Goods not recived via private internet purchase?

[will_cosworth]

Hi guys,

I bought a car cover for £130 off a guy on a car website in april, and it still hasn't been delivered. It was a private one-off sale, and I paid by direct bank transfer as I trusted the guy ... Now he has said royal mail have lost it, blah blah blah, but he did not insure it so cannot claim the money back. Ever since I have been fobbed off with lame excuse after lame excuse.

 

I called the police as it has been 4 months now, they paid him a visit on the grounds of obtaining money by decepiton, but he has convinced them that he admits he owes me £130, and it is all in hand.

 

I am loosing patience now, as I have been messed around for too long, is small claims court the way forward, as the guy is claiming he is off work due to a bike accident, so only has £60 a week. He lives with his parents, so even if I win in court could the baliffs legally enter the property to recover the debt?

 

Any advice would be great, I was going to follow the bank charges model, send him 2 letters then file on moneyclaim online, would this be acceptable? Also can I claim the interest on the initial £130 and the cost of all the phonecalls etc?

[barracad]

Yes - if you've already sent several requests for a refund then simply send him a final LBA, give him 14 days, then submit a claim.

[questioning]

Hi,

Did you ask him to get the postal insurance?

Does he have proof of posting?

 

If he is on benefits you are going to get very little from him if you take court action and win.

The bailiffs can only enter his property if he doesn't pay what the court orders and if he lets them in. If he doesn't answer the door to the bailiffs they will eventually give up. If he doesn't let them in they can't force there way in. As its his parents home I imagine he will say everything belongs to them so I don't think bailiffs would be very successful in this set up.

I hope I don't sound like I'm on the guys side I'm not.

This is the problem with buying off the net, you have to be so careful.

[the_grey_squirrel]

If you didn't ask him to insure the parcel, you can only claim compensation up to the maximum allowed by Royal Mail, which is a lot less than £130. From the Royal Mail site:

"This compensation is subject to the maximum payable being the lower of the market value of the item and statutory maximum of 100 x 1st Class stamps at the first weight step."

 

In order to do that, you will need proof of posting which he should provide. If he can't provide this, then he should compensate you as there is no way of telling the item was ever sent!

 

If he does give you proof of posting, then I'm afraid you don't have a case against him. You'll have to get compensation from Royal Mail. It's not too late, you have 12 months from the date of posting.

[will_cosworth]

Was meant to be sent recorded delivery. I don't belive he ever sent it.

[questioning]

If you didn't ask him to insure the parcel,

 

In order to do that, you will need proof of posting which he should provide. If he can't provide this, then he should compensate you as there is no way of telling the item was ever sent!

 

If he does give you proof of posting, then I'm afraid you don't have a case against him. You'll have to get compensation from Royal Mail. It's not too late, you have 12 months from the date of posting.

 

Exactly, You are spot on.

thats why I asked the OP if they had asked for an insured delivery and if the seller had proof of posting.!!

[questioning]

Was meant to be sent recorded delivery. I don't belive he ever sent it.

 

Does he have proof of posting certificate.?

[questioning]

Hi guys,

 

 

I called the police as it has been 4 months now, they paid him a visit on the grounds of obtaining money by decepiton, but he has convinced them that he admits he owes me £130, and it is all in hand.

 

you were lucky the police went round to visit the guy, surely they must have asked to see the proof of posting.

[Guest joe.inom]

you know what , it aint the fault for the sellers.

Cause you know what , i have orderd a Shoe pair from eBay , and they took it to deliver here in florida after a month .

I have sent them millions and millions of letters , emails and i almost murderd the bank manager on the phone.

Then almost at the month end of the order , the guy comes in with the delivery report and gives a ltter.

the letter says that they are already busy with millions such orders , when my number came in , i got my delivery.

This is the case with you too.

[the_grey_squirrel]

OP, if he has no money, I think the best you could get out of him is a very small sum each week, unless his parents do the decent thing and pay you back.

[questioning]

OP, if he has no money, I think the best you could get out of him is a very small sum each week, unless his parents do the decent thing and pay you back.

 

Until the OP actually says that the seller has NOT got any proof that he actually sent the item then no one knows for sure that he didn't.

 

The OP said "The guy is off work at the moment." which would make one presume that the guy is an adult, over sixteen at least.

Why would the guys parents have to do the Decent thing, and pay him back.

No one has any way of knowing if the parents knew anything about this.

Once children are over sixteen, the parents are not responsible for their actions.

If the seller was a child then I would agree. I think it can be gleaned from the OP that the seller is an adult. So I don't see that the parents should even be bought into the picture.

 

[will_cosworth]

Still not had any joy with this, whats the maximum sentance for GBH? :mad:... Incidently, the bank (HSBC) say they cannot do anything as the payment was made by myself, even though the guy is a fraudster, they refuse to help!

