The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / UK, Ireland  % width posts: 11

The truth about the purchasing of cigarettes in the UK


welshguyinpola 23 | 463
5 Oct 2011  #1
I am starting this thread because of the confusion surrounding the purchase of cigarettes within the EU, in particular the issue of how many can be taken back to the UK.

I would like to start by stating that the 'limit' the UKBA put on the amount that can be taken into the UK is only a guideline, as it is for the rest of the EU countries also. This means, as long as for personal consumption only, one can take as many as one wants. Anyone who says otherwise have been listening to UKBA propoganda.

The problem lies in the fact that even though the UKBA know this, they still try to rob innocent shoppers of their merchandise, in which they have a high success rate.

The fact is that, unless UKBA have received an anonomyous tip-off or have evidence you are selling, they cannot even stop your free passage through the airport. Rmember, the burden of proof is on them, not on you. Please read the hoverspeed case to see why this is so:

day-tripper.net/accesshoverspeed.html - read this whole page, it is disgraceful the way UKBA act.

If you get pulled by the UKBA, dont let them touch anything. Thye will demand you to open your bags - you are not obliged to. They will demand you to hand over ur passport - again don't, they cant make you.

The most important thing you must remember is don't talk too much. Alot of ppl try to blab their way out of the situation but this just gives UKBA sth to use against u. Just give a concise yes, or no and keep asking them why they are detaining you against your will.

They will then tell you that they are going to arrest you, dont worry this is where you have the upper hand. If they arrest you then they are legally obliged to record the interview they give you. This can only work in your favour as your words cannot be twisted then as everything is on tape.

Keep reminding them of the hoverspeed case and that they arre detsining you illegally, for not other purpose than to **** them off - it's quite funny.

Once they have found that they are not gonna get anything from you, they will ask you to sign a statement which was apparently said by you. Do not sign it, you are not legaslly obliged to, or sign it as micky mouse. If you sign this, UKBA have sth to use against u in court. For a laugh you can even ask the UKBA offiical to read the whole statemant back to you then refuse to sign.

Remember to always get the UKBA agent's ID number and name, they arre oblighe dto give it to you.

Here are the basics, if you want to know more pls PM me
PWEI 3 | 612
5 Oct 2011  #2
If you get pulled by the UKBA, dont let them touch anything.

Smart move: give them all the suspicion that they need that you have something to hide and give them due cause to check what you've got up your ringpiece. They claim that you were acting in a suspicious way and that your actions when challenged raised further suspicion and that is all they need to stick fingers up your arse. But whatever floats your boat.
OP welshguyinpola 23 | 463
5 Oct 2011  #3
They would be stupid to even try that since the stop they made in the first place was illegal and at the same time I am recording everything on my mobile phone/dictaphone. Thye cannot touch you and any attempt to on their part is completely illegal so going for my ringpiece will get them in the ****.

I have no idea why the mod changed the title of this thread, I am not talking about buying fags in the UK!!!!
PWEI 3 | 612
5 Oct 2011  #4
welshguyinpolaThey would be stupid to even try that since the stop they made in the first place was illegal and at the same time I am recording everything on my mobile phone/dictaphone. Thye cannot touch you and any attempt to on their part is completely illegal so going for my ringpiece will get them in the ****.

If you seriously believe this rubbish, why are you limiting yourself to making a few buttons smuggling 50 cartons of fags? Go speak to some Turkish smack dealers in Amsterdam about buying 10kg from them and then selling it on in UK. After all, UKBA can not look in your bags or touch you and it is illegal for them to even try.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,648
5 Oct 2011  #5
The fact is that, unless UKBA have received an anonomyous tip-off or have evidence you are selling, they cannot even stop your free passage through the airport. Rmember, the burden of proof is on them, not on you. Please read the hoverspeed case to see why this is so:

Okay, let's look at this analytically -

Yes, in theory, they cannot impede your passage if coming from an EU country and using the "blue lane". However, in EU law, there exists the right to conduct random checks at the border - which they use in order to stop you in the first place. While you can argue the toss about this - the truth is that random checks are perfectly allowed. They don't need proof - in fact, the only proof they need is that the check was made at random (unless they have evidence).

If you get pulled by the UKBA, dont let them touch anything. Thye will demand you to open your bags - you are not obliged to. They will demand you to hand over ur passport - again don't, they cant make you.

