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
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202 
Home Office pays up but isn't sorry
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The government pays £50,000 compensation to a haulier after it
seized his truck, but refuses to apologise. David Harris reports.
EXCLUSIVE
A DRIVER who has spent five years fighting the government after his truck was seized has finally won £50,000 compensation from the Home Office.
Brian Kent's ordeal began in October 2000, when his truck was confiscated because seven illegal immigrants had hidden on board.
Kent alerted immigration officials to the problem, but was fined £14,000 — £2,000 for each immigrant. He refused to pay the fine and the truck was impounded.
The recently-divorced Kent had been living in his truck.After it was seized he lived in the back of a Ford Escort van in a pub car park.
Kent's case was initially heard in the county court ,but despite being described as a"deserving case" the judge said rules prevented him offering compensation.
The case was taken to the European Court of Human Rights, but before it came before the court the Home Office agreed in July this year to pay £50,000 compensation, which was accepted and paid this month, plus costs.
Jane George,partner at Rothera Dowson solicitors, who handled the case, says: "Every so often in your legal career you come across a case where you feel justice needs to be done.This was one of those."
However, the Home Office has not apologised. It says: "The. settlement is not an admission of liability. The action taken against him was neither unlawful nor unreasonable."