Graduate student Nicole Lobo moved back to the US in late August after a year in the UK, shipping 10 boxes of possessions back home to Philadelphia that she expected to arrive within a few days.

Six weeks later, she is still waiting for the shipment - and fears it is lost, destroyed by UPS as the company struggles to handle a flood of packages facing new customs and tariff rules.

"It's been horrific," says the 28-year-old, who was notified last month that her boxes would be disposed of, leaving her to make frantic phone calls and send emails to try to head off the outcome.

It's an ordeal facing many UPS customers since the Trump administration in late August stopped allowing parcels worth less than $800 to enter the US without inspection, taxes or tariffs.

The decision abruptly made an estimated 4 million packages each day subject to new, more onerous processing and documentation rules.

As the influx leads to longer processing times and higher, sometimes unexpected, costs across the industry, some customers of UPS like Nicole, say they fear their packages have been lost in the backlog.

"It's beyond comprehension to me," says Janani Mohan, a 29-year-old engineer living in Michigan, who has also spent hours on hold and sent repeated emails since a tracking alert listed a box sent by her parents in India as set for disposal.

The parcel held her wedding dress, which had also been worn by her mother, an heirloom sari from her grandmother and wedding photos, among other items.

"I literally cried to them on the phone," she says. "Everything in there is very close to my heart."

Oregon-based Mizuba Tea Co, which has used UPS for more than a decade to import matcha from Japan, has five shipments together worth more than $100,000 held up in processing.

The firm has received conflicting alerts about their status, including some saying the items were set for disposal.

"My whole team is basically on scan watch," says Lauren Purvis, who runs the business with her family and is now starting to worry about running out of inventory if the limbo continues.

"It's just clear to us that the current importing systems were not prepared to handle the sheer amount of volume and paperwork."

Importers typically have 10 days after goods enter the US to submit documentation about the goods, pay tariffs and other fees, allowing the package to go to its recipient.

But the Trump administration's rapid changes to tariff rules have made it increasingly difficult to meet customs deadlines requirements, say shipping companies like FedEx and UPS, which offer customs services and often act as importers of record.

For example, businesses are now responsible for paying tariffs on any steel or aluminium contained in a product , and in many cases vouching for its country of origin - information that many businesses, let alone their shipping companies, do not know.

"Because of changes to US import regulations, we are seeing many packages that are unable to clear customs due to missing or incomplete information about the shipment required for customs clearance," a UPS spokeswoman said.

While acknowledging longer shipping times, the company said it was still successfully clearing more than 90% of international packages within a day of arrival.

The spokeswoman said its policy was to contact customers three times before moving to dispose of a package.

But seven people interviewed by the BBC, including several businesses responsible for shipping the items, said they had received no word from UPS about issues before seeing the tracking alert that their package would be trashed.

FedEx, another major player in the industry, said it does not typically destroy packages, unless directed to do so by the shipper.

Nicole, the graduate student, says she has been asked to supply more information about her items, which she did promptly in early September.

She did not hear more until seeing the notice about disposal in late September. After the BBC enquired about her package, the tracking information was updated for the first time in weeks to say it was "on the way", raising her hopes.

Likewise, Janani says the company reached out last week, after the BBC got in touch, for a few more documents and her package now appears to have cleared customs.

But for businesses, the chaos has already had real costs.

Swedish candy exporter Swedish Candy Land says more than 700 packages it sent via UPS to customers in the US in the first few weeks of September have been held up.

Co-founder Tobias Johansson says the business switched to FedEx after becoming aware of the problem and its shipments were now arriving without incident, although the process took a few days longer than before .

But the lost packages, some of which have been reported destroyed, have cost the firm roughly $50,000 in refunds, not including the expenses they incurred in shipping and brokerage fees.

"That was a big hit for us and we haven't gotten any answers yet for anything," says Mr Johansson.

Experts say the ripple effects are being felt across the supply chain, even on businesses, like Mizuba, that were not bringing in shipments using the $800 exemption from tariffs, known as de minimis.

"This can be felt pretty much across the board," says Bernie Hart, vice president of business development at Flexport, a logistics and customs business.

In a call with financial analysts last month, FedEx executives said it had been a "very stressful period" for its customers, especially smaller players.

"That is a big headwind," chief executive Raj Subramanian said, warning that changes to the trade environment would likely lead to a $1bn hit this year, including $300m in additional expenses as the firm hires and faces other costs related to the new rules.

But John Pickel, vice president of supply chain policy for the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents many shipping firms, fears the issues may get worse before they get better.

Overall trade volumes last month were lower than is typical, in part because many businesses rushed goods into the US early to beat tariffs.

"There's always been this prevailing thought that companies will figure it out," he says. "What we've seen is that is much harder than anyone anticipated."

