even MP's cant get an answer as UKBA say it would be too expensive to produce that figure :)

What? how difficult can it be? Are all the confiscations listed on UKBA's computers or not? lf they are (as they damn well should be) a 5 yr old could get the figure. So, we have a government agency saying that they don't know how many vehicles they've confiscated. Yet, these vehicles are then auctioned off  so how do they account for the money they get for them? Then some are scrapped ... how do they account for the money for this?

Despite the High Court saying that confiscating cars is not justified when the value of the car far outweighs any duty being allegedly avoided, it still goes on ... daily. I agree that some will be smugglers but not all by any means. On the prog Smugglers on ITV tonight we saw a man get his car confiscated because him and his mate had 50kg of tobacco. Fair enough you might think but how about the guy who had his 3 yr old van confiscated because he had 4kg of tobacco? No, it wasn't on the prog, it's an appeal l'm dealing with at this moment in time.

You've probably seen some of the comments on Simon's blog saying that what happens at the borders with UK shoppers isn't an issue and is of no concern. Well, excuse me but it bloody well is. People are getting their lives ruined by the UKBA on the most flimsiest excuses and yet it doesn't matter??  To us it does!

Returning to the prog, SBC commented :-

"The man from Up North with the company car was a prime example of what not to do.

Ok he was no doubt a smuggler and not a legit shopper but he could give a Master Class in how to have your goods and car confiscated.

He lied, he changed his story and worst of all he concealed

 l totally agree and another case of showing what happens when you go shopping totally unprepared. l also agree with that he was a smuggler but let me give you another scenario. If 2 family men who smoked went and bought 25kg each for personal use and they were totally prepared they could follow the path of Zaphod who brought back 27kg of tobacco for personal use ... even though he does not smoke roll-ups!.

Go prepared folks ... or pay the price!


  1. @Prop ... l've moved your post to the relevant thread, ok?

  2. Not only do they 'steal' 5000 cars a year but they had to give the obvious smuggler his 'company' car back! So infact the whole thing cost the Tax Payer a small fortune. I hate to think what man hours where involved in paper work and what the car cost to be 'processed' and stored.

    50% of all tobacco smoked in the UK is 'smuggled', maybe but they probably mean that 50% is 'non UK duty paid', which are two different things.

    But even if they did mean 'smuggled' then surely any sane Government needs to lower the duty?

    Bring the price of a pouch down to 7 quid and suddenly there'd be no smuggling and no counterfeiting. Sure genuine holiday makers would bring back some but there just wouldn't be the mark up that makes it interesting for smugglers.

    Instead of losing the revenue from the 50% smuggled the state would suddenly be getting the revenue from nearly 100% of tobacco sold in the UK, probably bringing in far more than the loss of revenue caused by reducing from the present obscene duty levels.

    Basic rule in business is that it is better to have 100 small machines each earning a pound rather than one huge one earning a hundred.

    And the saving in man power/man hours spent harassing legit shoppers alone would probably be enough to actually start to really tackle the drug smugglers (ie loads more cutters etc).

  3. But that's commonsense SBC, politicians don't understand such a thing. :)

  4. Thx SH, great job you guys did over at FOREST. kudos

  5. SH, they probably DO see the sense in reducing duty but it would be political suicide. Can you imagine how the Daily Mail/ASH/Sheeples would react? GOVERNMENT SAYS SMOKING IS GOOD FOR YOU ! SHOCK ! HORROR! O*U*T*R*A*G*E AT DUTY SINKINGS! END OF THE WORLD! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

  6. But smoking IS good, for some people. For others, maybe not so good. They should concentrate their research on that and then lift the ban so that those who NEED to smoke can get on with it and those who should not smoke can stay away.

    If they're confiscating cars at the border, I saw use a small electric powered boat and go by night. Always cross by night and never enter into a main port. Always have a port of entry that is remote and hidden away. Then there is nothing they can confiscate as they don't need to even worry themselves over it.

    Think about this too. When America did their prohbition, first on alcohol, later on tobacco, the Kennedy family did just that, brought bootlet booze in from outside the country and kept it all nice and quiet, made millions. Then they went on to become elected to every office in the land and the new political class, after they took advantage of the alcohol prohibition and tobacco bans to make large quantities of money.

    It's part of the natural cycle of things. Ten to twenty years from now, all the smokers can have all the money while the politicians have none, having lost their tobacco tax revenues thanks to their own foolishness. Then with all that largesse, one can easily fund his or her own political campaign and take the offices back from the dumb-dumbs who voted for this ban, all thrown out, smokers win in the end, as did the Kennedys in the US.

  7. I thought your argument was that they can not STOP you taking ANY amount into the U.K from another E.U country?

    SWo what happened to THAT?

  8. Hey Furor,
    that hasn't changed. Where have you got the idea that is has? l was using the example of last nights TV prog 'Smugglers' where 2 guys got 5okg (25kg each) confiscated off them. Then l showed that this amount is not excessive as Zaphod brought in 27kg himself.