Wrong. The relevant laws make it clear that UK Customs have the right to search your baggage and check your identity documents. You can argue otherwise, but the law clearly states that they have this right. In fact, if you fail to do so, you'll be arrested for obstructing an officer in the course of his duties. Incidentally, because the UKBA now do both immigration and Customs - it could simply be argued that it was a second immigration check.

They will then tell you that they are going to arrest you, dont worry this is where you have the upper hand. If they arrest you then they are legally obliged to record the interview they give you. This can only work in your favour as your words cannot be twisted then as everything is on tape.

Being arrested isn't going to work in your favour when you consider that such things stay on an enhanced CRB check. I'm sure 'arrested by Customs' would be looked at favourably by touchy employers.

Keep reminding them of the hoverspeed case and that they arre detsining you illegally, for not other purpose than to **** them off - it's quite funny.

Pissing someone off who has the power of search and arrest really isn't the wisest idea. It might seem funny at the time, but when you find yourself detained in their cells, it won't be so funny, will it?

Remember to always get the UKBA agent's ID number and name, they arre oblighe dto give it to you.

This is true, at least.

They would be stupid to even try that since the stop they made in the first place was illegal and at the same time I am recording everything on my mobile phone/dictaphone. Thye cannot touch you and any attempt to on their part is completely illegal so going for my ringpiece will get them in the ****.

They'll just arrest you and use the statutory powers to search you - no big deal. I suggest you acquiaint yourself with what the law actually says (as opposed to what a few internet experts say).
OP welshguyinpola 23 | 463
5 Oct 2011  #6
Yes, in theory, they cannot impede your passage if coming from an EU country and using the "blue lane".

Have you read the hoverspeed case? It set a precedent whereby random checks are not allowed. Hoverspeed sued HMRC for a vast amount and since then random checks have been outlawed. Please read up on this and you will see. This now overturns the earler act of 79.

In fact, if you fail to do so, you'll be arrested for obstructing an officer in the course of his duties. Incidentally, because the UKBA now do both immigration and Customs - it could simply be argued that it was a second immigration check.

They can't unless you are under arrest but they need a legal ground to arrest you on.

Being arrested isn't going to work in your favour when you consider that such things stay on an enhanced CRB check.

What when you were arrested illegally? They detained you against your will. The UKBA often arrest ppl when they know they wont cooperated to avoid the convoy being recorded - FACT

UKBA cannot detain you in any cells for bringing ho,me as many fgs as you want for personal use. And they are infact detaining you illegally.

I suggest you acquiaint yourself with what the law actually says (as opposed to what a few internet experts say).

Please tell me what powers they have in the face of illegal detention??

Please listen to this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=lkk-TvUaXWM&feature=related

It shows how one man stood up to the UKBA crooks and got away scot free. This guy knows the alw delhi.

Incidentally, this same man now never gets pulled by UKBA because they know they're in for a rough ride. He got bored at not being pulled any more so now he's fighting his local governmetn about double yellow lines and is likely to win that case too.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,648
5 Oct 2011  #7
Have you read the hoverspeed case? It set a precedent whereby random checks are not allowed.

Random checks have been outlawed? That's a curious interpretation of the Hoverspeed case if there ever was one. Perhaps the cigarette smugglers like to think so, but anyone with a passing interest in English law knows that no such thing has been set. While the English system of precedent is helpful in some cases - it only applies in the specific circumstances. And the 2002 case makes it clear that nothing changed for Customs.

Incidentally, relying on the Hoverspeed judgement for the entire UK is also wrong - it will have no validity in the UK or Northern Ireland, for instance. The Scottish system also doesn't even have the principle of precedent.

But anyway, start by reading this -
1cor.com/1315/?form_1155.replyids=482

You'll soon see that the Hoverspeed case didn't actually change very much. If you look further, you'll also find out that Customs settled the 2004-2006 case out of court - which isn't binding. Neither of these two cases changed the 1979 law in any practical way.

All that changed was that Customs must have a reason to stop someone. That can be as simple as "they appeared nervous when passing through the blue lane".

They can't unless you are under arrest but they need a legal ground to arrest you on.

Read the law. They have the full right to check your documents and baggage without you being under arrest. If you think otherwise - good luck to you, but I'll trust the text of the law more than I'll trust some random internet people who have a vested interest in people listening to them.

What when you were arrested illegally? They detained you against your will. The UKBA often unarrest ppl when thye know thye wont cooperated to avoid the convo being recorded - FACT

You're willing to be arrested by the UKBA? Doesn't matter what they do and don't do on anecdotal evidence - all that matters is that they have the power to do so.