A man who came to the UK on a small boat and threatened to kill Nigel Farage has been jailed for five years.

Fayaz Khan, 26, made a gun gesture with his hand, pointed to an AK-47 tattoo on his face and named the Reform UK leader in a TikTok post in October 2024.

Authorities believed the Afghan migrant had given them a false name and he was actually a 31-year-old called Fayaz Husseini, Southwark Crown Court heard.

Farage described the threat as "pretty chilling", adding: "Given his proximity to guns and love of guns, I was genuinely worried."

In the video, Khan pointed towards his face tattoo and said he was going to "pop, pop, pop" the MP for Clacton, in Essex, referring to him as "Englishman Nigel".

Sentencing him, judge Mrs Justice Steyn said: "Your video was not more abuse, it was a threat to kill with a firearm and it was, as Mr Farage put it, 'pretty chilling'."

Khan was one of 65 migrants on board a black inflatable boat that entered the UK by crossing the English Channel.

"The defendant livestreamed the recording of his crossing, which appears to have gathered a large online viewing," said prosecutor Peter Ratliff.

The court heard Khan gave a false name because he had "enemies he did not want to find him".

However, the prosecution said it was "more likely" he had given misleading details due to his criminal record while living in Sweden.

Mr Ratliff also disputed Khan's claim that he was unaware it was illegal to arrive in the UK by small boat.

He claimed Khan "intended to encourage others" by documenting his journey from Sweden to the UK, sharing it with hundreds of thousands of viewers online.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.

The government's national security adviser Jonathan Powell made no decisions about the content of any evidence provided in the collapsed case against two men accused of spying for China, a minister has said.

Prosecutors unexpectedly dropped charges against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry - who deny the allegations - in September.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch claimed the case collapsed because the government had refused to give the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) "vital information" as it wanted to "curry favour" with China.

Security Minister Jarvis dismissed claims the government deliberately collapsed the case as "baseless".

Mr Powell, who is one of the prime minister's most senior advisers and political allies, is facing pressure over whether he played a role in the collapse of the trial, with the Conservatives saying he has "questions to answer".

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted he has "full confidence" in his national security adviser, telling broadcasters: "He is doing an excellent job."

Christopher Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and Christopher Berry were charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024, when the Conservatives were in power.

They were accused of gathering and providing information prejudicial to the safety and interests of the state between December 2021 and February 2023.

But last week the head of the CPS said the case collapsed because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat.

Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said while there was sufficient evidence when charges were originally brought against the two men in April 2024, a precedent set by another spying case earlier this year meant China would need to have been labelled a "threat to national security" at the time of the alleged offences.

Giving a statement to MPs in the Commons, Jarvis denied reports Mr Powell had ruled China could not be defined as a national security threat at a meeting of Whitehall officials in September, shortly before the charges were dropped.

"Of course, [the national security adviser] takes part in discussions about national security and diplomatic relations. That is literally his job," he said.

"But any discussions were on the basis that the case would be going ahead and how to handle the implications.

"The national security adviser was not involved in any decisions about the substance of the evidence."

Jarvis said it was deputy national security adviser Matthew Collins who provided a witness statement in December 2023 under the previous Conservative government, with further witness statements requested and provided in February and July this year.

He said Mr Collins was given "full freedom to provide evidence without interference", adding: "Ministers and special advisers did not take decisions about that evidence and they were not cited on the contents."

Jarvis said all the evidence provided was based on the law and the Tory government's position on China at the time of the alleged offences.

He added that the decision about whether to proceed with the prosecution was taken by the CPS, "who were hamstrung by antiquated legislation".

The Official Secrets Act of 1911 has since been replaced by the 2023 National Security Act, which Jarvis said closed "the loopholes that have been exposed by this particular case".

"Suggestions that the government concealed evidence, withdrew witnesses, or restricted the ability of witnesses to draw on particular bits of evidence are all untrue," he said.

"The [deputy national security adviser] did not materially change his evidence and was under no pressure from anyone to do so...

"What has changed is the CPS's assessment of the case law."

Jarvis sought to blame the previous Tory government for not classifying China as a threat to national security and being too "slow" to update national security laws.

Defending her party's record, Badenoch pointed to a number of examples where Tory ministers and government documents had described China as a "threat".

"The trial has collapsed because for months and months, the government has been refusing to give the CPS vital information," she said.

"This wasn't a mistake. This wasn't a misunderstanding. This looks like a deliberate decision to collapse the case and curry favour with the regime in China."

She added: "I suspect that [ministers] have decided that closer economic ties with China were more important than due process and our national security."

The Liberal Democrats have called on the government to "come clean on why this case fell apart" and publish all correspondence between the deputy national security adviser and the CPS.

The party's foreign affairs spokesperson Calum Miller said: "The government's attempts to duck scrutiny and scapegoat a single official simply won't wash.

