Not an urban legend-Watch out for those stowaways or you could be paying.

[Corradobrit]

So much for border control

Essex couple fined £1,500 after migrant hid on motorhome

The pair are given a £1,500 penalty after finding the young man once they arrived home in Essex.

www.bbc.com

 

[Ch1pbutty]

Another reason not to have a bike rack cover!

 

[PJT1966]

The moral is, if you find someone stashed away in your van, let them go or face a fine.

 

[WelshGas]

At the EU ports I've used there were enough signs asking you to check your vehicle for stowaways.
Of course Border Control could stop and search ALL vehicles - just be prepared for significant delays.
It's all a balance. Quick transit then vehicle owners have to check.

 

[Corradobrit]

Thermal imaging detectors should not delay things much.

 

[KevH]

I reckon I might notice if there was a stowaway on board

 

[ThomasHJ]

How big are you guys vans?

 

[JAG7001]

i bet the stowaway doesn't get a fine, which Hotel did he get checked into, that said, if they both went into a Carrefour leaving the van, they maybe should have checked, i would be worried about the brackets on the rear wall now after the extra weight

 

[Vagophile]

In the days before small boats and Eurotunnel we used to park our motorhome overnight by the beach in the industrial zone in Calais to catch a morning ferry. We had a motorcycle on a tow bar mounted carrier which was under cover. On one occasion, in the middle of the night, I heard a noise at the back of the van, and opened the rear window blind to see the face of a young black man staring back at me. He took off p.d.q.
So this sort of thing is not new; we would have checked in any case irrespective. Calais has been a dodgy location for potential illegal stowaways for as long as I can remember.
Incidentally, I have on occasion been asked to consider smuggling someone for a fee, but being a law abiding citizen have always declined. Older couples in motorhomes are a demographic of particular interest to H.M.Customs.
Edit. This happened in the days before fines for importing stowaways was introduced.

 

[Steve&Bev]

Thanks for the lift!!

 

[Helicon]

Fine cancelled for couple who found immigrant in motorhome’s bike rack https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c74k7my94m3o​

 

[The Tall Luthier]

i bet the stowaway doesn't get a fine, which Hotel did he get checked into, that said, if they both went into a Carrefour leaving the van, they maybe should have checked, i would be worried about the brackets on the rear wall now after the extra weight

I don’t think we put them in hotels anymore, we just chain them to the walls outside in all winter weathers. After all it’s not as if they are human beings are they!

The sad reality is that before Brexit we had the Dublin Agreement which allowed us to return people to the original EU countries. We left that accord and for that there is an economic price to pay. No use in complaining, we did it to ourselves.

 

[Anthony1]

So much for border control

Essex couple fined £1,500 after migrant hid on motorhome

The pair are given a £1,500 penalty after finding the young man once they arrived home in Essex.

www.bbc.com

The fine has now been cancelled TT Starmer got involved.

 

[Corradobrit]

Yes a question was raised by the MP during last weeks QT. Clearly action was taken as a result.

 

[Anthony1]

I don’t think we put them in hotels anymore, we just chain them to the walls outside in all winter weathers. After all it’s not as if they are human beings are they!

The sad reality is that before Brexit we had the Dublin Agreement which allowed us to return people to the original EU countries. We left that accord and for that there is an economic price to pay. No use in complaining, we did it to ourselves.

Apart from the obvious, ie stopping them, we need to have a reassess our relationaship with the EHCR, the RNLI and the French police.

 

[The Tall Luthier]

Apart from the obvious, ie stopping them, we need to have a reassess our relationaship with the EHCR, the RNLI and the French police.

Absolutely nothing wrong with the ECHR.

The same looney tune, crackpot, far right, trump loving, snake oil salesmen that convinced us to leave the EU are now telling us that we must abandon our own Human Rights. That legislation has successfully protected me from government overreach for my entire life.

Long long long may it last.

 

[WelshGas]

Absolutely nothing wrong with the ECHR.

The same looney tune, crackpot, far right, trump loving, snake oil salesmen that convinced us to leave the EU are now telling us that we must abandon our own Human Rights. That legislation has successfully protected me from government overreach for my entire life.

Long long long may it last.

