## UPDATE ## Actual guidance and procedures for UKBA re interviewing cross-border shoppers etc

Taken from Border Force Operations Manual that is still bloody offline! Mind, judging by the UKBA Officers l've encountered they've never read it! :)


Guidelines and procedures for UKBA searching vehicles!

Freedom Of Information request re UKBA made easy! Make your request specific folks! Fill yer Boots!

H/T Debbie


  1. Gold Dust! This is what I have been going on about (and have been trying to get myself). It still isn't the full version but its a huge breakthrough.

    For example, think of that deaf OAP who had his goods nicked...the UKBA did so not comply with their own guidance about a suspect being bale to 'comprehend' questioning...hell it even mentions hearing difficulties!

    Even at first glance I can see at least three points of attack and things that could be woven into the the top of the SOT.

    "In Accordance with YOUR OWN GUIDELINES XYZ-Blah blah fucking blah, I request and demand etc etc"

    Nice One SH and Debbie (whoever she is).

  2. "lf any officer decides to continue any interview in order to progress a potential criminal prosecution, interviews must be done in accordance with Pace"

    So, if l'm stopped and they want to search me and my luggage l can say something like "lf you search my luggage there must be potenetial of a criminal prosecution, yes?" UKBA can't say 'no' ... so PACE please!"


  3. Jon, unfortunately when they ask you to open your bag then it isn't a search leading to a potential criminal prosecution but a civil.

    = No PACE
    = No Rights to taped interview
    = NO Legal Aid

  4. l see his point though SBC. If you ask a Mr Sked if searching your bag could lead to a criminal prosecution what is the Sked going to say?

    lf you ask the question before he starts it puts him on the spot, does it not?

  5. Goota luv this! use their own procedures against them! classic!

  6. SH, i see his point too but it'd be better IMNSHO to say, after he has refused to give you the reasons for stopping you, 'I give you fair warning that I WILL be appealing any seizure and therefore you need to comply with your own guidelines and record the reasons for stopping me in your notebook.

    Think back to your own recordings and the hammering you gave them on just the simple point of WHY they were stopping you at all.

  7. Officers are not to stop someone in the hope

    thats the best one yet. virtually all their stops will be with the off chance of stealing their tobacco if they have any!!


  8. SBC ... we try to hit them on everything to test their reaction. This has to be done in the 'field' so to speak. Theory is not enough.

    There is a lot of good stuff in these 2 articles. Take the vehicle search one for instance. Weight is given to UKBA trying to get drivers and occupants of vehicles to voluntarily CONSENT to searches and steer clear of searches by CEMA. This certainly needs testing out. Our proposed mini-cruises Oct-Dec gives us the opportunity to do this.

    You coming on one of these by the way?

    Anon 07.29 ... yes that is a very good one. Using their own operations manual against them will be interesting to say the least!

  9. http://2khh4.blogspot.com/2011/08/badges-came-this-morning.html


"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!