Postal problem - some help please

[davjoh]

Evening all

 

A parcel came to the door with Royal Mail around 1st May this year. It was sent first class recorded. I signed for the package whilst being given other mail.

 

Getting it back into the house it was sent to the correct address, but I did not recognise the name. I went on to open the package to try and find out what it was, expecting it might be an unsolicited goods [problem].

 

The parcel contained a jewellery box with either a necklace or bracelet in it, but no other useful information I could see. Believing it was unsolicited goods I disposed of it.

 

I had a knock on the door from a neighbour today saying I had signed for an item that they had ordered about a month ago. Whilst I know this neighbour by face, I did not know the name. I have explained my position to them - that I tried to establish whom it was for, but was unable to - and that I've chucked the thing out.

 

The nieghbour it understandably quite unhappy, though more at the situation than with me personally.

 

I just wanted to check if I'd opened myself up potential to any form of liability.

 

My thoughts at the time of taking the action were that it was an unsolicited item sent to the address by a trader, and an invoice would follow. I felt therefore I was able to do what I wished with the goods, therefore dispose of it (under the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000).

 

Any thoughts please?

[foolishgirl]

Tricky one but IMHO I think as it wasn't addressed to you personally (even if it was your address) it was not yours to either open or dispose of. The problem is that everyone gets so much junk mail nowadays stuff gets thrown in the bin automatically & if there is nothing to identify its sender, you would have been unable to notify them of its unsolicited nature. Maybe a word with your neighbour (who seems quite understanding if unhappy) with perhaps an offer to recompense in some small way might sort the problem - unless of course the jewellery was very valuable!

[stonedecroze]

1. "If the item has been sent to the correct address but you don’t recognise the name, they may be a former occupant at your address. Royal Mail is legally obliged to deliver mail as addressed irrespective of the name on it. Mark the item ‘Not known at this address’ and pop it back in the Postbox.
   
2. If the mail with a different address has been mistakenly put through your letterbox, we have clearly misdelivered the item and apologise. Please mark the item as ‘Misdelivered' and where it was misdelivered to and re-post. No further postage/payment is needed for misdelivered items."
   

This is the best advice I could find on the Royal Mail website, I also believe that it may be a criminal offence to open mail that is not addressed to you personaly even if it is your address. It may have belonged to a previous occupant. Like Foolishgirl, I would also recommend that you try to come to some agreement with your neighbour. remember we all mak typos LOL Stone :D

[Weird Al Yankovic]

As above, RM deliver to the address and not the addressee, so they are not at fault.

 

Whilst I understand that you did not recognise the addressee of the parcel, but it had the correct address, and that you actually signed for it, I would have thought by using a little initiative and contacting your local delivery office would have been more approriate than just disposing of it in the first instance.

 

It appears rather odd that a jewellery box containing either a necklace or bracelet sent by Recorded Delivery, suggesting a potential high value item, would be simply 'chucked out.'

 

Further, jewellery is often considered priceless due to sentimental reasons. A little effort to return the item to RM would surely not be much of a chore?

 

 

Although under no obligation to do so it is what neighbours do, at least in my area. Especially if a temp/cover is on the delivery round.

 

I'd say there is no criminal element in opening the item as you say you did not know your neighbours surname.

 

It appears either the neighbour gave an incorrect address when ordering their goods or the supplier/a loved one got the house number wrong.

 

If it was a loved one then what an unhappy ending to a cherished piece.

[davjoh]

I understand the item was purchased from eBay. The fact it was sent by recorded delivery suggests it was not an expensive item, since the terms of use for recorded delivery prevent its use for 'cash, valuables or jewellery', and requiring that Special Delivery was used.

 

My train of thought is that the seller has addressed the item incorrectly, and so they ought to reimburse the purchaser, given that they had a contract to deliver the goods to the purchaser.

 

Thanks for the posts so far

[foolishgirl]

If it was an eBay item & was addressed incorrectly (ie. your neighbour had supplied the correct address) your neighbour should get in touch with the seller first of all to see if an agreement re. cost etc. can be arranged; if not your neighbour can raise a dispute thro' eBay & they will investigate & decide on liability accordingly. Still think a small apoplogy/compensatory offer from you would not go amiss & would aid future good neighbourly relations - you might even talk to/know names of your neighbours then!

[patdavies]

Still think a small apoplogy/compensatory offer from you would not go amiss

 

I would be very cautious about doing anything that could later be construed as an admission of liability.

[davjoh]

Im not really concerned with a downturn in neighbourly relations, I've been frank and honest with them which they appreciate and offered to help them resolve things as much as practicable. I think they could see the situation from my perspective and really were just looking for a resolution going forward.

[bidstermeister]

I'm not taking sides here, but here's something to chew on:

 

If the item was sent Recorded Delivery, then the sender's address would have been on an orange sticker on the underside of the package - For the price of a 1st Class stamp, you could have made a "reasonable attempt" to notify the sender of their error.

[davjoh]

bidstermeister,

 

I do appreciate what you're saying. When the parcel was recieved, I felt at that time it was an unsolicited goods [problem]. I therefore acted in accordance with the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000 and kept the goods as an unconditional gift, choosing to dispose of it.

 

I could have written to the sender, but was not obliged to under the above stated regulations.

 

At the time, I felt I had behaved in a compliant manner.