Funny, didn't realise Jack Straw was of the Far Right persuasion.
As we have Human Rights legislation embedded in UK Constitution/Law , courtesy of Tony Blair, why cannot our own Supreme Court handle such cases rather that a cabal of 46 second rate political appointees.

 

[The Tall Luthier]

Funny, didn't realise Jack Straw was of the Far Right persuasion.
As we have Human Rights legislation embedded in UK Constitution/Law , courtesy of Tony Blair, why cannot our own Supreme Court handle such cases rather that a cabal of 46 second rate political appointees.

The Supreme Court applies uk law. UK Law is instigated by government and enacted by Parliament.

Our first past the post system allows both Johnson and Starmer to railroad pretty much any law they want. However they cannot change international laws and treaties.

They could leave the ECHR and the associated treaties and join Russia and a few outliers in the wilderness. We would of course look like a complete rogue state.

If Human Rights only exist in order to protect a population from its government, it makes no sense whatsoever to give control of the continued support of that law to said government.

As a besides, what harm has it ever done us?

Occasionally the Daily Heil tells us it’s led to some brown people extending their stay but really, is membership even worth arguing against?

 

[Anthony1]

The Supreme Court applies uk law. UK Law is instigated by government and enacted by Parliament.

Our first past the post system allows both Johnson and Starmer to railroad pretty much any law they want. However they cannot change international laws and treaties.

They could leave the ECHR and the associated treaties and join Russia and a few outliers in the wilderness. We would of course look like a complete rogue state.

If Human Rights only exist in order to protect a population from its government, it makes no sense whatsoever to give control of the continued support of that law to said government.

As a besides, what harm has it ever done us?

Occasionally the Daily Heil tells us it’s led to some brown people extending their stay but really, is membership even worth arguing against?

One of the primary criticisms of the ECHR is that it can be perceived as infringing on national sovereignty. Some member states feel that the convention and the European Court of Human Rights impose external standards that interfere with their domestic legal and political systems

 

[WelshGas]

The Supreme Court applies uk law. UK Law is instigated by government and enacted by Parliament.

Our first past the post system allows both Johnson and Starmer to railroad pretty much any law they want. However they cannot change international laws and treaties.

They could leave the ECHR and the associated treaties and join Russia and a few outliers in the wilderness. We would of course look like a complete rogue state.

If Human Rights only exist in order to protect a population from its government, it makes no sense whatsoever to give control of the continued support of that law to said government.

As a besides, what harm has it ever done us?

Occasionally the Daily Heil tells us it’s led to some brown people extending their stay but really, is membership even worth arguing against?

Convince Jack Straw then that he is wrong in his assertion.

 

[The Tall Luthier]

One of the primary criticisms of the ECHR is that it can be perceived as infringing on national sovereignty. Some member states feel that the convention and the European Court of Human Rights impose external standards that interfere with their domestic legal and political systems

Seriously Anthony1 send me the quotes from those critics and I’ll either show you a fool or someone who’s taking you for a fool.

Or someone who wants more power than they really should ever have!!!

 

[The Tall Luthier]

Convince Jack Straw then that he is wrong in his assertion.

Alas Jack has blocked me as I keep getting into conversations about VW Californias on his Politics forum.

 

[Lee.Van.Cleef]

We were subject to a spot check a few years ago on the French side coming back via Calais. Security semed pretty vigilant generally. This was pre-Brexit but we've avoided that route since, so not sure how things have changed.

 

[WelshGas]

A

Alas Jack has blocked me as I keep getting into conversations about VW Californias on his Politics forum.

Re you sure that's the reason?

 

[JAG7001]

I don’t think we put them in hotels anymore, we just chain them to the walls outside in all winter weathers. After all it’s not as if they are human beings are they!

The sad reality is that before Brexit we had the Dublin Agreement which allowed us to return people to the original EU countries. We left that accord and for that there is an economic price to pay. No use in complaining, we did it to ourselves.

Thin

I don’t think we put them in hotels anymore, we just chain them to the walls outside in all winter weathers. After all it’s not as if they are human beings are they!

The sad reality is that before Brexit we had the Dublin Agreement which allowed us to return people to the original EU countries. We left that accord and for that there is an economic price to pay. No use in complaining, we did it to ourselves.

ah I’m not complaining, just an observation as they must have sent them all to Ireland, North & South