In its press release regarding the now-applicable legislation, the UK Government department accused drivers of “not taking the steps required to secure vehicles”.
Despite both Logistics UK and the Road Haulage Association expressing concerns over the legislation, it has now become law.
Commenting on the matter a few weeks ago, Chris Yarsley, Senior Policy Manager at Logistics UK, made it clear that Logistics UK objected to the plans.
He also expressed the opinion that the fines are so high EU hauliers could be put off going to the UK:
“Vehicles crossing the UK’s borders have long been a target for asylum seekers and people smugglers. Logistics UK objected to the new penalty of up to £6,000 for crossing the border with an unsecured vehicle during the passage of the Bill through Parliament, as our members felt it could be seen to be deterring EU businesses from risking a journey to the UK,” said Yarsley.
Rod McKenzie, the RHA’s Executive Director for Policy and Public Affairs, also stated:
“People smuggling is a crime and we condemn drivers involved in deliberate trafficking – however, we need to ensure that operators and drivers who have made every effort to secure their vehicles and trailers are not unfairly punished. There have been cases in the past when this has happened, and we would want clear evidence the driver was a party to smuggling people rather than an innocent victim.”
The amendments to the legislation are detailed on an official document uploaded to the UK Government website. Page 6 of the document spells out the higher fines that drivers and hauliers will encounter.
It explains that the maximum penalty payable by a responsible person in respect of a clandestine entrant or concealed person has risen from £2,000 to £10,000. In addition to this, the maximum aggregate penalty has shot up from £4,000 to £20,000.
The exact amount of each fine will be means tested and is calculated according to numerous factors. Our original report on the legislation explains this process in detail.
Another key section of the document regarding the amendments concerns how the UK Government determines whether a goods vehicle is adequately secured against unauthorised access.
The list of actions that must be undertaken are very exhaustive indeed, and are better read in detail in the official amendment document linked above.
A list of standard checks is nonetheless also included in the document and has been added below for ease of use and reading.
- Where a means of entry to the load space is able to be secured by an optimal method against unauthorised access, a check that it is so secured.
- Where the vehicle has a means of entry to its load space that is not able to be secured by an optimal method against unauthorised access but is able to be secured against unauthorised access by another method, a check that it is so secured.
- Where the vehicle’s cargo is able to be secured by an optimal method against unauthorised access, a check that it is so secured, provided that the cargo can be accessed by the person undertaking the check.
- Where the vehicle’s cargo is not able to be secured by an optimal method against unauthorised access but is able to be secured against unauthorised access by another method, a check that it is so secured, provided that the cargo can be accessed by the person
undertaking the check. - A check of all locks, seals and other security devices for signs of tampering, damage, unauthorised repair and unauthorised replacement.
- A check that the documentation accompanying the vehicle under regulation 2E(8) is all correct.
- Where the vehicle has them, a check of all TIR cables and straps and related eyelets for signs of tampering, damage, unauthorised repair and unauthorised replacement.
- Where the vehicle has a load space that is enclosed (wholly or partly) by an outer shell or by a fabric cover, a check of the outer shell or fabric for signs of unauthorised access.
- A check of all external storage compartments and wind deflectors of the vehicle for signs of unauthorised access.
- A check beneath the vehicle for signs of unauthorised access.
- A check from inside the vehicle for signs of unauthorised access, including of the vehicle’s roof.
- A check that no person has gained unauthorised access to the vehicle.”
It must also be stressed that, as opposed to the situation previously, whereby proving a lorry had been secured could see a fine waived, there is no longer such a possibility. The only exception is when someone has been under duress.
As the amendment document explains, proof that the lengthy list of actions and checks have been undertaken will only see an unspecified “reduction” to the standard fine.
Moreover, in the event that a goods vehicle is deemed unsecured but no clandestine is onboard, a maximum fine of £6,000 still applies (£12,000 in the case of the maximum aggregate penalty). This is the fine that Logistics UK has taken particular issue with.
The news comes following a Durham University study that has concluded the UK’s decision to leave the EU without agreeing a deal on migrant returns has sparked “skyrocketing” numbers of dangerous migrant crossings across the English Channel.
As explained by The I, under the so-called Dublin Convention, the UK Government had the means to ask other EU members to take migrants back if they had traveled through safe countries before reaching the UK.
In the aforementioned study, Professor Thom Brooks of Durham University states that the Dublin Convention ended following the UK’s departure from the European Union. He is quoted as saying “numbers have skyrocketed after this deal stopped.”
This increase has made life hard for both hauliers and drivers, who are facing difficulties with clandestine entrants to their vehicles at a seemingly increasing frequency. The latest known example occurred less than a fortnight ago, when reports emerged of a Lisbon-based HGV driver who had been taken into custody in the UK for transporting clandestine migrants.