Hi, I had my hearing today thought I'd feedback the outcome and judgement as best as I can remember. The hearing was based around determining the following three things: 1) whether there was a contract between me and UPS 2) If not, whether I could exercise third party rights 3) if either of the above were found to be true, what compensation would I be eligible to receive based on arguments around limited liability terms being unfair and unenforceable. The claim was unsuccessful for the following reasons: - No contract between me and UPS as I didn't sign anything or tick anything or pay them any money - No third party rights as I'm not named by class or name in the T&Cs - Can't use my rights as a consumer and apply it to a third party contract as stated within the rights of third parties act 1999 - Claimant admitted to noticing the option to buy additional insurance and didn't use it - I agreed that I wasn't the shipper of the parcel as defined within the Defendant's T&Cs - Judge rejected the Defendant's argument about a specific term being relied on with the T&Cs for the third party rights to apply. A specific term need not be referenced as the term is the delivery of the parcel which they accepted they failed to do - Terms are fair as they are business to business terms not consumer terms, so the consumer rights act doesn't apply It goes without saying that I disagree with some of the points within the judgement and feel that the inclusion of the transcript that I was missing from Brentford County Court could have resulted in a different outcome. Nevertheless, I hope this helps others in their preparation for upcoming hearings of a similar nature. Also, the judge seemed opened to the argument that Packlink may be considered an agent of mine but this was the basis of my argument I failed to convinced her on that, but it would be an angle for future cases.

Thanks Bankfodder, all advice has been applied within the email. As it looks unlikely that I will be able to transcript within my hearing next Monday, would you recommend not making any reference to it at all within any opening arguments? Also, please see the attached skeleton arguments submitted by the defendant ahead of the hearing. Nothing new here really but thought others may benefit from reading it. Skeleton Argument for the Defendant - Jamie Bradbury v. UPS 221123.pdf

Okay, thanks for following it up. I'll send the email now.

Okay great. Email should be with you now.

I've just received an email from Brentford County Court stating that the transcript request has been processed today and that the transcription agency will contact me. Looks like the information commissioner's judgement has sorted it out. Hopefully I'll hear from the transcription agency by the end of the week!

The knowledge and information officer is responding to my Freedom of Information request as I didn't hear anything from Brentford County Court and haven't heard anything from them since.

Hello, Quick update. I received an email on 07/11/23 from the Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer stating that they would respond to my request within the next month. As my hearing is on 27/11/23, it looks unlikely that I will have the transcript before my hearing and am I right in thinking that even if I did, it's too late for me to include it within my arguments at this stage as the court bundle has already been submitted? Also, with the hearing now less than 2 week away, I plan to spend the time between now and then refreshing myself of all of my arguments and the legal materials that I am relying on. I'm aware of the format of the hearing and what's required of me on the day, however do you have any advice regarding how best to prepare? If not, I'll feedback in a couple of weeks regarding the judgement. Thanks

Thanks for the explanation regarding the unfair terms, that's crystal clear. Similarly, thanks for sharing the link to the complaint form, I'll complete that now.

Hello, Firstly, I wondered what the implications were of the court not replying to our Freedom of information act request within the 20 day period? Additionally, I recently received the Defendant's witness statement, I have attached this. In summary, their arguments are that as follows: - there is no contract between myself and UPS (nothing new here, responded within response to defence submission) - I have not stated how the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act applies to this matter (nothing new here, responded within response to defence submission) - the Consumer Rights Act doesn't apply as the contract is between two companies (i.e. Packlink and UPS) (nothing new here, covered by the arguments around the contract between myself and UPS) - if the Consumer Rights Act does apply, then the limitation of liability is in line with the CMR Regulations and the Warsaw Convention and they are similar to those of competitors (I'm less confident with my response to this argument, however the point around competitor terms seems irrelevant) Thanks as always Defendant Witness Statement.pdf

Thank you. I have just sent the email, will feedback as soon as I hear back from the court.

Thanks DX. Thought I'd share a bit of an update on my transcript request from the Farooq case. The request was referred to a judge who refused the application, no further details as to why it was refused have been provided. It seems a little odd to me as I don't understand why it would be refused given that I clearly stated it's relevance to my case.

Hello, I'm due to send off my court bundle tomorrow and just wanted to confirm that you would advise including the full length "eBay Delivery Powered by Packlink Terms and Conditions" as opposed to extracts, I'm conscious that it's a 20+ page document and didn't know whether it would be seen as excessive including it all. Thanks

Okay, I'm happy to apply for the transcript if you can send me the details please? Thanks for sharing. I have found the document before, it appears to be the blanket terms that Packlink uses for all transport agencies, so would also apply to UPS. I'll add a non-highlighted copy to my bundle as advised. Thanks

Thank you BankFodder, I have reflected your modifications within the attached file. By removing the reference to the Farooq vs Evri case, would you also suggest removing it entirely from the bundle (i.e. also in item 11, page 22) and keeping this argument for the hearing? Jamie Bradbury v UPS LTD K3QZ061X v4.pdf

It was sent by me. If that's not clear then I can reword to make sure it is.