BBC NEWS | Talking Point | Forum | Six Forum | Six Forum: Customs and Excise

A test case brought by cross-Channel operator Hoverspeed and a group of daytrippers over the legality of tactics used by Customs and Excise has been successful.

The daytrippers were among thousands to have had alcohol, tobacco - and their cars - confiscated while returning to the UK.

Lord Justice Brooke and Mr Justice Bell ruled that Customs' methods of operating were "incompatible" with EU law.

But Customs said the ruling upheld their policies, and stressed the result should not be seen as a "green light" that people could bring back unlimited amounts of cigarettes and alcohol.

Steve Laurence from Hoverspeed, told the BBC the rights of the travelling public had been protected from customs officers.

"We contend that they have been rather over-zealous in their actions in the fight against smuggling," he said.

Do you think customs officers have overstepped the mark? Or is it necessary to stop smuggling? What have been your experiences?

BBC correspondent Daniel Sandford answered your questions in a LIVE forum for the BBC's Six O'clock news, presented by Manisha Tank.

Transcript

Manisha Tank:
A group of cross-Channel shoppers and Hoverspeed have won a landmark case against Customs and Exercise after a judge ruled that Customs officers overstepped the mark when they seized a large quantity of goods bought by the day trippers. What's been called into question is not just the legality of the seizure but also the manner in which customs officers are tackling suspected smuggling. Daniel Sandford, our Home Affairs correspondent is here to address your e-mails and text messages.

Our first e-mail is from Mike Daly, England: By what right do Customs have to determine what is a permitted amount, when we are meant to be in a free trade zone. And is it not the onus on the Customs officers to prove that you are smuggling and not just take it for granted and leave you to prove you are not?

Daniel Sandford:
Taking that question in two parts: first of all yes, the whole point of the free market under the European Union was that there was total free movement of trade for personal use. What happened in 1992 when the whole free market opened up was that governments chose almost at random what they defined as being the sort amount that somebody might use for personal use - for example, the British Government uses 800 cigarettes - if you bring in 800 cigarettes, they'll say well that might be reasonable and if you bring in more than that, they say it might not be. But it's a totally random amount that they chose and obviously if you're going to stock up with a five years' supply of cigarettes it's going to be a lot more than 800 cigarettes.

On the second point - the burden of proof - the judges are very critical about that because the EU directive was quite clear, it did not say the burden of proof was on the passenger, it said it was up to Customs to prove that. But when we implemented it here in the UK, somehow the burden of proof got moved over to the passenger and it's up to a passenger to show that it's for their personal use and that's one of things that the judges picked up on today and were really quite critical about.

Manisha Tank:
Self-righteous from South Cheshire: Can we seriously believe that the amount of cigarettes brought into the country in this particular case was for personal use?

With that we have a text message from Rob, Preston, UK: How much can I bring back in terms of the quantity of beer and tobacco to be with my consumption level?

Daniel Sandford:
Picking up on the question from Rob in Preston first, the answer is you can bring as much as you want for your personal use. But going back to the burden of proof, if Customs don't believe you, that it's for your personal use, you've got a problem.

On the specifics of this case, if we take George Wilkinson for example, who was the driver of the car. He had 10,000 cigarettes with him. Now Customs are saying, 10,000 cigarettes - what kind of a person is going to bring 10,000 cigarettes into the country - he's clearly going to be selling them. But he says, I smoke 60 a day. Well, 60 a day - 10,000 cigarettes is about half a year's supply. And he says he hasn't been on holiday for two years and he was buying two year's supply - he hadn't got his sums quite right. But 10,000 cigarettes, it is possible for one person to get through that in about half a year.

Manisha Tank:
Helen Preston, UK: I want to purchase all the alcohol for my wedding from Calais but how do I prove to Customs that it is not going to be sold on?

Text message: What proof do Customs actually need when it comes to "for your own use"?

Daniel Sandford:
It's very difficult. If you've got a very specific occasion like a wedding - I don't want to be giving advice because I don't want someone to get caught out - I suppose if you were able to prove that you were getting married, to prove that were holding some kind of wedding reception, then you might be able to say to Customs, it's genuine.

