Is Panamoz "back"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
robj20 said:
Dont worry about them, they have been spamming the thread for ages, bit sore because we choose to pay less than they want us to.
Click to expand...

Really?

So you think people expecting other people to have some sort of moral compass are just a "bit sore because we choose to pay less than they want us to"?

A bit like being a "bit sore" at the smackhead who mugs pensioners outside the post office because that's a cheaper way of getting money than a bank loan.

What a stupid comment!
 
Not really, you clearly don't like what's happening in here so why continue to post in here when we all know what we're doing.
 
robj20 said:
Dont worry about them, they have been spamming the thread for ages, bit sore because we choose to pay less than they want us to.
Click to expand...

i'm lost as to how you reached that conclusion rob, I don't care what you chose to pay, and I'm following mattys request that we don't discuss the rights and wrongs of import etc in these threads.

I was just gobsmacked that panamoz have the lens for such a low price - I mean i knew they were cheap but £145 for a 70-200 is outstanding value, as they are closer to a grand in the Uk market - at that price i'd definitely be prepared to buy from them
 
I know very well what your post means. Same idea of my A7R and 35mm lens costing roughly the same as his lens only.
 
I'm sorry but i'm completely lost now - you seem to be suggesting that my post has a hidden agenda, which it doesnt - I genuinely thought that he had got a great deal and panamoz had paid the import tax etc on it... you seem to be saying thats not the case .

in which case i'm not going to discuss it further as that subject has been declared verbotten
 
and another thread heads off down the road to Lock.
 
Instead of locking the thread how about just removing all the often repeated petty negative comments about mport duty etc. I paid what I paid for the item, they state they pay the costs and refund any other charges (which they did immediately with me), and they ship the item to you. The EOS M kit I bought is fantastic and is easy enough to use for my son as well, so I ordered another kit for him for christmas (he thinks he's getting it next year instead of this year so he'll be well happy). To the people who have made positive comments towards my purchase, thankyou. I will enjoy my purchase and I will look into ordering off Panamoz again next year to improve my lens selection as I cannot fault their service in any way.
 
It's a shame this is heading towards being locked, I think a fair number of people would genuinely be interested in how they operate now that they appear to be heading towards something that sounds semi-legit for all parties, so it would be interesting to know how the charges are being worked out / parcels are being valued, without this descending into a moral battle.

Is anyone willing to post facts with regards to the values, charges etc on a recent parcel that has attracted a customs bill?
 
For info;

Customs charges are applied to imports into the EU with a value over £15 for VAT. All items valued over £135 will attract import duty. Imported gifts valued over £36 sent between private individuals will also attract VAT.
 
it is not right that the shippers mark parcels as gifts or toys, that much i agree on, that said, if the purchaser declares the goods, pays the fees and then claims them back from the seller as they say then there isnt a problem.
The issue appears to be though that the 'law abiding' posters dont see this as a viable alternative, instead the view is that we as a forum should ban ALL discussion on imports, and Slack Media should refuse to allow advertising from any companies that are not legitimate UK companies. In an ideal world that would be great, it would be lovely to be able to do that, but this place isnt cheap to maintain, we cant afford to do that at this time.
 
admirable said:
For info;

Customs charges are applied to imports into the EU with a value over £15 for VAT. All items valued over £135 will attract import duty. Imported gifts valued over £36 sent between private individuals will also attract VAT.
Click to expand...

incorrect.

Not all items from hong kong attract duty. a digital camera for example is duty free, only vat is applicable, and only then if the seller is not authorised to prepay vat.
 
matty said:
incorrect.

Not all items from hong kong attract duty. a digital camera for example is duty free, only vat is applicable, and only then if the seller is not authorised to prepay vat.
Click to expand...

The gentleman in post 368 asked."Is anyone willing to post facts with regards to the values, charges etc on a recent parcel that has attracted a customs bill?"
I was quoting from the Royal Mail label on an overseas parcel received today from outside the EU. Perhaps RM have it wrong?
 
