Importing a boat from Europe, Trading Standards Response

[westernman]

Out of curiosity, why a Dutch company?

I don't know. But I think at the time it was one of the very few companies set up to do this and they were the most approachable for a one off relatively small boat. I think most of the companies involved in this are for $50million plus super yachts and not interested in "small" sailing boats.
Of course the UK was in the EU at the time, which meant there was no disadvantage in using an EU instead of an UK company,

 

[Mister E]

My boat was a personal import from Canada in 1998. And yes HMRC were contacted and VAT was paid.
Also the boat was certified to RCD by a Dutch company.

So not the EU.

 

[Koeketiene]

Westerman a container is slightly different to a second hand boat.
Also personal is different to commercial.
When contacted hmrc said they were not interested.
Has anyone actually contacted hmrc to actually pay any for of tax on a boat imported boat in the last 4 years?

A story...

In 2016, I moved my UK registered, EU VAT paid, Belgian built (1984 - pre RCD) yacht to Brittany.
At that time, I changed registration from UK to Belgian. (this was just after the referendum and to avoid future shenanigans).
In 2020 (just before the first lock-down), I sold the boat to a UK national who re-registered the boat in the UK but kept her in Brittany till 2022.
In May 2022, I helped him sail the boat back to the UK.
At this point he contacted HMRC.
A couple of weeks later, he got written confirmation that no VAT was due.
To my knowledge Trading Standards was never involved.

Make of it what you will.

 

[ylop]

The leading legal case of Donoghue v Stevenson always reminds me not to be overly confident that my interpretation of the law is right and others' wrong. That case is the foundation of the modern law of negligence and possibly the most famous court judgment in UK legal history. When the case made its way to the highest court in the land, five of the most experienced and eminent judges in the whole British Empire (as it then was) heard the case. After the conclusion of the arguments in court, they took five months to think about their decision and discuss it among themselves. And then . . . three of them agreed with one side and two with the other. This wasn't a disagreement about evidence (about who to believe), it was entirely about understanding and applying the law. The majority of 3 over 2 decided the case.

If anyone is thinking of buying a boat and taking their case all the way to the appeal court to prove their entitlement to import without scrutiny, they are clearly bonkers. From a simple financial perspective they’d be far cheaper buying a boat that is already here or paying the belt and braces approach of bringing it up to RCD2013 standard and having it certified.

I’m not sure Donoghue v Stevenson is a great comparison here. It is common law, where there is not actually a single statute for lawyers to pour over and interpret. This is statute - clearly written in lawery English which has for the most part been the same for 27 years.

However, I’ve been clear from the start IF someone (Nevis or other) brings actual substance to back up their interpretation I’m open to being corrected. A brief answer from trading standards to a question we haven’t seen, and which actually seems to support Tranona rather that Nevis position is not what I would call substance. Why do I think Nevis is being disingenuous? Because he lied about me in a previous thread and that’s ruined any credibility he might have had. If he apologised for that I might have believed he was just wrong, but I am increasingly sure he is intentionally fighting even when he knows his position is factually incorrect.

 

[nevis768]

If anyone is thinking of buying a boat and taking their case all the way to the appeal court to prove their entitlement to import without scrutiny, they are clearly bonkers. From a simple financial perspective they’d be far cheaper buying a boat that is already here or paying the belt and braces approach of bringing it up to RCD2013 standard and having it certified.

I’m not sure Donoghue v Stevenson is a great comparison here. It is common law, where there is not actually a single statute for lawyers to pour over and interpret. This is statute - clearly written in lawery English which has for the most part been the same for 27 years.

However, I’ve been clear from the start IF someone (Nevis or other) brings actual substance to back up their interpretation I’m open to being corrected. A brief answer from trading standards to a question we haven’t seen, and which actually seems to support Tranona rather that Nevis position is not what I would call substance. Why do I think Nevis is being disingenuous? Because he lied about me in a previous thread and that’s ruined any credibility he might have had. If he apologised for that I might have believed he was just wrong, but I am increasingly sure he is intentionally fighting even when he knows his position is factually incorrect.

