A Northampton haulage company is contesting a hefty £66,000 fine imposed by the Home Office.
- The penalty was issued after Border Force discovered six stowaways in one of the company’s trucks.
- EM Rogers Transport argues it has taken extensive measures to prevent illegal entry into their vehicles.
- The firm is now seeking legal advice to challenge the decision.
- The Home Office asserts that the company is a repeat offender in stowaway incidents.
A Northampton haulage firm, EM Rogers Transport, is at the centre of a legal battle with the Home Office over a significant fine of £66,000. This penalty arose following the discovery of six stowaways within one of the company’s trucks by Border Force.
Ed Rogers, the director of EM Rogers Transport, has strongly criticised the fine, describing it as ‘frankly ridiculous’. Despite being accredited with Border Force and implementing extensive security measures, such as visibility checks, trailer seals, padlocks, and TIR cords, the company finds itself penalised. Rogers argued that these efforts should suffice to deter illegal entry into their vehicles.
The incident reportedly occurred eight hours from Calais port, highlighting the challenges faced by hauliers near this busy crossing point. Rogers emphasised the lack of safe parking options for HGV drivers near Calais as a significant concern, forcing drivers to park further afield and leaving them vulnerable to stowaway attempts. He lamented, ‘Our driver is in his mid-60s…he’s not a security guard, he’s a truck driver.’
Rogers expressed optimism about contesting the fine, yet recognised the possibility of recurrent incidents, attributing these to organised criminal gangs. According to Rogers, his company participates in ‘quarterly training and audits of paperwork’ and maintains regular communication with Border Force to ensure compliance with legal requirements.
The Home Office maintains a firm stance, citing the company’s history of stowaway incidents as justification for the penalty. It reiterated its commitment to combating illegal entry into the UK, noting that many vehicles lack sufficient security measures to prevent migrant access. A spokesman elaborated, ‘We are relentless in our pursuit of those who seek to enter the UK illegally… ensuring that drivers are taking every reasonable step to deter illegal migration and disrupt people smugglers.’
EM Rogers, however, contends that it has been unjustly targeted in this ongoing issue, describing itself as a victim of organised gangs who exploit the situation to facilitate illegal migration. The company is actively seeking legal counsel to address what it sees as an unjust penalty for circumstances largely beyond its control.
The legal outcome of this dispute remains uncertain, as both sides hold firm positions on the issue.