"It's inconceivable that neither Keir Starmer nor his national security adviser knew what evidence was being submitted in such an important case.

"The buck for this fiasco ultimately stops with the prime minister."

Meanwhile, Jarvis confirmed that MI5's National Protective Security Authority had published new advice for politicians on how to protect themselves from espionage and foreign interference.

The guidance warns MPs they are a potential target for foreign spies, with China, Russia and Iran identified as particular risks to British institutions.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

YouTube double act Dan and Phil have confirmed their relationship after 16 years of fan speculation, ending what they called the "apolcapyptic constant stress of the Dan and Phil dating conspiracy".

Dan Howell and Phil Lester have amassed millions of followers, hosted a BBC Radio 1 show, published best-selling books, and been on world tours.

Many of the British pair's comedy and gaming videos show them in the house they share, and they separately came out as gay in 2019, but they hadn't directly spoken about their relationship.

"We fell into it hard and fast in 2009, and here we are almost 16 years later," Dan said in the new video, telling followers they "can't live in fear any more".

The couple spoke about the impact of intrusion and intense speculation from fans, which Dan said "could have killed me".

He also explained it had taken time to discuss the relationship publicly because of the effects of his "extremely homophobic childhood", which meant he had been "deep in the closet" for years.

"In my mid 20s I felt we had to hide the relationship because I was still hiding who I was to my friends, family, myself," he said.

"This is why all of the digging from people online hit a nerve, because Phil was my safe space. You were my first boyfriend... You were a literal ray of light in my life back then."

Dan continued: "And what we had was the most important thing to me and I wanted to protect it, so when other people tried to grab it and drag it into the light, I felt completely violated.

"Having all of these people trying to out us, and being so hostile to me when I tried to hide it, was so triggering. Honestly, it could have killed me."

Dan added that he felt like someone had put a curse on them, with them achieving huge success "but half the time it's going to suck for years, wake up in the night with anxiety, you're going to have panic attacks".

He said there were times when he thought he might be "happier without all of this".

"Yeah, [in] 2017 I'm thinking, my solo comedy content is killing it on YouTube, this could just be my life. I could be like every other YouTube boy and just enjoy this without the apocalyptic, constant stress of this Dan and Phil dating conspiracy."

'A cycle of never-ending closets'

He said he had decided to make the relationship public after a recent therapy session.

"My therapist said, 'Dan, you love being in the closet'. And I was like, 'Excuse me?'"

He continued: "I spent so long not being authentic and being trapped in a situation, that I am comfortable being miserable in an environment where I don't do the thing that would suddenly make me feel better. I am in a cycle of never-ending closets, and this secret conspiracy is just another thing that I'm trapped inside."

Phil added that some followers may have already guessed, but making the announcement was "a big scary deal for us, it's kind of like another mini coming out".

He acknowledged that the move may attract more homophobia.

"Look, sure, this is a scary time in the world," Dan replied. "Let's be real, it feels like things are sliding backwards because the fighting for what was important was going a bit too well.

"But I think that's why it's more important than ever that we're like, 'You know what? Hey, here we are, gay. And what?'"

'Happy and relieved'

Their reveal was met with praise and love from longtime fans.

"I just adore you both so much," wrote one.

Another wrote: "Listen. Not our business. Never been our business. Fully aware it's parasocial. But after all these years, I'm both very, very happy for you both and feeling a bizarre sense of relief."

"Thank you for making me feel accepted just as I am throughout the years. I am glad you both feel safe enough to be your authentic selves!" posted someone.

"This is like gay independence day," said another.

Followers also celebrated what a big part of their lives the pair have been over the years.

"I've finished my bachelor's, master's, med school, and a PhD by the time they hard-launched their relationship," wrote one.

"Big day for girls who were on Tumblr from 2012-2015," said someone else.

"There's at least 20 people I haven't spoken to in seven years that I need to call RIGHT NOW," wrote another.

"I've literally had to go outside and have a cigarette," someone else posted.

A mental health trust says it is planning to install CCTV following the death of a patient in mysterious circumstances.

Maria Morris, 44, was found unresponsive at Bethlem Hospital in south London on 21 September 2021 with four socks down her throat, and a large unexplained bruise on her back.

She died hours later in hospital from a brain injury caused by a lack of oxygen. A consultant who treated her questioned whether she had been assaulted.

An inquest jury at South London Coroners' court concluded that her death was accidental, but her family says they still have questions about what led to her death.

Large bruise on her back

The inquest heard that Maria Morris, who worked as a teaching assistant, had bi-polar affective disorder.

In September 2021, her family and friends became concerned when she started acting erratically and found that she had stopped taking her medication.