What a load of cobblers, 2 of us have spoken to Trading Standards now, and got the same response, CE marking will continue, no UK certification required. Your first paragraph above looks very much like an industry response.
A very well known broker also agrees no UK certification required. .
Will just link that again as it makes your day, Lol
CE & UKCA Categories. A Brief Explanation for Boat Owners | Val Wyatt

If anybody is thinking about importing a private buyer I can send you a copy of the email and go through what Trading Standards told me. Or ring them yourself they are very helpful.

 

[Mister E]

So until we find a boat owner who has actually been through the process then we do not have a definitive answer.
However some people have checked with the relevant authorities and it seems that they are not interested.

 

[PaulRainbow]

What a load of cobblers, 2 of us have spoken to Trading Standards now, and got the same response, CE marking will continue, no UK certification required. Your first paragraph above looks very much like an industry response.
A very well known broker also agrees no UK certification required. .
Will just link that again as it makes your day, Lol
CE & UKCA Categories. A Brief Explanation for Boat Owners | Val Wyatt

If anybody is thinking about importing a private buyer I can send you a copy of the email and go through what Trading Standards told me. Or ring them yourself they are very helpful.

You seem to entirely miss the point. Yes, CE marking will continue. BUT a boat that was built before the RCD was introduced does not have a CE mark.

 

[ylop]

What a load of cobblers, 2 of us have spoken to Trading Standards now, and got the same response, CE marking will continue, no UK certification required.

Nobody had disputed that. What they haven’t done in anything you have shared is covered the questions of pre-CE boats and boats CE marked to the 1994 directive.

Your first paragraph above looks very much like an industry response.

Are you once again trying to imply I work in the trade and am pushing some agenda? I’ve categorically told you I am not. Persisting with labelling any view you don’t like as a vested interest destroys any fragment of credibility you are left with.

A very well known broker also agrees no UK certification required. .
Will just link that again as it makes your day, Lol
CE & UKCA Categories. A Brief Explanation for Boat Owners | Val Wyatt

But that’s the problem! Nobody is suggesting that UKCA is needed if CE to RCD2013 is in place. Even when it looked like that might be required in the future the standards were the same so it was a paperwork issue. When confronted with the evidence that there is an issue for pre1998 boats and probably pre2013/2017 boats your response is about a different topic. I don’t think you are stupid, so my only conclusion is you know you are wrong but have some form of affliction.

 

[Tranona]

A story...

In 2016, I moved my UK registered, EU VAT paid, Belgian built (1984 - pre RCD) yacht to Brittany.
At that time, I changed registration from UK to Belgian. (this was just after the referendum and to avoid future shenanigans).
In 2020 (just before the first lock-down), I sold the boat to a UK national who re-registered the boat in the UK but kept her in Brittany till 2022.
In May 2022, I helped him sail the boat back to the UK.
At this point he contacted HMRC.
A couple of weeks later, he got written confirmation that no VAT was due.
To my knowledge Trading Standards was never involved.

Make of it what you will.

That was pre Brexit when such boats had free circulation (including the UK0 so completely normal but not relevant today in the UK.

 

[Koeketiene]

That was pre Brexit when such boats had free circulation (including the UK0 so completely normal but not relevant today in the UK.

The UK exited the EU 31/01/2020.
The transition period formally ended 31/12/2020.

How is what I told not relevant?

 

[Koeketiene]

So until we find a boat owner who has actually been through the process then we do not have a definitive answer.
However some people have checked with the relevant authorities and it seems that they are not interested.

#83

 

[Koeketiene]

What a load of cobblers, 2 of us have spoken to Trading Standards now, and got the same response, CE marking will continue, no UK certification required. Your first paragraph above looks very much like an industry response.
A very well known broker also agrees no UK certification required. .
Will just link that again as it makes your day, Lol
CE & UKCA Categories. A Brief Explanation for Boat Owners | Val Wyatt

If anybody is thinking about importing a private buyer I can send you a copy of the email and go through what Trading Standards told me. Or ring them yourself they are very helpful.

