arj1 wrote:
There are too many unknowns, and I have to agree with Peter, it appears that Germany is a higher risk country in terms of customs procedures than lot’s of others.
No – it is the very same in almost all other countries! How do you prove that you actually sent the GAR-Form to UK-authorities? How do you prove that you didn’t land at a grass strip before you actually flew into that airport of entry in the UK – and how do you prove that you did not deposition a box with 10mn untaxed money (and 10 kg of H) at that grass strip?
There is so many things you can not prove. Therefore the authorities have to prove to you that these things did/did not happen – in Germany as in every other country in the world!
In the case we are discussing it is undisputed what the pilot did and didn’t do and the only question is the legal consequences. There is not a single case published, where a pilot claimed that he followed the adequate customs procedure and got charged anyways because the customs office said they did not. And not a single case of an emergency landing there this was an issue either…
Jesus, this is ridiculous.
How do you prove that you actually sent the GAR-Form to UK-authorities?
You don’t bloody well have to, because if it gets lost you might get a “talking to”. That’s why people emailing it CC it to themselves. If they use OnlineGAR then they get a receipt from the Govt gateway. GAR thread.
They aren’t going to charge the VAT/duty on your plane!!!!!!!
What is totally missing in this “discussion” is the massive magnitude of the risk.
The risk of entering UK without GAR is going to jail. Yes, it never happened but it has also never happened that someone had to pay anything because the German customs claimed they did not receive a form that the pilot pretends to have sent.
It is totally missing the discussion if you compare what theoretically could happen in one country with what practically happens in another.
Either you compare the theoretical worst case in both countries or you compare the practical reality in both countries. And both are extremely similar in case you did everything right but can not prove it waterproof …
Malibuflyer wrote:
The risk of entering UK without GAR is going to jail
Much cheaper and fair than VAT on automatic import 
Malibuflyer wrote:
The risk of entering UK without GAR is going to jail. Yes, it never happened but it has also never happened that someone had to pay anything because the German customs claimed they did not receive a form that the pilot pretends to have sent.
Not sure that if you filed a flight plan and did not file GAR you to jail.
Actually, for both of these extremes you mentioned the answer is we don’t know if it has happened or not.
Frans wrote:
But for Würzburg, it is clearly not the duty of the Flugleiter to do anything, as his number is not mentioned in the CUST section of the AIP and the airfield is not on the A-list of German customs. Again, if the pilot would have called the correct customs number, which is mentioned in the AIP for Würzburg, he would not be in trouble right now.
For me, this is a question of attitude as well as culpability.
Ok, so you run an airport and you are basically responsible for the operation of this airfield. For me, this implies a certain amount of interest in all your facilities and how to use them, so you can be the single point of contact for any pilot who wants information and give COMPETENT advice. Simply not even knowing or caring about that your own airfield has lost it’s customs facility some years ago shows an ignorance which makes me question what that person is doing there. If Germany already insists on the position of a responsible person in the ops of the airfield, then get them to do something which really helps! The same goes for the immigration folks, what place of theirs is it to tell that pilot that calling customs was NOT necessary? Had he not done that, the pilot would have called and gotten away with either a fine or a talking to.
On the airfields which have customs in Switzerland, you can either see the correct procedures on their website and you will get competent advice if you call someone there, also because they are pretty much standardized. In Germany, I used to fly to 3 different PNR airfields for training, all 3 have very different procedures. Why?
And finally, the AIP has to be correct.
Legally, in the position of a pilot in this situation having run out of legal challenges towards customs, IMHO the following legal challenges should have been investigated and claims filed:
- Against DFS for publishing misleading information in the AIP
- Against the Flugleiter for giving wrong information
- Against the immigration officer who told the pilot that calling customs was not necessary.
Maybe this would cause, if not sharing the responsibility financially, the people in those positions to re-think their functions and involvement. It can not be that you need to consult a lawyer before you fly anywhere, just before the information published is sloppy, inaccurate or outright wrong.
arj1 wrote:
how could you prove that you talked to someone and prove that your request was correctly understood and recorded?
Do it in writing, email, fax or whatever and keep all the records. Had this pilot had a sheet of paper with the utterings of the above mentioned personae to present in his court case, the outcome would have had to be different, maybe not even for him but for those giving wrong information.
The problem here is that the guy went to court with lawyers who one hopes and expects would have had the expertise to put up all the defence the guy needed to get him off without a fine or a jail sentence or whatever. The lawyer did that, as far as I can tell, admittedly from reading this thread. However the lawyer did not get him out of paying customs duty. So was there something else to this story or did the lawyer not even try to reduce the amount owed in tax? Are there still legal proceedings pending to try and get the return of this “overpaid” tax? If not why not?
It would be normal to reclaim any overpayment in tax and there is usually a procedure for doing so, however long winded that might be. It took me 2 years haggling with Mexican tax officials before the situation regarding the non stamping of a carnet on exit was sorted out and agreed that the equipment was indeed a temporary import which actually left the country and not a permanent one.
Had this pilot had a sheet of paper with the utterings of the above mentioned personae to present in his court case, the outcome would have had to be different, maybe not even for him but for those giving wrong information.
Better still, record the phone calls.
The problem here is that the guy went to court with lawyers who one hopes and expects would have had the expertise to put up all the defence the guy needed to get him off without a fine or a jail sentence or whatever. The lawyer did that, as far as I can tell, admittedly from reading this thread. However the lawyer did not get him out of paying customs duty. So was there something else to this story or did the lawyer not even try to reduce the amount owed in tax? Are there still legal proceedings pending to try and get the return of this “overpaid” tax? If not why not?
Indeed; there is likely to be more to it. However, there are also plenty of useless lawyers. Paying €1000/hr is no absolute assurance of competence, but if you use a cheap one (which nearly all private individuals will, and almost no lawyer will turn a job down) you are likely to get a bad job done. Ask me how I know I have known lawyers and accountants around the (in today’s money) 1k/hr bracket who were useless. And one (admittedly cheap) lawyer told me that “no lawyer around here will stand up in a court and say a policeman is lying; if you want that you will need to get one from outside the area”.
The risk of entering UK without GAR is going to jail.
That is probably the most egregious piece of twaddle ever published on the internet.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
IMHO, this whole affair is a total affront against free movement according to ICAO. Therefore, I actually think this should be taken care of by bringing the case to an international court.
As far as I know, there is no “international court” for the enforcement of the ICAO treaty. Most treaties don’t have such a court, and are not directly enforceable (especially for citizens, not states) at a level “above the national courts”. EU foundational treaties, and the European Convention on Human Rights are exceptions among treaties there.