Matty, I haven't seen anyone advocate banning discussion of imports or the problem with non-UK companies advertising. I think what is normally said is that any illegal activities should be banned from discussion on the forum.

Making a post about receiving a £1000 camera marked as a £10 toy and boasting about not caring about the evasion of tax or buying a £700 lens and then happily posting how it only cost 20 odd quid in tax shouldn't be allowed, just like discussing where to download a pirate copy of the new movie releases is banned.

Both type of act are illegal, both should be kept off the board.
 
For the record I have and would again buy from Panamoz and I don't give a stuff what your opinion on the matter is. You know full well what the content of a thread about Panamoz or any of the other HK dealers will be so stay away from them, if you don't like what is said in these threads don't open them and don't read them. You've made your opinions and feelings well known Dave and I personally am sick and tired of having to get past your (and others) constant repetition of said opinions to read what I want to read here and on other threads.
 
matty said:
it is not right that the shippers mark parcels as gifts or toys, that much i agree on, that said, if the purchaser declares the goods, pays the fees and then claims them back from the seller as they say then there isnt a problem.
The issue appears to be though that the 'law abiding' posters dont see this as a viable alternative, instead the view is that we as a forum should ban ALL discussion on imports, and Slack Media should refuse to allow advertising from any companies that are not legitimate UK companies. In an ideal world that would be great, it would be lovely to be able to do that, but this place isnt cheap to maintain, we cant afford to do that at this time.
Click to expand...

I, as a `law abiding` poster, don't share that view at all!

If anyone purchasing from some of the more dubious sites declares their import & pays any fees due, there simply isn't a problem.

It's the evasion of such fees that is the issue and highlighting this for posters/readers who may not know of the potential problems is the correct thing to do, surely?

It does appear that when anything IS mentioned on the subject, there are quite a few who become defensive and tend to throw a strop, thus dragging the thread down, which then leads to `locked` threads & discussions, but try to blame the `law abiding` posters for it.
 
admirable said:
The gentleman in post 368 asked."Is anyone willing to post facts with regards to the values, charges etc on a recent parcel that has attracted a customs bill?"
I was quoting from the Royal Mail label on an overseas parcel received today from outside the EU. Perhaps RM have it wrong?
Click to expand...

Hong Kong is different, not all imports from there attract duty. as we are posting in a thread about a company based in hong kong it is relevant to have all the facts, no?


Dave1 said:
Matty, I haven't seen anyone advocate banning discussion of imports or the problem with non-UK companies advertising. I think what is normally said is that any illegal activities should be banned from discussion on the forum.
Making a post about receiving a £1000 camera marked as a £10 toy and boasting about not caring about the evasion of tax or buying a £700 lens and then happily posting how it only cost 20 odd quid in tax shouldn't be allowed, just like discussing where to download a pirate copy of the new movie releases is banned.

Both type of act are illegal, both should be kept off the board.
Click to expand...

But its said in EVERY thread where imports are mentioned, usually even before anyone mentions it.
We actually get more people reporting YOU or MOOSE than we've had reporting people for buying stuff from abroad.
The point that you CONSTANTLY ignore is that the person RECEIVING the package DIDNT send it OR WRITE THE BLOODY TICKET.
It is not illegal to buy something from Hong Kong
The posters have the responsibility to declare their imports and pay the relevant charges, they are NOT breaking the law simply by importing.

You have a responsibility to drive within the speed limit - perhaps you need to post that in every thread that a car is mentioned in, just in case anyone forgets.
 
Last edited:
OldCarlos said:
I, as a `law abiding` poster, don't share that view at all!

If anyone purchasing from some of the more dubious sites declares their import & pays any fees due, there simply isn't a problem.
Click to expand...

exactly.

It's the evasion of such fees that is the issue and highlighting this for posters/readers who may not know of the potential problems is the correct thing to do, surely?

