parcel force clearance fee
Options
Comments
-
Is this a 5 minute argument or the full half hour?0
-
But what exactly are you using to back up your arguments?I'm willing to admit I don't know everything and I don't try and represent myself as some form of expert, and I won't say something without backing it up unlike some here.
Definitions from an American legal site. Just because the Americans define something in one way doesn't mean that it's the same in the UK.
Not every word has a legal definition in this country and if a word doesn't appear in the interpretation section of legislation then it is generally accepted that the common definition of that word will apply and in the UK, a consignee is the person that any shipment or letter is addressed to.
Even HMRC themselves use this definition:
The following form is used when you think too much import duty or VAT has been charged on goods brought in to the UK by post. There is no difference whether these goods are gifts or purchases. All that is important is that the goods were liable for duties.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/581510/bor286.pdfDetails of UK Importer/Consignee (the person
the goods were sent to in the UK)
So ask yourself which is more likely to be the case.
You are correct or every other poster who has replied and a department of the UK government are correct?.0 -
That form does not prove that the importer for all parcels is the person it was sent to.
That form proves that the importer for such parcels, whereby the recipient was charged vat and wishes to reclaim it, is the person to whom the parcel was sent.
It's important to keep in mind the context of these things. I was not charged vat, my friend was, as he is the importer. (the buyer).
And since other people are making sweeping references to international import agreements etc. I don't see how a legal definition from an American site is a problem especially since nobody has challenged these definitions with specific British ones that say any different.0 -
It clearly states that the person the goods were sent to is the importer and consignee.That form does not prove that the importer for all parcels is the person it was sent to.
That form proves that the importer for such parcels, whereby the recipient was charged vat and wishes to reclaim it, is the person to whom the parcel was sent.
As to your definitions.
This website:
https://www.globalnegotiator.com/files/dictionary-of-international-trade.pdf
has exactly the same legal standing as the one you are using.
What does it state?Consignee.
In export transactions, the intended recipient of a shipment. The named person having the right to claim the merchandise from the carrier at destination, and is generally recognized as the legal owner for customs purposes.
But of course, I know you won't accept that either as it's as clear as day that you had already made your mind up before your first post.
And on that point, I'm out.0 -
shaun_from_Africa wrote: »It clearly states that the person the goods were sent to is the importer and consignee.
In cases where the person claiming has been charged vat, not in cases where the receiver has not been charged vat. If the receiver has not been charged vat, this form does not refer to them.
Sorry, did you just say merchandise?
As to your definitions.
This website:
https://www.globalnegotiator.com/files/dictionary-of-international-trade.pdf
has exactly the same legal standing as the one you are using.
What does it state?
But of course, I know you won't accept that either as it's as clear as day that you had already made your mind up before your first post.
And on that point, I'm out.
MERCHANDISE. By this term is understood all those things which merchants sell either wholesale or retail, as dry goods, hardware, groceries, drugs,
Sorry friend, try again.
Also, note the use of the word transactions. I have no transaction with my friend.0 -
Isn't it funny how I provided actual legal definitions and excerpts from the law whereas you've provided nothing. If you're going to try to assert something g you're going to need some actual facts instead of your say so.
I am not liable because I am not an importer. I have already shown this factually, backed up by legal definitions. You've shown absolutely nothing here. Please don't do that it's disrespectful not only to me but to anyone readi g thus site looking for factual information.
Edit:
And no, I don't forfeit the goods. The goods are returned to the person who sent them. My friend. Who happens to be the importer in this case because he is the buyer.
I've already proven this. Don't reply to this unless you have something actually written in law.
Edit2: just in case you don't have time to check it, I'll provide for you here. For customs purposes, the importer is the person writing the customs declaration or the person whom the agent acts on behalf of. This person is usually the consignee or the buyer as indicated on the shipping label.
Now, the definition of consignee, that is a person who orders a consignment.
I did not order the package therefore I am not a consignee, merely a recipient. My friend is designated the buyer and is therefore the importer.
If you don't like that or agree with it then you need to stop giving people advice because that's the actual facts proven in the letter of the law.
I have explained to you how the system works and clarified definitions where your statements were incorrect. If you want chapter and verse the I would refer your to Volumes 1&3 of the UK Customs Tariff. There are also numerous Public Notices to which I could refer you if you were short of bedtime reading. An index of same can be found here;
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/import-export-and-international-trade-notices
As for your suggestion that I should not give advice, that is what I do professionally. I have been doing this for 40 years and hold a number of qualifications in the subject. The work that I do and the procedures that I put in place for my company and our clients is subject to audit by HMRC. I would therefore suggest that my background and experience legitimises my ability to provide advice.0 -
Your friend paid it so that you received his gift - it says nothing about his liability to pay.
It's important to keep in mind the context of these things. I was not charged vat, my friend was, as he is the importer. (the buyer).
If I helped a friend out and paid a month's rent for them, no-one would think that I was legally required to do this.
Is your friend in Japan still a friend? I would be quite hurt if I sent a friend a present and then they came back to demand that I pay the import fees. I've no great knowledge of Japanese culture but you could have caused some offence. Culturally they may not directly tell you this.0 -
I've an inkling that the main argument here is due to a language difference.Actually, no I am not the importer because I am not the consignee. I've already stated this multiple times. I am reading your posts. Please give me the basic respect of reading mine or STOP COMMENTING.
Merely by definition if you accept something sent from overseas you have imported it. If you send something to someone overseas you are exporting it.
There's no need for legal definitions or posting links, that's just what the words mean, look them up in a dictionary..0 -
I've an inkling that the main argument here is due to a language difference.
Merely by definition if you accept something sent from overseas you have imported it. If you send something to someone overseas you are exporting it.
There's no need for legal definitions or posting links, that's just what the words mean, look them up in a dictionary.
Since I have still not accepted the package, I have not imported it and it is not yet my property. I can't possibly pay tax on something I do not own. my friend owns it. it's even the same on all the printed matter sent to me by parcel force. even the card they put through my door makes the clear distinction between two parties. party a is referred to when they say "your parcel" and then party B is referred to by "the addressee". they use these two terms in specific places and therefore make a definite distinction between the two. this careful wording and terminology is also present in the letter they addressed to me informing me that a customs bill is due on the item. they never once said I was liable to pay it. things like this, I take notice of.
anyway it's not a language difference. it is the concept of being charged when you have not bought anything, charged to receive a gift. my sense of justice will not accept this, and now my friend has dealt with the bill, I take great offence at anyone suggesting that the bill was rightfully mine and that I have somehow screwed my friend. I also take offence at the idea that the government could demand money off of me just because my friend decided to be kind to me. it's like a tax on charity. it's fundamentally wrong and flies in the face of my sense of justice. This is personal.
martindow, my friend was tracking the parcel every step of the way, he knew it had been held and he knew there was a customs charge affixed to it. he requested the details and paid it. i had nothing to do with that decision. If I sent him a gift of my own volition, I would be mortified if a bill was affixed to it and I most definitely would not want to land him with that extra expense when I was sending a gift. I would ask him for the details and pay it myself.
MEM62, hank you for that link it is very useful. a cursory reading of what seems like relevant sections does nothing to change what I have already said. it'll take a long time to read it in full so I'd have to come back in a few days to confirm my findings.0 -
That's how it works. Different countries have different levels of what is accepted as "a gift" it's usually a relatively small amount. If it wasn't it would be open to even more abuse.
I also take offence at the idea that the government could demand money off of me just because my friend decided to be kind to me. it's like a tax on charity. it's fundamentally wrong and flies in the face of my sense of justice.
As a side note, charities aren't exempt from all taxes..0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards