Sunday, September 20, 2009

On the spot fines: putting the Border Agency on the spot

Via The Englishman, I see that a farmer is facing a massive fine for employing illegal workers.
A farm owner from Devon who is facing a fine of up to £120,000 for employing illegal workers says he had taken precautions to check their credentials.

Twelve workers were arrested by Border Agency officials after a raid on 1 July at Merrifield Farm in Crediton.
...

Farm owner Peter Coleman may now face a fine of up to £10,000 for every illegal worker.

He told BBC News: "We do our best to comply with regulations.

"We have a very good database of all employees and we have a list of passports and proof of identity.

"But the biggest problem for employers is to prove the identity of the person.

"We are not experts in forgery."

If he did check and copy their credentials, then I am sure—after spending fucking thousands of pounds on lawyers in order to prove his innocence—that Mr Coleman will be able to avoid the fine.

Or, rather, to be able to reclaim the money that he will be forced to pay, having been allegedly handed an on-the-spot fine.
Mr Coleman was handed an on-the-spot penalty notice by immigration officials that could mean a fine of up to £10,000 for each illegal worker.
...

A spokesman for the UK Border Agency said: "Mr Coleman was issued with a fixed penalty notice following the raid.

"That civil action is still pending.

"To avoid being fined, Mr Coleman must prove to the UK Border Agency that he has carried out the correct checks before giving the workers jobs."

Um... I'm sorry? You fucking what? Mr Coleman was issued with a fixed penalty notice?

So, what you are saying is that far from the state having to prove Mr Coleman's guilt, Mr Coleman has to prove his innocence? Seriously, what the fuck?

But, leaving that aside, can we assume that Baroness Scotland has been handed a £10,000 fixed penalty notice? She hasn't?

Well, fuck me!—ain't that a surprise?

P.S. It's worth noting why Mr Coleman was forced to hire immigrant workers.
He said he had problems finding British people to work on the farm which processes chickens and ducks.

He said: "We approached the Job Centre.

"We offered employment to 58 out of the 59 people that applied, 55 of which were British.

"Four were unsuitable and asked to leave and five are still with us.

"The other 46 found the job not to their liking and left or did not turn up in the first place."

It is not the job of the British taxpayer to subsidise the lifestyles of those who choose not to work. We should find those British people who did not turn up to work and stop all of their benefits—it is the only way that these lazy cunts will learn.

If we remove the benefits of those who will not work, then they will have to work. This will reduce the amount of work available for immigrants, and thus reduce the number of immigrants coming here (and, yes, I know that this won't be an instantaneous effect).

For crying out loud, it's really not very difficult.

UPDATE: as the wife pointed out last night, it's a strange country that punishes those who are the victims of fraud...

9 comments:

Rob said...

A £120,000 on the spot fine? Did he offer to pay in cash?

What a joke. Is it really the case that if the authorities dispense summary justice like this then the whole tiresome "innocent till proven guilty" thing is turned on its head?

Leg-iron said...

And to think, there are people out there who think Labour have one law for us and another for them.

Tut tut. It's not like that at all.

There are no laws for them.

Junican said...

Mr Devil,

I am all for exposing practices such as you have revealed, but I cannot help but feel that we have not been informed of all the facts.

Go back to this situation and make some enquiries about the terms and conditions attached to the jobs.

Anonymous said...

I think Farmer Palmer would find it less expensive in the long run to beat the living shit out of any public-sector employee found near his farm. The fines would be a lot lower and after a few demonstrations, they'd be a lot less likely to single him out for their attention.

(Use a pool cue; the sentence is a lot lower (suspended) than a hammer (18 months = 10 minutes really), or a brick (4 years = a few days really) (figures from the Darlington and Stockton Times). Or perhaps they could fall in the manure heap.)

Who pays Danegeld is never free of the Dane.

FlipC said...

It gets better - £10,000 is the maximum allowable penalty, so that's 12 maximum penalties without judicial approval.

Of course he can object to the Secretary of State within the period of notice; and the SoS can then either do nothing; reduce the penalty; remove the penalty; or even better increase the penalty.

He can also appeal, but has to do so within 28 days. If the appeal takes longer, we have the exciting situation whereby the penalty can still be collected despite being under dispute as that's specifically catered for in the legislation "In proceedings for the enforcement of a penalty no question may be raised as
to—
(a) liability to the imposition of the penalty," so pay up. Likewise the notice doesn't have to be put on hold so you may have to cough up straight after the appeal is rejected if it lasts long enough.

FlipC said...

Sorry about the double posting but just re-read the thisisexeter news story "Mr Coleman was handed an on-the-spot penalty notice by immigration officials that could mean a fine of up to £10,000 for each illegal worker."

Um no according to legislation a penalty notice must "state the amount of the penalty" so either he knows how much it's going to be or he wasn't given one.

ENGLISHMAN said...

On the spot fines are illegal under the bill of rights(1689)But since every-one pays up they have become normal,and the man having to prove his innocence is straight from the code napoleon,the antithesis of English common law,but as they say "when they came for the jews ,i did nothing"so frankly we have no-one to blame but ourselves.

Roger Thornhill said...

I agree with mrs Dk, even For Baroness Scotland. The guilty party is the illegalworker and the "law" is an ass and should ne repealled along with all the other irrational statutes.

Vicola said...

If he has a problem and is unsure whether a passport is real he can ring the home office information line. They will then pass him round several different people, none of whom seem to know who he should be speaking to. Eventually he may get through to the very nice man who is the one and only person allocated to deal with whether passports are forgeries or not. One man, on his own. I don't know whether he was the one man for the Greater Manchester area or the whole sodding country but given the sheer incompetence of the home office I can probably take a guess. I know this because my folks own a nursing home and were trying to find out whether someone's passport is genuine or not.