It does appear that when anything IS mentioned on the subject, there are quite a few who become defensive and tend to throw a strop, thus dragging the thread down, which then leads to `locked` threads & discussions, but try to blame the `law abiding` posters for it.
Click to expand...

the threads are locked because they degenerate into exactly this discussion. there are 10 pages to this thread, how many of those pages mention tax evasion? its right back there on page one. Regular viewers get the point, casual readers will get the point by page 3.
 
matty said:
Hong Kong is different, not all imports from there attract duty. as we are posting in a thread about a company based in hong kong it is relevant to have all the facts, no?
Click to expand...

Not one of the HK retailers discussed on this forum are authorised to prepay VAT, you can check that with HMRC for verification if you wish.

matty said:
But its said in EVERY thread where imports are mentioned, usually even before anyone mentions it.
We actually get more people reporting YOU or MOOSE than we've had reporting people for buying stuff from abroad.
The point that you CONSTANTLY ignore is that the person RECEIVING the package DIDNT send it OR WRITE THE BLOODY TICKET.
It is not illegal to buy something from Hong Kong
The posters have the responsibility to declare their imports and pay the relevant charges, they are NOT breaking the law simply by importing.
Click to expand...

I would never mention duty/tax/illegality unless a person makes their post boasting of doing so, I actually can't think of any occasion where anyone has done as you say. It's always in response, you shout the fact that we ignore the sender didn't write the ticket, are you aware that UK law considers what is written on the declaration ticket is the responsibility of the importer? And any discrepancy should be immediately communicated to HMRC with a failure to do so being a crime.

I don't see why downloading warez (which might not actually be a crime)is not allowed whilst the discussion and promotion of tax evasion (which is a crime) is openly allowed and to a certain degree protected by you (look at your tone of post about how you view those who disapprove of the evasion and make comment in the threads where people boast of their actions).

It really shouldn't be difficult to differentiate between legitimate grey importing discussion and the discussion of tax evasion.

matty said:
You have a responsibility to drive within the speed limit - perhaps you need to post that in every thread that a car is mentioned in, just in case anyone forgets.
Click to expand...

No, a more valid comparison would be if there was a section of the forum where illegal street racing was discussed/promoted/planned.

Would you allow a section of the users to do that?
 
Last edited:
admirable said:
The gentleman in post 368 asked."Is anyone willing to post facts with regards to the values, charges etc on a recent parcel that has attracted a customs bill?"
I was quoting from the Royal Mail label on an overseas parcel received today from outside the EU. Perhaps RM have it wrong?
Click to expand...

I was specifically thinking of a recent package from Panamoz, I wondered exactly how they are labelling and valuing their parcels. I have no issue with importing in theory, but would like to do that legally, at the same time I really can't be bothered with the hassle of contacting HMRC to tidy up any shortfall (a quick look on the HMRC suggests it wouldn't be that straightforward), but if Panamoz are now doing everything 'by the book' for the importer (i.e. you or I) that's fine by me.
 
Dave1 said:
Not one of the HK retailers discussed on this forum are authorised to prepay VAT, you can check that with HMRC for verification if you wish.



I would never mention duty/tax/illegality unless a person makes their post boasting of doing so, I actually can't think of any occasion where anyone has done as you say. It's always in response, you shout the fact that we ignore the sender didn't write the ticket, are you aware that UK law considers what is written on the declaration ticket is the responsibility of the importer? And any discrepancy should be immediately communicated to HMRC with a failure to do so being a crime.

I don't see why downloading warez (which might not actually be a crime)is not allowed whilst the discussion and promotion of tax evasion (which is a crime) is openly allowed and to a certain degree protected by you (look at your tone of post about how you view those who disapprove of the evasion and make comment in the threads where people boast of their actions).

It really shouldn't be difficult to differentiate between legitimate grey importing discussion and the discussion of tax evasion.



No, a more valid comparison would be if there was a section of the forum where illegal street racing was discussed/promoted/planned.

