Another HMRC / RM / AliExpress Rant...

sev-8

Forum GOD!
I believe Sean's point is being missed here. This post started last November, before the recent fall of sterling.
The vendor specified a value of $20 which was above the true value paid. At £12.95, there shouldn't have been any additional fees if the true value had been converted correctly, rather than declaring a default $20.
Yep, that was why I originally replied to the thread.
 

SeanC

Forum GOD!
I believe Sean's point is being missed here. This post started last November, before the recent fall of sterling.
The vendor specified a value of $20 which was above the true value paid. At £12.95, there shouldn't have been any additional fees if the true value had been converted correctly, rather than declaring a default $20.
Yes. A well intentioned, but flawed seller was using $20 as a default value for all packages, whether they were worth that or not. Historically not an issue, but became one due to the low value of the Pound
 
Top