 

Also, Can I claim 8% interest on this if I go through the small claims court?

Edited October 3, 2008 by will_cosworth

[questioning]

You still haven't said if the guy has proof of posting or not.!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will_cosworth.

Still not had any joy with this, whats the maximum sentance for GBH? :evil:...

 

You might just land yourself in alot of trouble with that attitude,

I don't think a court case is worth bothering with. As the guy you are after is unemployed you are likely to get a pound a month out of him, if your claim is successful.

I think that kind of outcome would wind you up and make you feel worse than you do now.

[will_cosworth]

So Basically I have been done out of £130 and unlikely to get a refund?

[Bookworm]

A couple of things:

 

1) Even if the sender had proof of posting, it is still his responsability. Whether he can claim off RM or not is not the OP's issue. OP entitled to get full refund for item non received.

 

2) Maybe the guy can pay, maybe he can't. There's no way to ascertain that and it's amazing the number of people who DO find they can pay up after all when faced with the possibility of a CCJ. There is the risk that OP might not recover his money + court fee, but the alternative is kiss goodbye to £130 without a fight. If it were me, I'd spend the money on the court fee and go for it. At worse, I'd lose £30 (£35 now?) and not get my money back, at best, I'd get it all back + interest.

 

If you do decide to go to court, yes, you can add 8% statutory interest (and your court fee on top). You can also claim "reasonable" costs for dealing with the case, at £9.25 an hour, but don't be greedy and over-inflate your costs, that does nothing for your credibility.

 

Yes, there is the risk that the guy will come out with a £1 a week judgment... IF he can convince the judge that that is all he can afford... But you know what? As far as I am concerned, it's always worth doing anyway if only for the moral victory, knowing that maybe he screwed you out of £130, but his credit rating is b*ggered for the next 6 years.

 

In the end, though, it has to be your decision, and no-one else's. ;-)

[peterlucas]

As of last Monday, the starting court fee is still £30, £25 on moneyclaimonline.

[MrShed]

I agree with Bookie on this wholly - not sure why it is assumed that it is the OPs issue if the compensation from RM is inadequate - the seller had a responsibility to ensure the goods were delivered and this includes adequate insurance on the item.

 

In addition, again agree with Bookie that to say it is pointless following a claim is just not true, certainly on the information we have. Baliffs are not the only form of enforcement of a CCJ(indeed, they are the worst IMO), and a garnishee order or AoE would probably work wonders in this case.

 

Good luck OP

[questioning]

Hi Bookworm,

Every thing I sell on line is covered by the royal mail comp which is free when I obtain a proof of posting certificate, I think it covers up to £36. roughly,I always obtain POP when I send an item I've sold.

If the item sold is worth more I give the buyer the opportunity to pay insurance.

Buyers usually wish to pay the insurance.

Are you saying that if the buyer chooses not to pay for the insurance and lets say the item is worth £100. and royal mail looses it then its up to me to refund the buyer in full?

[Bookworm]

But the seller didn't offer insurance in this instance, did he? Seller didn't insure goods, didn't offer to buyer to add insurance to purchase, so yes, it is totally 100% his liability and responsability to reimburse buyer. Furthermore, even if buyer were to want to pursue the matter himself (for reasons best known to himself), he couldn't as he doesn't have a contract with RM, the seller does.

 

Edit: As far as you are concerned, if you are charging your customers (not businesses, that's a different matter) insurance, you are in breach of the CPUT Regs 08:

If you are selling to a consumer, you are responsible for the risk of loss or damage in transit, until the goods are delivered. If you wish to take out postal insurance, this is your responsibility, not the consumer's. Postal insurance should therefore not be offered to consumers at an extra charge.

http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/Images/ca12_tcm9-8175.pdf Edited October 5, 2008 by Bookworm

[questioning]

But the seller didn't offer insurance in this instance, did he? Seller didn't insure goods, didn't offer to buyer to add insurance to purchase, so yes, it is totally 100% his liability and responsibility to reimburse buyer. Furthermore, even if buyer were to want to pursue the matter himself (for reasons best known to himself), he couldn't as he doesn't have a contract with RM, the seller does.

 

sorry i probably didn't explain my self very well, not very articulate.

I was asking the question for myself.

I sell quite alot on Ebay.

As I said I always offer insurance , the buyer has to pay. If the goods are worth less than £36. this is covered for free for buyer through the POP which I always obtain. I also give them an option to purchase insurance.

If they decide they don't want insurance (which from memory only one buyer has & the value of item was £60) and RM looses the parcel are you saying I am responsible & have to refund them the full amount.

Thanks

[Bookworm]

Sorry, I was editing my post while you were asking. See my edited post above. ;-)

[MrShed]

Yes you are is the short answer, as per Bookies edit above