UK Customs Seizures

[trailboss99]

Another interesting article here

http://www.jmw.co.uk/services-for-b...erty/articles/dealing-with-counterfeit-goods/

"The brand will need to consider the cost of initiating proceedings, which will depend upon the value of the claim. If the claim were for between £5,000 and £15,000 then the cost to initiate the claim in the county court would be £225. Further, in order to then apply to the court for an injunction, there would be the further cost to seek non-monetary relief, in the sum of £150. This would total £375 just to issue the claim based on the value above. In addition, there will be the substantial legal fees which would be incurred in dealing with the proceedings.

Clearly, dealing with the importation of counterfeit goods will become a massively expensive process and once infringers become aware of the new process, they will no doubt simply reduce the size of each consignment (whilst increasing the number of consignments) knowing that it will not be financially viable for rights holders to issue proceedings against them for a small seizure of counterfeit goods. Furthermore, counterfeit goods are often imported using false details making proceedings even more futile."

Based on this and what Balders says below I'd say tell 'em to get stuffed and ask for your watch back. I'm no lawyer but I'd say a letter to the extent of "I have NFI if it's fake or not, I bought it in good faith, it's mine so I do not consent to it's destruction." would be worth a go especially if they got a whole bunch of 'em at once. It certainly appears that UK law has a unique set of loopholes, I doubt this would work in the US for example.

 

[richardzx9]

Would it be possible to please hear from other members who have had their watches seized and received a letter?

What action have you taken?

 

[Senormankypants]

This is a test case in Denmark - OK so not the UK but they operate under the same set of EU regulations: (if anything National law is slightly more lax than the UK as they allow import of some counterfeit goods as personal luggage on flights into the country).
http://www.glpi.com.br/templates/conteudo_geral_en.aspx?page=6787&idiom=1

 

[Baldrick]

would be worth a go especially if they got a whole bunch of 'em at once.

More precisely, if you get the timing right ( 10 day period...God bless UK Customs ).......it takes quite a while to go legal in such a timeframe......AS IF they would for 1x...ONE....CHEAP CHINESE KNOCKOFF..... how desperate do people imagine Richemont / LVMH to be......if we were talking a couple of containers worth...possibly......Joe Public...no.

 

[trailboss99]

if anything National law is slightly more lax than the UK as they allow import of some counterfeit goods as personal luggage on flights into the country).

That's an EU wide thing,

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1383/2003

(11) To avoid disrupting the clearance of goods carried in
travellers' personal baggage, it is appropriate, except
where certain material indications suggest commercial
traffic is involved, to exclude from the scope of this
Regulation goods that may be counterfeit, pirated or
infringe certain intellectual property rights when
imported from third countries within the limits of the
duty-free allowance accorded by Community rules.

 

[Baldrick]

The matter was conducted as a test case of general public importance and each party therefore had to bear its own costs. The judgment was delivered by a panel of seven judges.

He was not prosecuted....Rolex won their IP rights case...he lost his watch...and DID NOT HAVE TO PAY ROLEX COSTS.

 

[mykeos]

Well, finally a case summary!Thanks for the link Senormankypants! The legal reasoning seems convincing to me and therefore would simmilar argumentation be applied by judicial bodies throughout EU,more so because danish law seems to be rather liberal (as is in Scandinavia in general). The most interesting for me is the final paragraph which says:"The matter was conducted as a test case of general public importance and each party therefore had to bear its own costs."I don't think the "general public" argument can be used in all EU countries, because the civil proceedings legislature has it's specifics in every country.In my case (a 30USD watch) I don't think it's worth taking a chance,but for a 500USD AP,I would strongly object the destruction,because I think the chance of this coming to court phase is really miniscule.

 

[sharrkey]

I think there is more than enough information on this thread for most to make stand, the way I see it, you either
1. Get your balls out on the table, write a reply letter and say no your not destroying it
2. Roll over get humped, and loose ur watch and hard earned cash

I know what I will be doing if it happens to me, and I've a Hub getting posted any day now to the uk.


Sent from my using Tapatalk HD

 

[murklemark]

I think Balderick and Senormankypants have given anyone who wishes to challenge TM Eye great ammo to challenge your watch being destroyed.