Would you allow a section of the users to do that?
Click to expand...

i didn't say any of them are prepaying vat, i'm talking about duty, but just so you know, we have already asked the various retailers to disclose their status under MoU so that it can be added to the sticky that is being worked on.

as for the rest of your post, i dont have time for pedantic and protracted debates. Discussing moderating decisions in public isn't allowed. Contact us link below if you want to argue, but as it stands at the moment its pretty simple, stop banging on about tax evasion, everyone is aware of your feelings on the matter. We as a forum are trying to find the best way to handle the issue as a whole but whatever we do will be decided by us and wont be up for debate.

finally, perhaps if people report the posts where people are promoting tax evasion then we can look at them as they come in.
 
matty said:
just so you know, we have already asked the various retailers to disclose their status under MoU so that it can be added to the sticky that is being worked on.
Click to expand...

Excellent to hear that, Matty. Obviously you know I'm in the 'law abiding' camp and we've disagreed many times about the stance the owners of TP have been taking on this issue. But anything that helps to avoid the entrenched arguments about this subject is to be welcomed.
 
Steep said:
For the record I have and would again buy from Panamoz and I don't give a stuff what your opinion on the matter is. You know full well what the content of a thread about Panamoz or any of the other HK dealers will be so stay away from them, if you don't like what is said in these threads don't open them and don't read them. You've made your opinions and feelings well known Dave and I personally am sick and tired of having to get past your (and others) constant repetition of said opinions to read what I want to read here and on other threads.
Click to expand...
100% agree, Dave and a couple of others are a blight on this topic, they really couldnt care less about the legalities of how Panamoz do or dont operate, they are just mischief makers and simply want to prove a point

If you genuinly cared about the legalities of Panamoz and any individual importing using Panamoz your time would be far better invested in speaking with HMRC and shopping all of those who have posted on here about how they have supposedly broken the law, go on, i challenge you to waste your own time instead of ours
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with others here, the constant "I saved £xxx pounds", and the "I paid £35 duty/vat/fees on my £700 lens" should not be allowed.
If it is then what is the harm in others posting in reply to this, if people didn't boast/show-off then others would not feel the need to respond.

Quite clearly as can be seen in the previous few posts things are still being labelled completely incorrectly.
The staff member's statement previously is quite simply wrong, it's the responsibilty of the importer to declare the correct value and they know what they have paid so are able to do this. Ignorance is no excuse of the law.

It's interesting to me that we can't comment on some companies services for fear of them getting their lawyers involved yet ways to avoid VAT & Duty are continually allowed to be discussed.

I'll leave it at that for now as I've had my say but should I feel the need to respond to someone who boasts of saving VAT/duty I don't see why this should not be allowed.
 
Like your post Pat, i suppose you really should keep it under your hat, the savings are out there whether they are "legal" or not and bragging about them could possibly wind up a few sensitive souls

What we shouldn't forget though is there are some folk out there who are genuinely not aware they are potentially doing anything wrong, my very first purchase from abroad was from DR about 10 years ago and i really didnt have the foggiest about import duties, VAT or the like and whilst its fine to remind people of their obligations its not alright to ram it down everyone's throat every minute of every day like some childish wailing banshee, state your point and walk away then let the individual decide whats the best course of action for their own circumstances

But OH NOOOOO
 
pmcgsmurf said:
I have to agree with others here, the constant "I saved £xxx pounds", and the "I paid £35 duty/vat/fees on my £700 lens" should not be allowed.
Click to expand...

A - it's not constant, far from it it's two or three threads that are only at the top of the page when they are because of the genuinely constant bullying of one or two armchair warrior forum members.

B - we all have a choice whether we click on a link to a thread, if you exercise that choice knowing full well from the thread title what the content is going to be then you can't really complain about what you read there.
 
Steep said:
.......

B - we all have a choice whether we click on a link to a thread, if you exercise that choice knowing full well from the thread title what the content is going to be then you can't really complain about what you read there.
Click to expand...

Exactly and it works both ways! (y)
 
Still not seeing where it adds anything to the discussion though?
 
I know what I wrote, I'm just not clear on what your point is Carl, after all you specifically quoted my post so I assume the response is aimed at me? You do seem to me to be just trolling since you won't actually say what it is that's on your mind if anything.

