1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 
GIVE US OUR
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
12m
BACK
• by Dominic Perry The Industry has reacted with fury to government plans to hang on to £2m worth of stowaway fines despite giving up its attempt to reclaim the 112m operators have refused to pay.
The Home Office argues that those who have already paid up under the despised £2,000-per-head 'civil penalty' scheme have effectively admitted liability and therefore have no right to have the cash returned.
However, those hauliers who contested their fines will not have to pay—the government is effectively giving up Its claim following the Court of Appeal ruling that the scheme broke human rights laws. But any fines imposed after 8 December under the new regime will stand.
For those who paid up through fear of court action or desperation to keep their businesses going, the government's refusal to return the money despite its policy U-turn leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
Northern Irish haulier Derek Anderson has already shelled out 24,000 of an 28,000 tine for unwittingly carrying four stowaways back in April 2000, He told the Home Office that he could not afford to pay the hill amount in one go and agreed to pay instalments of £1,000.
Although he has now had half the fine cancelled, the government will keep the remainder, leaving him with a £4,000 dent In his profits. Anderson says he is outraged by its attitude: "I'm utterly, utterly dls
gusted. I think it's a disgrace that they can think of keeping that money.
"It's totally unfair penalising me just because four stowaways were found on my truck—I should be entitled to that money back." Anderson, who runs seven trucks, says that the fine has forced him to delay replacing vehicles, Another hauiler waiting for Its cash Is Dover-based Mike Beer Transport. Mike Beer says It was forced to pay half of a £27,000 fine as 'security to get a brand new truck returned. Although the Home Office has promised that any security will be refunded, Beer remains sceptical: "Well It's music to our ears that we might get the money back but I'll believe it when I see it.
"Those pee* had been In our trailer for less than an hour and we got lumbered with a very large bill, It's been uncomfortable not knowing the outcome for so long."
The trade associations are outraged by the government's scrooge-like behaviour. Mike Freeman, the Road Haulage Association's head of international affairs, describes Its actions as "iniquitous". He adds: "Even if It is legally correct, we feel they are morally bound to repay it. It's petty and Unfair otherwise. It's typical of the way the government has handled this from the start— giving a little at a time and refusing to admit that its policy was wrong from day one."
Freight Transport Association chief executive Richard Turner welcomed the scrap ping of the outstanding fines: "You have got to give the Home Office some credit—at least they have done this. However, they have just left a sour taste In the mouth."
Solicitor Ian Rothera from Nottingham law firm Rothera Dawson says his firm will be fighting hard for fines to be repaid to Its clients. Rothera explains: "It seems to me corn
pletely Inequitable to treat those who were co-operative more harshly than those who stuck their heels in."
Commercial Motor is launching a campaign to per suede the government return the Um to our indu try, kicking off with a lett from Editor-In-Chief En Weatherley to Home Secreta David Blunkett (see above).