I don't think we can go over this issue or it's legalities anymore we will just need someone to respond their initial letter to take this point further.

 

[Senormankypants]

Finally then: I would suggest that the way forward would be to wait about 7 working days (after receiving letter) then write back asking for further information (such as who checked the watch for authenticity or similar) without objecting to the destruction.
This is low risk as it the objecting to the destruction of the item that leaves the rights holder with two choices - go to civil action or let the customs hold request time out and the allow the item to be delivered.

 

[orson]

Finally then: I would suggest that the way forward would be to wait about 7 working days (after receiving letter) then write back asking for further information (such as who checked the watch for authenticity or similar) without objecting to the destruction.........

I would object to destruction in the initial response and I wouldn't wait so long.

 

[Baldrick]

I would suggest waiting 5 days, then cutting straight to the chase, no point beating about the bush....as outlined previously....DETAIN UK...give all indications that they are a 2 bob outfit....if I received a letter from them...I would tell them that I took their advice and contacted Trading Standards, who advised me that they are breaking UK law by not declaring their correct company details and structure on their letterhead.

TM Eye appear to be a similar 'cheap' organisation, their webpage has a Contact Us link which gives no contact or company details....there seems to be a strong emphasis on Greece on their website.....they are also NOT REGISTERED AT COMPANIES HOUSE in the UK.

I WOULDN'T LEND ANY CREDENCE TO EITHER OF THESE 'COMPANIES'....FOR ALL WE KNOW, THEY COULD SIMPLY BE WORKING WITH PERMISSION OF RICHEMONT....TAKING THE 'DESTROYABLE' ITEMS FROM CUSTOMS AND SELLING THEM ON THE BEACHES IN GREECE OR TURKEY !!!

TM EYE 'WEBSITE'.....AN HTML DOCUENT!
http://www.tmeye.com/55.0.html

Their website has links ( many broken )....to all sorts of agencies, NONE of which mention TM Eye....they also claim to have offices all over Europe....but there are no physical addresses / tel nos...location or contact details.....on the surface it all appears serious and business lke....I can't see anything of any substance tho'....no company officers...MD's / CEOs....contact names or testimonials.....nothing.

 

[Baldrick]

BTW...here's the Google map location of DETAIN UK's corporate HQ.....a Post Office in Alcester B49 9BW, United Kingdom.



Look up the adress on Google maps. :biglaugh:

 

[orson]

TM Eye is a legitimate EU company and their addresses in several countries can be found quite easily. The main hub of the organisation is in Greece as Baldtick suggests.

TM Eye Hellas
Gounari 109
15125 Athene
Griekenland

0030-210-8022139

Offices in Nederlands as well and there is no need for a registration in the UK to do the work they do.

A registered office can be at any location you like and a post office with mail forwarding is fine. It doesn't tell us anything about the seizure and I don't think any of this is worth the effort to look at really.

The matter in hand (hold point and letter) could be done by Prince Harry if the rights holder asked for a favour.

 

[Baldrick]

Just so that you know who you are dealing with

Company Information

TM Eye Ltd

Registration Date: 19/12/2007

Registration Number: 06456876

Type: Private Limited Company

Company Status: Active
Registered Address

10 WESTERN ROAD


ROMFORD

ESSEX

RM1 3JT

SEE GOOGLE MAP

*******************************************************
Current directors and secretaries

Director Summary

David Albert McKelvey has 6 company director or secretary appointments.
Short name - David McKelvey
Director ID : 912663042
Year of Birth: 1962

Address
The Lodge House Thrifts Hill
Abridge Road
Theydon Bois
Essex
United Kingdom
CM16 7NL

SEE GOOGLE MAP
**********************************************************
Company Summary Company Name Company Status
TRADEMARK PROTECTION SOLUTIONS LIMITED Active
HIDDEN SECURITY LIMITED Active
TM EYE LIMITED Active
HIDDENTEC UK LTD. Dissolved
TRADEMARK PROTECTION SERVICES LIMITED Dissolved
HIDDEN FORENSICS LIMITED Dissolved (Director Resigned 01/11/2009)
************************************************************
TRADEMARK PROTECTION SOLUTIONS LIMITED

