Parcel Force Charges

[Fluke]

I know the OP has got the fact about being privately owned wrong, but has anyone ever heard of this?

I found this and found it quite interesting indeed, as we know, large purchases from Rexspeed incur a charge by Pacelforce....well....I may have found a way around it....read on...

Firstly the package was labeled correctly as its legal to import for person use and customs didnt put up an arguement they simply held the package for a couple of days and then slapped the duty and VAT charges £23 something.

As the package was imported using the thai national postal service it gets handed over the Parcel force which is now a privatly owned devision of the royal mail.

Parcle force pay the customs charge on your behalf then slap £13.50 on for the privlige of doing so.

When my mate went to collect his pack from the depo they refused to hand it over unless he paied the charge includig £13.5. and storage on top of that.

My mate then quoted that it was illegal to complete a service (paying customs) and charge the customer wthout offering them the chance to pay it themself or having a proir agrement on the price.
Then he demanded that they hand the package over with an invoice as it was a criminal offence under the (criminal law act section 104 sub section 2d) to hold a postal package in "virtue of lien". This means holding a package for ransom of payment... This is just like saying....

"you cant have your package unless you pay us £13.50 cause we paid your customs bill,,,,, when you didnt even ask us to."

Also holding a package illegaly as a non government owned postal service (Royal mail and Parcel force are privatly owned now) is against the postal service act 83,84 and carries a sentense of up to 6 months.

He spoke to the manager who didnt give him the package and my mate then rang the police who after an hour or so of argueing with him told the boss he either released the package or they would arrest him.

He got the package. Parcel force paid the bill and as they didnt inform my mate they were going to pay the customs charge on his behalf they didnt have a leg to stand on so in the end he paid nothing.

Royal mail and Parcel force make millions every year doing this and its against the law so f**k them and next time you get a bill check to see if you legaly have to pay it.

Im telling you this now cause I just went to pick up my new set of golf clubs and they slapped a bill on for over £90. I walked in and stated the criminal law act 104 subsection 2d and the postal act 2000, 83,84 and they just gave me my clubs.

Sounds like they shouldn't be doing what there doing...

[Tman]

Don't believe a word of it.
Apart from anything else, why would a copper get involved and go up against a government department official?

PF don't pay C&E on "your behalf" either; the bill comes itemised with the duty separate to the PF collection charge.
Just another dreamer giving it the big 'uns on-line.

[DGP1]

This has been brought up before but I'm not too sure how it would end up if it actually went to court, another problem with that is that no company will want to transport any item if they're going to be held responsible for paying the customs charge (all these packages are just sent to a customs depot for them to deal with).

[not me]

the problem here is people dont get a choice.
now dont get me wrong,it shouldnt be done free but what i dont get is why nobody challenges HMRC who are the ones allowing this scenario?

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

from a legal stand point the guys is correct about the handing over of the parcel saying they will pay the charge later, they could legally technically insist on it and then hmrc would have to chase them for the duty, however the part about the police threateneing to arrest someone is bull as it is a civil matter and the police have no interest/juristiction over it,

[Lounge Lizard]

Royal Mail can't be expected to collect the customs charge and pass it on to HMRC for nothing so RM should make it clear to HMRC that they have no interest in their customs charges and HMRC should therefore (a) take charge of such parcels when they arrive in this country and deliver them themselves (b) seek payment of the charge from the addressee after Royal Mail has delivered the parcel or (c) have Royal Mail's fee collection charge deducted from what RM passes onto HMRC, instead of being paid to RM by the addressee - this last one would result in less revenue to HMRC but surely if HMRC wants RM to collect the customs duty then HMRC, not the addressee, should foot the bill

[k979aaa]

Is it not the case that someone who knowingly attempts to import Good's without paying duty is a smuggler and in times gone by could be hung and can still get a hefty prison sentence!.

[andy2007]

Only if they try to hide the item(s). For example, if they tried to avoid going through Customs, or if they hid the item(s) in something which wouldn't be liable for Import Duty.

[k979aaa]

Only if they try to hide the item(s). For example, if they tried to avoid going through Customs, or if they hid the item(s) in something which wouldn't be liable for Import Duty.

Pepole put all kinds of items in the post without declaring what is in them first!.

[bandit650]

104-subsection(2)applies to-
(a()a postal packet
(b)anything contained in a postal packet,and
(c)a mail bag containing a postal packet
which is not the property of the crown but which is in the course of transmission by post.
(2)Anything to which this subsection applies shall have the same immunity from,
(a)examination,or seizure or detention,under a relevant power conferred by virtue of this Act or any other enactment,
(b)seizure under distress or in execution.
(d)retention by virtue of a lien,
as it would have if it were property of the crown.
(3)In subsection(2)"relevant power"means any power other than
(c)a power conferred by an enactment relating to customs or excise in its application,by virtue of section105 or any regulations made under that section 105 or any regulations made under that section,to goods contained in postal packets,or
105_(1)subjects as follows,the enactments for the time being in force in relation to customs or excise shall apply in relation to goods contained in postal packets to which this section applies which are brought into or sent out of the United Kingdom by post from or to any place outside the United Kingdom as they apply in relation to goods otherwise imported,exported or removed into or out of the United Kingdom from any or to any such place.
(c)enabling persons engaged in the business of a postal operator to perform for the purposes of those enactments and otherwise all or any of the duties of the importer,exporter or person removing the goods,
(3)Duties(whether of customs or excise)charged on imported goods or other charges payable in respect of postal packets to which this section applies(whether payable to a postal operator or to a foreign administration)maybe recovered by the postal operator concerned and in England and Wales and Nothern Ireland may be so recovered as a civil debt due to him.
The postal Services Act 2000.or the parts that we need for this post.

[axeman]

Don't believe a word of it.
Apart from anything else, why would a copper get involved and go up against a government department official?

PF don't pay C&E on "your behalf" either; the bill comes itemised with the duty separate to the PF collection charge.
Just another dreamer giving it the big 'uns on-line.

Read the postal act 2000 what the sly bas***** are doing is using the wording of the act specificaly for there own purposes ALL competitors deliver first then you recive the vat / duty bill but royal fail retain the item until the lein is payed clearly in breach of the postal act 2000

[axeman]

Where's the reply tman or not read your manual yet ???? if answer is 2 then ask question 5 etc...

[Tman]

Good one Agent, but B5 or even C22 could be better.