It's possible that you were making the point that I also could avoid this thread but if so you've got the wrong end of the stick, I'm one of the people who are interested in hearing about deals from Panamoz and other overseas dealers. What I'd like is to be able to read that info in peace without being subjected to any of the bullying, hounding, trolling that is taking place here. Do you understand that point?
 
Hugh, the point I am making, the same as yourself I think (& others have said many times) is, this is a forum where `discussions` take place & differences of opinions occur.
If posters/readers get fed up with a topic, they can either not read, or choose not to reply. (or even block/ignore an individual poster?)

Stating; `bullying, hounding, trolling` isn't very helpful & imho & just gives the impression that certain posters don't want to hear what others have to say, or like what is being said.

I also like to read info & read of others experiences, but I would also want to be armed with ALL the facts & possible pitfalls before making a decision. If it keeps being repeated, so be it, that's information.

As I've said before, we all want a good deal, that's natural, but I wouldn't want to knowingly break any rules or laws to get that deal. If anyone imports/purchases from abroad and pays any fees due (as Matt commented on earlier) I don't have a problem at all.
 
pmcgsmurf said:
I have to agree with others here, the constant "I saved £xxx pounds", and the "I paid £35 duty/vat/fees on my £700 lens" should not be allowed.
If it is then what is the harm in others posting in reply to this, if people didn't boast/show-off then others would not feel the need to respond.
Click to expand...

Then do as the mods have requested - report the post, and do not add to the "pedantic and protracted debates".
 
pmcgsmurf said:
I have to agree with others here, the constant "I saved £xxx pounds", and the "I paid £35 duty/vat/fees on my £700 lens" should not be allowed.
If it is then what is the harm in others posting in reply to this, if people didn't boast/show-off then others would not feel the need to respond.
Click to expand...

An interesting use of 'constant', 'boasting' and 'showing off'.

If someone posts to say what they paid, as in 'I bought X from Y and it cost £Z, then that's not boasting or showing off. It's passing on information.

As it happens, I've just bought an Olympus TG-2 from WEX. I was going to buy it from Currys but WEX dropped their price just before I did so I've saved £26. Boasting? No. Showing off? No. Jjust letting others know that there are savings to be made.

Substitute Panamoz and DigitalRev for Currys and WEX and the grey market bullying and hounding kicks in.
 
Rapscallion said:
Then do as the mods have requested - report the post, and do not add to the "pedantic and protracted debates".
Click to expand...
But theres no way he would do that because his report would be invisible except to the Mod team and the last thing he wants is to be invisible, he wants to be the big bad bully of the forums and as visible and as vocal as possible, its how Bullies and Trolls operate
 
Last edited:
Just as an aside, Currys owned by DSG has a very interesting past, nothing dodgy, just interesting
 
Last edited:
digital said:
As it happens, I've just bought an Olympus TG-2 from WEX. I was going to buy it from Currys but WEX dropped their price just before I did so I've saved £26. Boasting? No. Showing off? No. Jjust letting others know that there are savings to be made.

Substitute Panamoz and DigitalRev for Currys and WEX and the grey market bullying and hounding kicks in.
Click to expand...

Yeah but if someomne said ive just made a massive saving i bought a 7D from this bloke round the back of the dog and duck - people who suggested his act might not be entirely legal wouldnt be described as bullys and trolls. There is definitely a saving to be made by buying nicked goods in an unsalubrious den of iniquity , but i'm fairly sure the powers that be wouldnt let us discuss the good places or best ways to buy hot merchandise

Bullying and hounding would suggest a particular member was being targetted , as far as i can see that isnt happening (if it is then yes i deplore it) what we have here is two groups of members with diametrically opposed views, - and in my opinion we can either have the debate openly (which actually idsnt a great idea because its been done to death and always gets heated) or both sides can just shut up about it. But the key is that everyone leaves it alone , not that one side leaves it alone on pain of mod action while the other group repeatedly pokes the bear with a sharp stick to see if they can get a reaction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top