But this is the whole issue - it comes back to it time and time again - Customs have been able to say - we don't believe you, we're going to seize everything that you're bringing into the country and no only are we going to seize everything that you're bringing into the country but we're also going to seize your car as well. That was brought in about two years ago in 2000 as a sort of punitive sanction - the vehicle in which the stuff was coming in, was also being seized. People have been losing their cars - 10,000 cars a year. Now Customs point out - I think probably fairly - that an awful lot of those 10,000 people who have lost their cars this year, haven't complained. So presumably a lot of them were smugglers - but not everyone.

Manisha Tank:
Stuart Bell, UK: What is most worrying is that there seems to be no appeal procedure if a vehicle is confiscated. If I get a parking ticket, I can choose to appeal, but if my car is seized, that's it. What appeal do I actually have?

Daniel Sandford:
There is an appeal procedure. You can appeal to the commissioners of Customs and Excise and that is what happened in this case. The woman who owned the car wasn't actually on the trip - she had lent it to her brother and some friends. Her car was seized and she appealed and tried to get it back and the commissioners wouldn't hand it back and that's how partly we ended up with this court case today. That was part of the process of her trying to get her vehicle back. The judges said today, Customs and Excise have to return her car within seven days and pay for any damage that has happened to it in the meantime.

Manisha Tank:
Greg Yerbury, UK: The only logical thing for the Government to do is to harmonise tax on drink and tobacco between France and us. Smuggling only occurs when tax is vastly different between countries - the smaller the difference the less smuggling will occur. The fault does not lie with Customs and Excise, it lies with the Treasury for setting tax rates too high.

Daniel Sandford:
Customs and Excise are part of the Treasury - they are the part of the Treasury who are responsible for raising revenue. The judges picked up on them today - in their judgment today - they were pointing out, in Britain it's about £4.39 for a packet of 20 cigarettes, in France, £2.25, in Belgium £1.85. So if you go over to France and take a load, as George Wilkinson did, of 10,000 cigarettes you are saving yourself well over £1,000. Now the logical answer to that is let's go and harmonise stuff right across the UK. The down side of that is of course that the Treasury raises a huge amount of money from particularly tobacco but also from alcohol every year and that's going to be a big hole in our pocket and we're all going to have to start paying more income tax - that's why the Government does it.

Manisha Tank:
Jerry Hutchings, London, UK: What are the regulations between other members of the EU? France to Spain for example?

Daniel Sandford:
That's a very interesting point because of course we still think of ourselves somehow because of the Channel as being somehow separate and we do still have Customs officers who mill around at Dover and Folkestone and places like that.

If you drive between France and Spain, you won't see a Customs Officer because strictly the EU directive says that Customs officers mustn't be manning border posts. In fact, Customs officers mustn't do anything differently at the borders than they would internally within the UK.

Now it is true to say that Customs officers circle the M25, stopping cars that look particularly laden down and asking people if they've just come across on the ferry and spotting if they've got huge amounts of beer or wine in the boot. But Customs officers in the UK are clearly doing something slightly different at the ports and strictly that's wrong.

Manisha Tank:
Michael Stone, Norfolk: I had my car and goods seized. I appealed to the magistrates court and won. I have been told that my car and goods have been disposed of in line with departmental policy. I cannot get them back - they just ignore court rulings at will. I have proven my case twice but nothing to show for it. If I had lost they would be hounding me now for costs.

Daniel Sandford:
That's a very interesting case. I think it's true to say now that they do no longer dispose of the vehicles but they certainly did use to and they certainly dispose of the goods seized. Strictly they should be compensating him. I'd advise him to contact a lawyer and try and get his money back because they shouldn't have seized the vehicle and goods and he has the right to compensation.

Manisha Tank:
Hodozi, UK: Is there a limit to the amount of alcohol, cigarettes etc. within the EC? If so, what is it please?

What is the permitted amount that one can bring back? My understanding was that as long as it was duty paid, you could bring as much as you wanted.

Daniel Sandford:
The answer is - it goes back to the free trade point - there are no limits, there are strictly no limits at all as long as it's for personal use. This guidance came out - for cigarettes in the UK it's about 800 cigarettes - but it's purely for guidance for Customs officers so they've got some sort of idea what to work on, but strictly there are no limits. But of course if you're doing it for commercial reasons then you are a smuggler and that's a criminal offence. So basically if you are at any point selling any of those goods on to anyone, even if it's a friend, then you are a smuggler. If you give it to a friend, you're not. But if at any point any money comes back the other way, you're a smuggler and that's a criminal offence.