Appointment Date: 21/10/2009
Position: Director
Occupation: Policeman
Company Status: Active
Address:
10 WESTERN ROAD
ROMFORD
ESSEX RM13JT
RM1 3JT
GB
***********************************************************
HIDDEN SECURITY LIMITED

Appointment Date: 15/10/2009
Position: Director
Occupation: Policeman
Company Status: Active
Address:
10 WESTERN ROAD
ROMFORD
ESSEX
RM1 3JT
GB
*********************************************************
HIDDENTEC UK LTD.

Appointment Date: 10/08/2009
Position: Director
Occupation: Public Servant
Company Status: Dissolved
Address:
467 RAINHAM ROAD SOUTH
DAGENHAM
UNITED KINGDOM
RM10 7XJ
GB
******************************************************
TRADEMARK PROTECTION SERVICES LIMITED

Appointment Date: 19/05/2008
Position: Director
Occupation: Director
Company Status: Dissolved
Address:
THE LODGE HOUSE, THRIFTS HILL, A
THEYDON BOIS
EPPING
CM16 7NL
GB
*****************************************************
HIDDEN FORENSICS LIMITED

Appointment Date: 14/07/2009
Resignation Date: 01/11/2009
Position: Director
Occupation: Police Officer
Company Status: Dissolved
Address:
467 RAINHAM ROAD SOUTH
DAGENHAM
ESSEX
RM10 7XJ
GB
*****************************************************

TM Eye Ltd STATISTICS

 

[Alex_P1]

Based on this info, i can't see him wanting to take any chances in court unless he has an excellent grasp on the law, which he seems not to have based on a couple of key admissions from his letters.

A bit of combined pressure, in the form of a standard letter, might well teach him to leave single watch shipments alone.

Funnily enough, I do agree with the rights of the copyright holder when there is a legitimate threat to their business, however, chasing people who collect reps "not for profit" falls outside of this remit as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Baldrick]

DETAIN UK...are not a registered UK company.....I'm betting my eye teeth...that both these companies are run by either...ex-Met retired or fired coppers...who've discovered a little niche market....I don't think they'll be jumping thru' hoops to squeeze someone's nuts over a 65 quid watch....they prolly have a nice little earner going on fake stuff from all the scam / websites....typical scenario...customer orders watch from buy-yer-fake-from-us.com...it gets seized...customer writes it off thru' fear and he gets a commission on every one stopped and destroyed. :B):

 

[Baldrick]

We may also find that the recent upsurge in EMS detentions from China, that our members are experiencing, does in fact correlate to the increased Olympics scrutiny, more Customs officers...new or temp recruits to deal with the pressure, may mean that more stuff was being inspected, perhaps by officers / temps with less than standard experience, but working from a 'notice' list, simply picking out all they can....result being that TM Eye and Detain Uk ...got a little boost over their normal quota.

 

[QinetiQ]

Bottom line is that they do operate and items do get seized. What happens from then on is just a gamble if you ask me. Everyone can interpret the law as they wish but I'm sure they can do the same. I wouldn't take this so lightly to be honest. Just as Switzerland has a law against counterfeit goods, UK can do just the same. I'm just saying that we shouldn't consider this as something minor... I for one (if I was in the UK that is) would hold off any purchases...

 

[mbjoer]

Bottom line is that they do operate and items do get seized. What happens from then on is just a gamble if you ask me. Everyone can interpret the law as they wish but I'm sure they can do the same. I wouldn't take this so lightly to be honest. Just as Switzerland has a law against counterfeit goods, UK can do just the same. I'm just saying that we shouldn't consider this as something minor... I for one (if I was in the UK that is) would hold off any purchases...

I think that you are wrong here. Read the documentation presented in this and the other thread about the issue.

What has yet to emerge is a case where any watch was actually seized follwing a court case. Some may have been surrendered by individuals who got scared off by the threatening letters, but that is not the same as legally being seized.

The distinction here is: Personal use or commercial import. There have been many cases of traders having stock seized, but that is very different from you and I being at threat.