with the loss of seized property due to improper transportation, irregular accumulation and failure to determine the duty on time, it is possible to request compensation for the victims in both Iran and England. The existence of specific characteristics such as prohibited, smuggled, ownerless, fugitive, and unknown ownership of the goods, it is not considered a valid reason to carry out harmful possessions and to remove civil liability due to the damages. Although in Iran, with the formation of the Property Organization, parallel administrative units have been merged and seized property has been organized, but the multitude of laws and lack of guarantee of efficient implementation to fulfill legal obligations in material and legal possessions of this organization And on the other hand, unsolved legal challenges such as how to prove the organization's fault in judicial courts, has created a big gap in compensating the damages caused by the act or omission of this organization in securing the rights of confiscated property. While in England there are other challenges such as Uncertainty of the responsible entity, insurance restrictions and long proceedings to determine the assignment of property, are among the reasons for not securing the rights of the seized property. The issue is, what are the legal challenges of civil liability caused by damage to seized property in Iran and England? This research, with a descriptive-analytical method, examines legal, judicial and executive challenges in a comparative manner and suggests solutions such as increasing financial fines and Expanding insurance coverage.