Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It was The repair team that do work for Harvey’s. They had to come out three times in the space of four months. After the last visit in august 2019 Harvey’s contacted us to say they would replace the sofas
    • If you can spend some time reading around the threads here as I've already suggested, you will understand what we have to say about the so-called insurance cover and how it is unfair and unenforceable. Please familiarise yourself with this. Have they actually agreed to pay out on the insured value? Not only should you have the value of your lost items that you should also have the cost of the delivery as well as the insurance back. They don't care about losing a lot of business. They've got a huge amount of business and although they are the most complained about courier company in the country, I expect that 98% of their deliveries are successful. Of course when you talk about the remaining 2% of millions – it still ends up with a lot of loss parcels. The really disgusting thing is how Hermes then deny liability and try to force people to accept their losses. Most people give up but people who come here normally get their money back – but in your case afraid it does depend on the correct declared value
    • I was not aware of the non compensated list until after the event.   when you book it only shows the prohibited list which is about safety.   the non compensated list is right at the bottom of the page.   they took my additional payment for “insurance”  so cannot refuse to pay out unless its prohibited.   They should perhaps put a drop down box, to select an item type, and if its on the non compensated list then not allow the option to pay for additional “insurance” and warn the users it has no compensation for loss or damage.   They would loose a lot of business and the extra money they make if all goes to plan.   Will do, i might just have to accept the insurance value and put the rest down to experience. Thank you for the advice i will review threads and familiarise myself with what to do.
    • Thanks. As for their prohibited items list – in respect of items which are lost, it's completely irrelevant and unenforceable. However, the view we take is that if you declare a particular value and they undertake to carry your goods at that value then that is all you can recover. If you want to try and go for higher value then we are happy to help you but I don't fancy your chances but it would be interesting. Please spend the next few hours reading around the Hermes sub- forum and understanding the process about challenging Hermes, issuing a letter of claim and then issuing court papers. Understand also the process of bringing a small claim in the County Court. When you think that you know your way around then come back here and will help you on the next step. Once again, you're welcome to try and claim for the higher figure – but I think is most unlikely that you would succeed and in fact whereas most claims seem to go to mediation and get settled there, I suspect that if you claim for a higher amount that they would try their luck in court. However, you seem to be saying that so far in respect of your claim Hermes have been making positive noises and that they may pay you out on the basis of the insurance cover.  
    • the issuance of a Default notice was some +3yrs after the last acknowledgement through a deferral letter to the original creditor.   i thought a debt buyer could not issue a default notice? thus change the cause of action under the PRA DN ruling Win~ it was not retrospective appeal win?   i believe we've countered these late DN's before along the lines of:   alternative whereby claimant intimates SB date=defaulted date and that has been registered months/years after the last payment . 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on dd/mm/yyyy.    2.The date last payment/acknowledgement made was the dd/mm/yyyy     3.The Default Notice was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months/years after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months + years and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.    4.Therefore the Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980. If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any true cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.    5.The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £x or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.   @andyorch your thoughts?
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2749 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...