    There is no NO LIMIT on the amount you can bring in. All l go on about all thetime is being prepared for the UKBA 'if' they stop you.

    Legally they cannot randomly stop you without justifiable cause as stated in the Hoverspeed case. However they just ignore it and if you are not strong and confident of your rights people will just not fight it. Unfortunately l'd say 99% of people fall into this category. So we prepare them for the questioning UKBA then inflict on them.

    lt's never really the amount that is the reason for confiscation, it's how you answer the questions UKBA ask you. Preparation is everything.

    lf l've put something down that's confusing, please tell me where and l'll correct it.


  9. Let me let you all in on a little secret.

    Did you all catch the reason WHY they stopped the car in question in the first place?

    "It looks like a hire car"

    Please tell me nobody here actually believes that the UKBA can spot a car that was hired just by looking.

    Was there a big sticker on the front saying 'Honest John's Car Rental'? Was my favourite Dutch painter (Hertz Van Rental) written on the back?

    Of course not.

    UKBA didn't 'profile' the pair of smugglers.

    There are two ways that the UKBA knew to pull that car over and they are as follows:

    1.Someone informed on them. Without informers the UKBA couldn't catch a 17th Century 'Gentleman' even if he was bringing back 'brandy for the parson' in a row boat. Either the shop in Belgium or the Car Deck workers on the ferry picked up the phone.

    2. Personally I'm guessing that it was neither of the above and quite simply the men in question bought the bacca using a card.

    THAT's the big secret that UKBA don't want anyone to know. Buy more than a few kilos of tobacco in Belgium on any British card and its likely you'll get stopped...especially if you also paid for your return ferry trip with the same card.

  10. It just annoys me so much that we have to be prepared for interrogation by UKBA for what I see as a right to go abroad and shop albeit for tobacco. We are only in Europe when it suits the arsewipes in Parliament. I have never sold any tobacco or cigarettes that I have bought back as both the wife and myself smoke and it would be a false economy to sell it as we dont make frequent trips so would have to buy in UK or buy smuggled tobacco, can they not get that through their thick heads

  11. spikejack, they can indeed get it through their thick heads. They K N O W that you and most people are honest.

    The politicians have told them to harass, intimidate and even terrorize legit shoppers so that people are too scared to buy abroad and have to pay for more and better duck houses.

  12. Almost certainly the new tobacco control strategy that is imminent from UKBA will be aimed at shoppers. Truth and integrity were evicted from the UKBA years ago. These UKBA officers that pervert the course of justice are a disgrace. Mind they do seem to have a great deal of compassion for EU Foreign Nationals ... it's just their own fellow UK citizens that the contempt is reserved for. l don't say this lightly ... it's gained from actual experience.

    lncidentally, 'smuggling' is a criminal charge so calling anyone a smuggler who has had their duty paid tobacco confiscated under civil law is completely false. UKBA's favourite terms of 'l am satisfied' or 'l believe' does not a smuggler make. They may just as well say 'l believe you are a teapot'.

  13. "Mind they do seem to have a great deal of compassion for EU Foreign Nationals ... it's just their own fellow UK citizens that the contempt is reserved for."-SH

    Ain't that the truth!

    Back when I had a car with German Plates it was amazing how quickly we always passed Customs.

  14. EU regulations must be enforced when it comes to denying sovereign rights or collecting carbon taxes directly, coming soon, but when it comes to allowing EU regulations allowing importation of tobacco for personal use, then that one must be corrupted backwards and innnocent people caught up in the snares. It is an Alice in Wonderland world, up is down, left is right, black is white. Total corruption is all it is, EU and UK both. Soviet Union or East Germany could have done better than the current lot holding power in this cuntry (not a typo).

  15. If smuggling is a criminal offence why when you go to court having taken your tobacco off you do they treat it as a civil offence. Even the police need to have proof that an offence has been comitted and have to put a good case forward to the magistrates or judges. UKBA can make anything up, which they normally do, not much evidence or proof of offence needed by them or so it seems.

  16. Just to say thanks to all who showed Forest up for what they really are. x

  17. Returning to the original topic; it would be REALLY interesting to know what the exact UKBA guidelines, and the Official Operating Procedure, for the confiscation of Vehicles is....

    As said many times, that's the weak point.



    Red tape.

    For example, do they have to receipt you for the approximate amount of fuel in the tank? Are the vehicles stored in the approved manner? Did the Officer who removed it from the scene have the required training (ie has he attended the 6 week course on 'driving confiscated cars out of the shed and into the car impound' and been certified? Yearly?).

    Nine times outta ten forms are filled in on a computer and, like everyone else, UKBA Officers probably just click 'Next', 'Yes', 'Next', 'No', 'Next'...

  18. ps

    This might be worth the read

    unfortunately I don't think they did ever write a part two :(

  19. My Bad, they did


"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!