There Is NO Magic Wand! ##UPDATED##

Lately we've been getting the impression that people think we give away a Magic Wand. Our advice, like the info cards, is totally useless unless you do something too. You can't simply wave it about at the UKBA/Border Force or Courts and all your problems will disappear! YOU have to put the effort in too!

Take Appeals and appearing in Magistrates Court for Condemnation Proceedings. Hard work has to be done! ... and that takes time!

Take Condemnation Proceedings ... the case against you depends solely upon the evidence presented by the UKBA/Border Force. This is primarily what is contained in the officers notebook from the time of the seizure (that's why we tell you not to sign it and audio record all interviews!). With Condemnation Proceedings you will (or should) receive a sworn transcript from your UKBA Officer of what this notebook contains. This is not good enough! ... you have to get a photocopy of the actual notes. Then you painstakingly compare one against the other for mistakes, falsehoods,  deletions and additions. After you've got in front of you what the officer actually wrote at the time ... then, and only then do you look at what it says ... unless you've recorded the interview. Then you have to transcribe what was actually said in the interview and compare it to what the officer wrote in the notebook This again is a painstakingly long process.

You have to then dissect the notebook and show where possible the errors made in the questioning and what was written ....  and the professionalism of the said questioning ... or lack of. Was the officer trying to find out the truth or simply ticking boxes because the decision to seize had already been made and so forth. You also have to check that the officer adhered to procedures and standards set by UKBA. Another long process.

lt's not enough to point these out, you also have to show the questions they should've asked to clarify points that they may have used against you. You have to back this up with actual evidence from yourself ... transcript of audio recording, flight details, holidays, bank accounts, consumption, expenses, income and so forth.

Then you look at their reasons for seizure. Where did they get these reasons from? Are they factual? Can they produce actual evidence to back these reasons up? Another painstakingly long process because you then have to show with actual evidence wherever possible that their reasons for seizure are wrong. This includes Subject Access Requests, FOI's. requests to prosecution to release documents and info, research and so forth.

Then you have to prepare for court ... evidence exhibits incl copies (all referenced and easily accessible), line of questioning you want to take and breaking it down into bullet points and so forth. Another painstakingly long process.

Court is a game but a damn serious game. You have to defeat the prosecution and you can only do this with preparation for 'the game'. Each case is different so the same work has to be done time and time again.

This involves YOU putting in the effort too.We need all this info and we can't get it without you.

We don't have a Magic Wand!


Of course, if you prepare before you get stopped and searched by Customs we won't even have to talk about a Magic Wand! :)


  1. These guys won't mention it but l will. They do all this for nothing! They don't receive £250k+ from big tobacco like someone l could mention. ln fact they get no funding at all. They don't ask for donations or even payment for the work they do. When they helped me they would not accept anything but l sent them a cheque anyway. These guys deserve it! We all should thank them for they work they do and help them to continue doing so. They won't ask for it but l think we should all show our appreciation.

  2. Not only do the guys do it 'on their own dime' but they have to face accusations of 'helping smugglers','aiding terrorists' and, perhaps most insultingly, 'running a money making scam'.

    And it isn't just 'sticks and stones' either. There has been at least concrete attempt to discredit them and maybe even get them into serious trouble with the law.

    It won't surprise me in the slightest if, one day soon, the Guys get an 'early morning wake up call' from the Police/HMRC. Not that there would be any justification for it BUT in this Cuntry these days it only takes one phone call 'denouncing' someone as a 'smuggler' or as a 'TERRORIST'. Tin foil hat-ness? Me? No the case of Honest George up in Scotland proved that recently.

    I stick by my earlier claim that the Guys are 'heroes' and i'm proud to 'know' them. I'm also happy to tell anyone that it is only thanks to SH and Zaphod that I've been able to afford to pay the Gas Bill this winter. I'm not rich- I live of Care Benefits for looking after my mentally ill wife. Without the kilos of cheap baccy that the Guy's advice has made possible we'd be fucked.

  3. I can personally vouch for the guys and all the hard work they put in. They really don't get any funding from anyone. They pay for it all themselves. They don't do it for themselves because they don't need to. They already know how to tackle Customs. They do it for you and all the others. They don't make a penny out of it. With funding they could do much more and l think it's time they set up a donate feature. l know what they'll say if l ask them so l'll probably just do it anyway. Justine :) xxx

    1. Not sure about this Jussy. Hold back for a while. x

  4. l'd go with that Jussy. Bestest site on web for xborder shoppers

  5. Ill go with that to, I cant afford much but I will donate. Can we do it via PayPal.


  6. Yes it would be nice for those that can offer a donation in support of the blog and it's administration but it could possibly cause ramifications and extra undue burden to those "special people" that provide the advice and information.

    This has to be well "administered" to be beneficial

    1. Sort of my thinking too. l saw what happened to Anna Raccoon with her donations for a good cause. Yes we could do a lot more but donations come with a price and not one that that l believe would be helpful.

  7. ". Yes we could do a lot more "

    Actually probably not that much more-not with the level of donations that you could reasonably expect ie not much. Lets us not forget the reason FOREST takes money from Big Tobacco is because it couldn't finance the vol-u-vents and Bolly for minor politicians from donations alone.

    The 'more' that needs doing is actually free and isn't yours to do. The other socalled 'Libertarian' blogs should be publicising N2D's tatics/victories (if not N2D itself). Let's not even mention what the MSM should be doing.

    The 'more' that needs doing is for US your readers to do. We need to hand out cards, and take every opportunity to tell others. We , the Readers, need to lead by example- always buying abroad and bringing home our purchases unmolested to show family and friends.

    Sure *if* you got huge donations (I'm talking FOREST level plus) then yes there is more you could do and should I ever win the Euro Millions RollOVer then you can expect a 1st class ticket to Zurich to plopp trough your letter box so you could do things such as finance a full time rep-a 'Our Man In Adinkerke' whose job it would be to go from Baccy Shop to Baccy Shop and inform shoppers of their rights/help them fill out a simplified SOT that kind of thing. Having a permanent rep on the Hull ferry handing out professionally printed cards.

    TBH you're probably better off all round simply relying on The Bank Of Back Pocket and what 'donated' help you get offered (eg 'I can get some cards done professionally' type thing) than on PayPal buttons et al.

    Although, of course, if you do put up a Donate Button then I will give what I can- I didn't mean to sound 'tight' in any way.


"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!