Monday, 11 November 2013

UKBF(HMRC) v Pureleaf (Tobacco Leaf Supplier) ... one to keep an eye on.

Pureleaf have had atleast 6000lbs ( 2721.55 kilograms) of USA imported leaf 'seized'. Not our normal type of seizure ... this is CEMA 1979 S170B ... could be very nasty indeed. Pureleaf have now disabled their forum ... some can still see it but others can't.

http://pureleaf.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&p=940&sid=ede740794c8d37b55c9e91d725f963fa#p940

For those that can't see it, go here

http://2khh4.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/here-copy-of-pf-forum-thread-site-back.html?showComment=1384126426437#c5289111853158558937

20 comments:

  1. FFS Pureleaf say theyre only selling leaf for medicinal n cosmetic purposes n on same page have shredders, tubes n ciggy papers!!!!!
    The lawyers they get dont know what s170b is n pureleafs forum is all bout turning leaf into smoking baccy. What a compleat clusterfuck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, just this screenshot of the PF site would probably be enough to prove PF KNOWINGLY supplied...

      http://tinyurl.com/ppj2yry

      Delete
    2. I'm lost for words. Looks as though the BF coffee machine can handle this one!

      Delete
    3. l said earlier its a complete clusterfuck and that screenshot proves it. What a plank.

      Delete
  2. Poor sod thought he was involved in Condemnation Proceedings until SH put him straight. The advice he got from these lawyers was worthless. How long will this take to come to court?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Condemnation Proceedings usually take approx a year to get to court. Can't see this case being any earlier.

      Delete
  3. Antone who resorts to Lawyers and Gourts where Tobacco is concerned might as well stuff their leaf up the nearest ASH member's butt.Impossible to find justice ,reason,fair play when tobacco is mentioned ,those who desire freedom,liberty and choice
    will have to face the reality,there are no rules ,no guidelines,no regulations,no Geneva Conventions. Man made laws are not sacred,they last only as long as honest men stay silent.


    One of the few.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Gonna need some well handy lawyers for this one - nearly three tons? HMRC are going to go to do a Curtis Warren on these guys...

    The HMRC PR crew will have come in their pants....

    If they put info up about conversion - then they are in deep sh1t




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 6000lb was a conservative estimate. Pureleaf said a couple of thousand lbs of each leaf so l kept it to minimum of 3 types of leaf. How many more they did l don't know. Even at those figures it's approx £1.5 million of threatened Duty.

      Delete
    2. And that is only the last order. PF have been selling for a couple of years at least. Customs will simply total up his entire purchases since the year dot and that will then be multiplied by 3 to get the fine amount.
      The total amount also has a direct bearing on the sentencing and how many years custody etc

      Only a few weeks ago HMRC announced they would be pressing for heavier sentences for all such offences as Judges have been being a little lenient in their opinion.

      Delete
  5. We at N2D are here to support legitimate cross-border shoppers who exercise their rights and observe the law.

    My jaundiced experience of Customs tends to make me view them as the enemy, and my enemy's enemy can seem like my friend?

    No.

    Other groups campaign to change the law, or defy it, or circumvent it. Some commentators here may have sympathy with them.

    But it is N2D's firm policy to encourage observation of the law, by both sides. We've put a lot of work into it, and we're sticking with it.

    As a smoker, I have very strong opinions about the punitive and spiteful taxation level on Tobacco in the UK, and the damage which that tax causes. But those opinions don't have any relevance on this site. So I'll not mention them.

    N2D does not condone or encourage or applaud any tax evasion.

    Zaphod.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Whovever paid for the baccy is likely wishing they'd simply gone for promoting a new fashion for snuff.

    Idjits

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TL4U promote snuff on their leaf site and they have a forum l cannot find anything on their site that promotes smoking their leaf and their forum is exclusively about snuff as one would expect. You also have to agree to their terms and conditions before being allowed to purchase off them. This end user agreement states that they are selling to you on the understanding that you are making snuff. Whether the end user sticks to this arrangement is not TL4U's responsibility.

      Delete
    2. Maggie your link don't work cos you forgot the ':'
      http://snuffhouse.vanillaforums.com/

      Delete
  7. This is why l luv this place cos you guys tell it how it is good or bad. Bet smokers and customs both come here for your take it to the bank info. My own brief used info off the site to win my case. Respect

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, we personally know of 2 Defense Lawyers that use our database as no doubt do others ... as do Prosecution. Such is the way of documented facts ... they either help you or bite you on the ass!

      Delete
  8. A bit late for this thread but .....
    I just had a thought. What do you think of the idea of finding a contact in in, say, Belgium who can supply whole leaf? Not for now, but for future consideration.
    It is an interesting thought because people who make snuff must get their raw materials from somewhere. Why not cut out the middleman and carry it in personally?
    Interesting ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leaf is often quite bulky and also Belgium, as far as l can tell, doesn't produce leaf.

      Delete
    2. Uhm Smokey Ol' Chum, Belgium produces pretty much the finest leaf going. The terms 'Semois' and 'wervik' are just two to google.

      Delete

"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!