UKBA cannot detain you in any cells for bringing ho,me as many fgs as you want for personal use. And they are infact detaining you illegally.

They can certainly detain you for obstructing an officer in his duty.

Please tell me what powers they have in the face of illegal detention??

Read the law.

It shows how one man stood up to the UKBA crooks and got away scot free. This guy knows the alw delhi.

Good luck to him - anyone who knows anything about UK Customs knows that they'll get their man in the end.
OP welshguyinpola 23 | 463
6 Oct 2011  #8
Get him for what??? Hed does not sell his cigs and therefore does not do anything illegal.

The hverspeed case didn in fact change what customs can/cant do, here is a summary of the case

"Customs did not appeal the key aspects of the 31st July judgment. They asked the Court of Appeal to address four matters. These are:

1. Whether, if Customs are unable to show that they had reasonable grounds to stop a passenger for questioning, the court should infer from the fact of any subsequent seizure, that Customs did have reasonable grounds for stopping the passenger: The Court of Appeal found that no such inference should be made, and that if Customs cannot establish that they had reasonable grounds to stop the passenger, the stop was unlawful.

2. Whether the unlawful stopping of a passenger by Customs invalidates any subsequent seizure of goods: The Court of Appeal found that an unlawful stop does not automatically invalidate a seizure that is of itself valid. It is however for Customs to show, if challenged, that they satisfied the burden of proof that on the balance of probabilities the passenger was bringing in the goods for commercial purposes. - therefore, any unlawful pulling can be challenged and overturned without proof of UKBA

3. Whether Customs are permitted to rely upon general trends and profiles when selecting passengers for questioning: In its judgment of 31st July 2002 the High Court found that Customs had to have reasonable grounds "on an individualised basis" before they were entitled to stop passengers for questioning and were not entitled to rely upon "generalities or trends". The Court of Appeal said that the law does not permit random spot checks but there is nothing to exclude reliance on profiles and trends to establish reasonable grounds to suspect a passenger of bringing in goods for commercial purposes.(1)

So as you can see from this ruling, customs powers are severely limited in pulling people and seizing cigarettes

You are the kind of person that UKBA love Delphi, unquestioning, open ur bag straight away type.
PWEI 3 | 612
6 Oct 2011  #9
welshguyinpola
here is a summary of the case

Actually, there is a press release about the case which was put out by Hoverspeed. Hoverspeed want as many people as possible to cross the channel. So is their release likely to be unbiased?

welshguyinpola
You are the kind of person that UKBA love Delphi, uquestioning, open ur bag straight away type.

Why shouldn't he open his bag immediately? He has nothing to hide: he isn't the one claiming that 10000 cigarettes are for his personal use.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,648
6 Oct 2011  #10
So as you can see from this ruling, customs powers are severely limited in pulling people and seizing cigarettes

Severely limited? What you've posted makes it crystal clear that Customs must only establish a reasonable suspicion. Now - Hoverspeed at the time were backed by Sea Containers, which was (at the time) a huge company. They had the pockets to go all the way, and were able to afford the best lawyers that money can buy. The average man doesn't have access to such resources, and even to use a defence of precedent is exceptionally difficult for the "ordinary man in the street".

So - we've established that Customs need a reasonable suspicion. What do you think they're going to say when submitting evidence? Let's see...

"On Saturday 8th October at 20:00, I observed a man passing through Customs who had arrived on a flight from Krakow. He appeared to be uncomfortable and was perspiring heavily, despite the cool Autumn tempatures. I therefore stopped him and asked him in accordance with the law to open his bags, where I found 10,000 cigarettes. Blah blah blah". Voila - the stop was justified - how are you going to prove otherwise?

So - you'd have to go to court to prove that it was for personal use. Easier said than done, especially because you're relying on the court to believe you over a man in uniform.

You are the kind of person that UKBA love Delphi, uquestioning, open ur bag straight away type.

Nah, I just know better than to pick a fight with UKBA over something that's subjective.

By the way, you mentioned a coach trip - have you mentioned to the trip goers that transporting more than 800 cigarettes at once is illegal under French law, unless it's on a commercial basis?
OP welshguyinpola 23 | 463
15 Nov 2011  #11
For all the doubters:
nothing-2-declare.blogspot.com/2011/11/25-x-ukba-guidelines-and-125-x-ukba.html

Read it then tell me the UKBA has power

Just been to UK and took 52x200 cigs home, got pulled at Border Control and had nothing seized, knew the law better than them


Home / UK, Ireland / The truth about the purchasing of cigarettes in the UK
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.