Police were called after she ran away from a friend while on a walk in a park. When found, she was delusional and taken to Croydon Hospital.

She was transferred to Bethlem Royal Hospital, a mental health hospital run by South London and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLAM), on 18 September where she was sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

The jury was told that while Maria was on the unit, she raised a number of concerns about how staff were treating patients. She told one member of staff that patients were being "punished" at night.

On the evening of the 21 September, Maria was observed by staff in her room at 20:00 and then again at 20:30.

At 21:23 a member of staff found her unconscious on the floor of her room, having had a cardiac arrest.

During attempts to resuscitate her, a sock was found in her throat. When paramedics arrived, three further socks were removed from her throat.

By the time she was transferred to Croydon University Hospital, she had suffered a hypoxic brain injury. A few hours later she went into cardiac arrest again and died on 22 September.

The jury was told that Dr Simon Wood, an intensive care doctor at Croydon Hospital who treated Maria, alerted the police to a large bruise on her back.

He also said that, in his view, a patient wouldn't have been able to push socks down their own throat without gagging. He was concerned that this may have indicated she'd been assaulted.

The jury heard that there was no CCTV used on the wards at Bethlem Hospital and there was nothing in Maria's notes or observations to explain the bruising.

Maria's room was locked when she was found. The court heard that most patients had keys for their own rooms, but there was no record on who had what key.

Staff had master keys that could unlock all the patients' rooms.

Untested blood

In a statement read to the court, Metropolitan police officer DC Herdeep Jugdev said that his investigation had been hindered because Maria's room in Bethlem had been cleared, and the sock disposed of, before they got there 19 hours after her death was reported.

During their investigation, the police spotted what appeared to be blood under Maria's nails, although this did not appear to have been tested to see whose it was.

John Taylor, the South London Coroner, told the jury that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that Maria was assaulted on the ward, or that someone else had pushed socks into her airway.

The inquest heard conflicting evidence from staff at Bethlem about how often Maria was checked on the night she died.

Some documents and witnesses suggested she should have been checked four or five times an hour. Others suggested she should have been checked once an hour.

The jury concluded that Maria had pushed the socks down her own throat, but that her death had been accidental. They were unable to reach a conclusion on whether a lack of observations contributed to her death, because of the conflicting evidence.

'Immense pain'

In a statement, Maria's family said she was a much-loved mother, daughter and sister, and that her death "has left a profound and lasting void in the hearts of her family and all who loved her".

"We are grateful to the jury for having identified that there were missed opportunities around communication, documentation and observations.

"As a family, the idea that more could have been done to keep her safe causes us immense pain."

The family also said it felt the jury was not allowed to comment on all the issues it considered to be important.

"As a family we still have questions about exactly what happened that night."

South London and Maudsley NHS Trust (SLAM) says it will be rolling out CCTV in all its wards and opening a new CCTV control centre in November.

Personal data may have been stolen in the ransomware attack that forced Asahi to halt beer production, the company has said.

Japan's biggest brewer was forced to halt production at the majority of its 30 factories in the country, after a cyber-attack late last month disrupted everything from beer shipments to its accounting system.

All of Asahi's facilities have now partially reopened and restarted production but computer systems remain down, meaning orders are being processed using pen, paper and fax machines.

In a statement on Tuesday, Asahi said it was investigating whether personal information was stolen in the attack.

The company said its Emergency Response Headquarters were working with cybersecurity experts to "restore the system as quickly as possible", and will contact those affected by the hack.

"As we continue investigating the extent and details of the impact, focusing on the systems targeted in the recent attack, we have identified the possibility that personal information may have been subject to unauthorised data transfer," it said.

"Should the investigation confirm this, we will promptly notify those concerned and take appropriate measures in accordance with applicable laws on the protection of personal information."

It remains unclear what personal information was stolen, and Asahi declined to provide more detail as the matter is currently under investigation.

Asahi Group also owns Fullers in the UK and global brands including Peroni, Grolsch, and Pilsner Urquell. But Asahi said only its systems and operations in Japan - which account for around half of its sales - have been affected by the attack.

Asahi apologised for "any difficulties" caused by the incident.

The company also said it would delay the disclosure of its third-quarter financial results, citing the disruption caused by the attack.

The disclosure would be more than 45 days after the end of the October to December quarter, Asahi said, but when exactly would depend on the progress of restoring its system.

Russia-based ransomware group Qilin claimed responsibility for the attack, which has previously hacked other big organisations, including the NHS.

The cyber-attack is the latest to have hit operations at major firms.

Jaguar Land Rover, Marks and Spencer, and Co-op are among the major British companies that have been affected this year.

The UK's National Cyber Security Centre has reported a record rise in "nationally significant" cyber-attacks in the last year, with an average of four happening every week.

They urged businesses to take "concrete action" to protect themselves from attacks.