[bidstermeister]

Understood - I trust you'd do the same if the contents were cash

[steven4064]

Understood - I trust you'd do the same if the contents were cash

Not likely to have arisen because

...the terms of use for recorded delivery prevent its use for 'cash, valuables or jewellery', and requiring that Special Delivery was used.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

Not likely to have arisen because

 

One must recognise that the item was sent by an ebay seller where a fair number will aim to make a few quid on inflated postage and packing.

 

The OP seems to have had no inclination to do anything like using a little common sense.

 

He dumped it because he says so.

 

Thank God I don't live in Wigan!:o

[davjoh]

He dumped it because he says so.

 

I find this comment to be extremely libellous and ask that the poster revokes it and apologises. This is of course unless he can offer any evidence that his comments are accurate.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

Im not really concerned with a downturn in neighbourly relations

 

I missed this bit!

 

In that case, I'm not surprised you didn't make any effort whatsoever.

 

Apologies for my previous posts.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

I find this comment to be extremely libellous and ask that the poster revokes it and apologises. This is of course unless he can offer any evidence that his comments are accurate.

 

Huh?

 

You have already stated that you dumped it in your first post.

 

How is that libel when it was you who stated this in the first place?

 

Ie, 'he dumped it because he says so.'

 

How does one libel oneself?

[MrShed]

OP, there is a difference between being "compliant" and using your common sense. No-one in their right mind would chuck out an item addressed to someone else, in my opinion. Legally, you may have some basis (I quote: "My thoughts at the time of taking the action were that it was an unsolicited item sent to the address by a trader, and an invoice would follow. I felt therefore I was able to do what I wished with the goods, therefore dispose of it").

 

But who in gods name actually thinks like that? IMO, although not legally obligated, I think you should be reimbursing as my opinion is that you have acted wholly unreasonably, and (again my opinion) verges on stupidity.

 

Talking legally, whoever is responsible for the misdelivery is probably liable - so either the seller, or the buyer(if they supplied the wrong information).

[davjoh]

As I am sure you are aware Weird Al Yankovic, it is libellous because in post four you stated:

 

"It appears rather odd that a jewellery box containing either a necklace or bracelet sent by Recorded Delivery, suggesting a potential high value item, would be simply 'chucked out.'"

 

Then in post 13 you stated:

 

"He dumped it because he says so. :wink:"

 

Expressing an opinion, that you find something hard to believe, is fair comment (a legal concept, feel free to Google it). The second statement, followed by a wink, is clearly in my view dismissive of my statement that the item was disposed of, and suggests I am lying when I state I have done so.

 

Once again, I ask for you to apologise and revoke your comment... unless you can prove that I in fact did not dispose of the item.

Edited June 7, 2008 by davjoh
spelling error

[MrShed]

 

Expressing an opinion, that you find something hard to believe, is fair comment (a legal concept, feel free to Google it). The second statement, followed by a wink, is clearly in my view dismissive of my statement that the item was disposed of, and suggests I am lying when I state I have done so.

 

Actually, I for one didnt read it like that - I read it as meaning that you had no better reason for dumping it than you felt like it.

 

I'm certainly reading it like that now - thanks for bringing that meaning to our attention. :grin:

[bidstermeister]

Not likely to have arisen because

Actually, it could have - because the sender used 1st Class Recorded to send this item which - as you've already stated - is the incorrect service anyway. My point was that the sender's address is/was on the packaging so the OP could have made a reasonable attempt to notify them of the error. If the poster did that and said he'd heard nothing back, THEN I probably wouldn't be playing devil's advocate

 

I'm not saying he was wrong, or right - Just that for the price of a 1st class stamp, he could have sent a letter saying "you sent this, what's the deal?" - Although the OP claims to have stayed within the boundries of the DSR, it doesn't hurt to also be a reasonable person in what appears to be have been a genuine error and somebody has now been deprived of their bling!

[Azure]

If someone had sent some jewellry to me in the post i wouldnt think it was unsolicited goods, i would think that it had been misdelivered. It really wouldnt have hurt to put it back in the post box.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

As I am sure you are aware Weird Al Yankovic, it is libellous because in post four you stated:

 

"It appears rather odd that a jewellery box containing either a necklace or bracelet sent by Recorded Delivery, suggesting a potential high value item, would be simply 'chucked out.'"

 

Then in post 13 you stated:

 

"He dumped it because he says so. :wink:"

 

Expressing an opinion, that you find something hard to believe, is fair comment (a legal concept, feel free to Google it). The second statement, followed by a wink, is clearly in my view dismissive of my statement that the item was disposed of, and suggests I am lying when I state I have done so.

 

Once again, I ask for you to apologise and revoke your comment... unless you can prove that I in fact did not dispose of the item.

 

Look buddy, I find it odd, then and now, that someone would receive a potentially high value item through the post by mistake and just dump it!

 

That is what you do but it is not what i would do.

 

Just different approaches to life, that's all. Hardly a case of libel! More of how we operate within society.

 

And if you state that you dumped it and then I repeat, what you actually said, and then you want to argue about it then you are just having a laugh, surely?

 

Look, you have probably done nothing wrong in law but you have most probably revealed yourself as an unattractive potential neighbour within the Wigan area.

 

You posed your question and it's beeen answered.

 

Get over it.

[steven4064]

Guys

 

This thread is getting out of hand so I'm closing it.