I use a courier company, i will call "TPC", who in turn use DPD. I have to say on the whole the past few years has been event free but a few months ago we sent a 3D printer to someone to use and it was smashed up really badly.
The recipient took photos and has emailed us stating the damage was beyond dropping in his view and we have loads of photos of the box damaged etc. I reported the issue immediately and TPC were originally very sympathetic etc. I have to say I was shocked at the damage, you would have had to try really hard to do what they did.
As the client needed to get printing urgently, I resent a new identical printer out, only this time this one had a glass build plate, so about 30x20, super tough, heat resistant glass plate that the plastic is printed onto. This was in fact a bespoke upgrade I did to this one but the plastic plate was also sent.
This printer was also sent insured fully.
This 2nd delivery went horribly wrong yet again, with a tonne of damage done.
We sent both printers in the original boxes, designed for transporting them. They are thick boxes, with the original polystyrene inserts. Loads of space etc. we also used an outer box with more packaging to be safe. The packaging has never been challenged, in fact DPD stated that it was fine.
long story short. I know DPD have accepted both claims (although irrelevant as the contract was with the 3rd party we use, TPC). I am still waiting for any decision, I have emailed multiple times and so we logged a small claims track.
Unfortunately the printers are no longer made, so I have asked for the replacement cost of the latest available model for both printers.
The defence is that they will not pay as there was glass in the box (even though only the 2nd item had glass in it)
There is no consideration about the first delivery that had no glass in it at all.
I have sent the court questionnaire off, have stated I am willing to mediate and I am waiting.
No solicitors seem to be involved at this point, certainly no legal sounding stuff has come back from the defendant at this point.
Just want some help and advice really. I have basically lost a part of my little business due to these printers being damaged beyond repair.
1. I have no doubt that I will get the compensation for the 1st Printer as there was no glass and it was clearly in breach of the Sale of goods and services act 1982, (reasonable care and skill clause).
What about where there is a piece of glass in an item?
I have never actually claimed for this extra add on, I feel that if they had delivered properly in the first place I would not have had to send the 2nd printer out and also the glass did not cause the damage, it was just "also" damaged, but again I am not claiming for this.
2. I would normally claim for the cost of the item if damaged. However in the case of the model being superseded and no longer being available. Is it OK to claim a little more for the latest available model? I have averaged the price from 5 retailers and would genuinely be buying these to simply replace my lost printers.
In my defence it is a real pain in terms of retraining and new software to learn a new machine.
Any help would be appreciated on the best course of action and of course I will post everything up here so others can learn from my mistakes and hopefully successes!!
I am about to go through mediation, but can't find much on the process here.
Has anyone gone through this process as a claimant and is there any advice anyone can give.
I have been told by the CAB that it's a chance to "negotiate" but Ii'm not sure if negotiation is what I want to do, i'd really like the defendant to try and see the light.
Also can the defendant deny wanting to use mediation?
Any help appreciated.