Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
    • The video-sharing app told the BBC that a "very limited" number of accounts had been compromised.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Parcel Force smashed guitar but won't pay compensation


J1snn
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2717 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all, I'm here to see if anyone can guide me on my rights please as sofa I've just found a brick wall to bang my head against!

 

I sold a guitar on eBay and sent it via Parcel Force 48 fully compensated at slightly more than the guitar was valued for peace of mind to the buyer. The guitar was in a thick padded Gibson case (soft type) that lots of inbuilt protection. The guitar was then put in a slightly modified cardboard guitar box and wrapped tightly so there was no room for it to move around. The box was then covered top to bottom and around the middle in white and red fragile tape so it could be seen from all directions.

 

When I took the box to my local post office the post master said "due to security reasons can you please tell me whats in the box?". I told him it was a guitar and he laughed and said he knew due to the shape. I paid £16 for the postage using Parcel Forces 48 service and an additional £15.00 in compensation to insure it up to £600.

 

The buyer contacted me a couple of days later and said the guitar had snapped where the neck meets the body and sent me pictures. I immediate filed a claim with PF, sent proof of postage, compensation, pictures of the guitar before and after and proof of value.

 

Two days later I got a email back saying it was rejected as the packing was insufficient. I challenged this as I had sent many guitars before using the same packing method and asked for evidence. They showed me a guide to packing a guitar and how they "recommend" there method but couldn't show me anything in there terms of carriage that a claim would be rejected for not following there "recommendation".

 

I was then passed to an manager who then pointed out that there was a problem. Under PF terms of carriage it states that items excluded from the enhanced compensation include all musical instruments. So it turns out that they have said they have turned my claim down due to insufficient packing however they doing even offer insurance (compensation) for any musical instrument never mind how its been packaged. PF told me that its the PO fault as they should know the PF terms and that they do not offer enhanced compo therefor should not of sold it and made me aware. They said that the PO have a system called Horizon and that clearly gives them clear details on what can and can not be covered.

 

Taken from there website - Musical instruments - no enhanced compensation is available.

 

I went back to my local PO where I shipped the guitar and the post master became immediately defensive when I said PF will not and do not offer enhanced cover on any musical instrument, He claimed he did not know this and he was accepting no liability. He later phoned me maintaining he was not liable but admitted after looking through terms of carriage found the exclusion for musical instruments but referred me back to PF.

 

So this is where I am. I believe that I was miss sold compensation by the post master at my local post office. He knew it was a musical instrument, he asked me what it was. He still sold me the compensation even though they did not offer it for what I was shipping. If he pointed this out I would never of sent it and told the buyer to collect in person, cancel or take it at his own risk.

 

PF have offered me the £15 I paid in compensation back but I have refused this as I believe that if I accepted it I would close this situation and have no comeback.

 

So where do you recommend I go next? Has PF been neglectful in handling my Parcel or have I been miss sold by the post office?

 

I am currently £500 down and can't really afford to be. I have an appointment at the local CAB office but this isn't for a couple of weeks due to them being busy and my work commitments.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

James

Link to post
Share on other sites

James,

 

You don't have a claim agianst PF since they do state there is no enhanced insurance for musical instruments. (with carriers these days you do wonder what they are willing to carry)

 

Potentially you might have a claim against the PO, since oyu informed them what is in the parcel and they then sold you insurance. I'm sure that someone will be along later with a greater brain than myself on these matters but I would be thinking of making a claim against the PO through the courts.

It is easier to enter a rich man than for a camel to pass a needle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi James and welcome to CAG

 

My opinion is that the Post Office is responsible as they accepted the parcel. They are just trying to wriggle out of their responsibilities.

 

I would take it as far as I could with them and if still no result, a letter before action. This may have the desired effect but if not, you could sue them in the courts.

 

I do seem to remember a case (quite a while ago) where the Post Office lost with a similar case.

 

This thread, while not the same as yours may offer you some advice on what to do.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?392591-Me-V-s-Royal-Mail-(advice-needed!)-**-Successful-Outcome-**&p=4244272&viewfull=1#post4244272

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I know this is a slightly old post, but I had a similar experience with a musical instrument.

 

I was aware of the 'no enhanced compensation' as it was on the 'items not included' list,

but I did phone and ask if the instrument would be covered for at least the basic £100.

I was told yes... but PF own staff on their helpline.

 

As I had sent this instrument to myself many times over with PF I did not really have too many worries.

I pack it well and it arrives when it should.

(I travel around and don't have a car.)

 

On receipt this occasion however, it was cracked at the top of the frame.

I was giving up playing it, and wanted to sell it on Ebay.

My harp devalued from £350 to £100 over night!

 

Sadly I was away travelling and didn't find out until some months later, but as a regular customer I made a claim anyway.

No good!

It was past the 60 days.

 

Not only that even when I took it to the top they said my case did not warrant any goodwill and sent me packing.

POOR POOR SHOW!!!

Shame on you PF!

How did it get broken in the first place!

Next time I will offer collect only....

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?446533-Parcel-Force-Freedom-of-Information-FOI

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...