Poacher turned Gamekeeper

l've recently been in communication with a lady called Julie Wiggs. Who is she? well she says this:-

"I have a wealth of experience and expertise in Excise and Customs work having worked for 25 years for HM Customs & Excise and subsequently HMRC and UKBA, leaving in 2010. The last 22 years were spent in the Excise & Customs legal, excise fraud and appeals areas. 

My expertise allows me to offer you quality advice and to present the best possible appeal on your behalf. I can also attend the Finance and Tax Tribunal and/or Magistrates Court to assist you, should your case proceed that far" 

As some of you will know, finding a solicitor to fight your appeal is difficult in itself, let alone finding a solicitor who understands the appeals process of Customs/UKBA. Here we now have a lady who has years of experience in the appeals process ... she was on the other side!

Now she is on our side. lt is a new venture for her and she is new to me. However, l'm willing to believe she will be an asset to those who have suffered at the hands of Customs/UKBA.  As such, l've put a permanent link to her on our site. 

Hopefully she will also post and comment here from time to time.

l wish her success, for her success is also ours!

Note:- Nothing 2 Declare shall still continue to offer help and advice for appeals etc.


  1. I was in the middle of writing a comment asking for the SP on her.


    very very interesting.

    However I do wonder about her 'rates'. The OAP WW2 vet who can't afford to heat their council flat, and whom UKBA have robbed of a laughable 3kgs, might have trouble paying even nominal rates.

  2. PS added a link to my own, surprisingly popular, moblog and I would urge everyone to do the same, on the off chance its a GOOD thing.

    JMWCC, code up a proper link 'button' please.

  3. 35 quid an hour is indeed VERY reasonable although perhaps still out of the reach of some (even with the hope of 'jam tomorrow' for court costs).

    I hope Julie will be writing regularly here? Her view from the inside could be the single biggest step forward since you started this place.

  4. l've invited her to post/comment but l'll respect her decision either way. She tells me that she has been reading our blog though. :)

  5. Of course you'll still respect her in the morning, gentleman that you undoubtedly are ! :P

  6. that's good news. well found SH. just hope l never have need of her!

  7. Nice one! l hope she does contribute to this blog. Like SBC l'd be interested in her views.

  8. Can you see what good you're doing SH - Can I send you a nice big red shiny apple?

    Looking forward to her comments, a quantum leap for your blog.

    Don't know though if everyone will be able to pay the £35 an hour. Wouldn't you want at least a couple of hours?

    Good news all the same!

  9. A lawyer l was going to use charged 150 quid an hour and all advice the cnut gave me was dont bother appealing!

  10. smoking, Is there any chance asking her about the legality of customs refusing to record the interviews. My barrister said I was entitled to it. many thanks

  11. Spikejack do the goonies record the interviews of people who dont speak english or for that matter people who cant read or write?

  12. I know nothing about Julie, but at £35 an hour she can't afford to take on much charity work. So go easy on the clamour for comments and info from her!

    SH does it for free, but only when he's not busy. And despite his experience, Julie must have far, far more.

    I really wish her well. Her successes will have a knock-on effect for others. One day this big rip-off has to end, when enough people have stood up to Customs' intimidation.

  13. Zaphod does have a bad habit of talking sense.

    ...its a character flaw.

  14. I agree with Zaphod, Julie can post or comment if she wishes to.

    @Tam ... mmmmm, maybe l'll forget/lose/can't find my reading glasses next trip. :)

    lt's all in 'The Game' :)


"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!