 

[Tranona]

The UK exited the EU 31/01/2020.
The transition period formally ended 31/12/2020.

How is what I told not relevant?

Sorry I misread it. I am surprised at that as based on what you say he is not entitled to RGR because he was not the person who took the boat out of the UK. Difficult to comment really without knowing exactly what was presented to HMRC and their reasons for the decision.

 

[nevis768]

So until we find a boat owner who has actually been through the process then we do not have a definitive answer.
However some people have checked with the relevant authorities and it seems that they are not interested.

Hi Mister E,
I phoned Trading standards because I want to import Motor sailor or yacht with a protected helm for Scotland of which there are some good examples in Scandinavia. I therefore phoned to query this with Trading Standards to make absolutely sure before committing. I have had 2 conversations with Trading Standards who are the prosecuting authority under the legislation. They have confirmed to me now that NO UKCA certification is required because CE or whatever was in place before is accepted now, indefinitely. The lead investigator I spoke to checked with the relevant Gov department on hearing I was going to make a purchase. He then emailed me a link to the relevant part of the guidance and went through it, on the phone. I don't think you can get any more definitive than that. Doug also phoned TS and was told the same. If anybody has any doubts over a prospective purchase they should just ring themselves, but I am happy enough to share what I have had to prospective purchasers.

 

[nevis768]

You seem to entirely miss the point. Yes, CE marking will continue. BUT a boat that was built before the RCD was introduced does not have a CE mark.

You've not read the thread, TS say whatever was there before is also fine, because of S8 of the guidance ie if the manufacturer has tested it, that's fine with them, as far as Private Importers go. Read Post 1 which covers Pre CE marking.

 

[nevis768]

You've not read the thread, TS say whatever was there before is also fine, because of S8 of the guidance ie if the manufacturer has tested it, that's fine with them, as far as Private Importers go. Read Post 1 which covers Pre CE marking.

Also if you read Doug 478 post about this, he was only querying a Pre CE marked boat when he phoned Trading Standards

 

[Tranona]

Hi Mister E,
I phoned Trading standards because I want to import Motor sailor or yacht with a protected helm for Scotland of which there are some good examples in Scandinavia. I therefore phoned to query this with Trading Standards to make absolutely sure before committing. I have had 2 conversations with Trading Standards who are the prosecuting authority under the legislation. They have confirmed to me now that NO UKCA certification is required because CE or whatever was in place before is accepted now, indefinitely. The lead investigator I spoke to checked with the relevant Gov department on hearing I was going to make a purchase. He then emailed me a link to the relevant part of the guidance and went through it, on the phone. I don't think you can get any more definitive than that. Doug also phoned TS and was told the same. If anybody has any doubts over a prospective purchase they should just ring themselves, but I am happy enough to share what I have had to prospective purchasers.

You are just repeating yourself without providing any indication of the actual question you asked and the precise answer. Until you do that (as you have promised) we only have your word.

 

[Tranona]

You've not read the thread, TS say whatever was there before is also fine, because of S8 of the guidance ie if the manufacturer has tested it, that's fine with them, as far as Private Importers go. Read Post 1 which covers Pre CE marking.

But your post#8 which is what you claim they advised does not say that. They referred you to the Regulations that do not include any exemptions for boats certified to earlier standards. Your claim about exemptions is only in your words unsupported by any official guidance.

 

[PaulRainbow]

You've not read the thread, TS say whatever was there before is also fine, because of S8 of the guidance ie if the manufacturer has tested it, that's fine with them, as far as Private Importers go. Read Post 1 which covers Pre CE marking.

I have read it, more importantly i have read the actual legislation, which clearly states that the boat must have a CE mark.

 

[nevis768]

I have read it, more importantly i have read the actual legislation, which clearly states that the boat must have a CE mark.

You obviously didn't read it or you wouldn't have asked about Pre Ce marks which is covered in post 1.