*ADMIN FEE WAIVED* DHL Admin Charge - "Invoices Remain Unpaid"

[turbocharge]

Ordered supplements from the USA some time ago, delivered by DHL. 2 months later a letter by post demanding VAT and £10 admin fee. Emailed them, and they responded

 

Dear Customer,

Thank you for writing to us and apologies for the delay in response.

Sorry for the inconvenience caused to you.

Whenever a product is imported to UK and the value of the product exceeds £15.00,

It is liable for import Duty and VAT payment for customs clearance.

The VAT calculation is done by the HMRC for the package which is imported to UK.

Please find attached customs document for customs reference number. UK Customs HMRC contact number 0300 200 3700.

The reason why the Duty & VAT was not updated is because this shipment was not updated in our collection file that is why you did not receive any call or text message from DHL regarding this payment before delivery. For more query on this kindly contact our Aviation team at 01332 857 082

Spoke to HM Customs who advised me that VAT at 20% was payable, couldn't comment on admin fees. I emailed offering to pay VAT, was told to ring an 084 number. I declined and asked for an email address but they said

Unfortunately, we do not have a direct email address for the head office. Hence, we request you to contact our head office at 0844 248 0777, option 6.

Emailed them again saying that I expect all correspondence to be dealt using the email address given on their letters. Waiting for a response.

[i hate bailiffs]

Administration fee is unlawful

It will cost them more to chase this than they will get back

[obiter dictum]

The Admin fee is not unlawful if procesing a shipment on behalf of HM revenue and customs

[SabreSheep]

Again OD you have not managed to find any evidence to support their lawfulness

 

The contract is between the seller and the parcel company

 

there is no statutory implement to force a 3rd party into a commercial contract without their knowledge or consent

 

This is the advice this forum offers until EVIDENCE appears that updates that guidance

[i hate bailiffs]

The Admin fee is not unlawful if procesing a shipment on behalf of HM revenue and customs

 

The administration fee is what dhl are trying to charge

the administration fee IS UNLAWFUL

The only fee that would be collected for HM revenue and customs is the vat

[obiter dictum]

I posted this up before direct from Royal Mail

 

I will locate that EVIDENCE

Edited November 4, 2015 by obiter dictum

[obiter dictum]

Dear Mr XXXXX

 

Thank you for contacting Royal Mail.

 

Royal Mail Group is authorised under the Postal Packets (Customs and Excise) Regulations 1986 and section 105 of the Postal Services Act 2000 to clear postal items through customs where no other arrangements have been made. This involves paying duty and taxes to HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) up front, dealing with all relevant HMRC paperwork and record keeping, and processing the payment collected from the recipient.

 

Our charges have been created as part of the Overseas Letter Post Scheme, created under Section 89 of the Postal Services Act 2000.

 

Certain Royal Mail products or services have the charges, terms and conditions detailed in documents called ‘Schemes’. These Schemes are published under the Postal Services Act 2000 and mean that it is not necessary for Royal Mail to have individual contracts with each and every customer purchasing these products or using these services.

 

You can read the relevant legislation at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/26/contents and our Overseas Letter Post Scheme can be found at http://www.royalmail.com/sites/defau...0March2015.pdf

 

As you can see these charges have been created legally under the relevant laws and Royal Mail are legally authorised to recover both the customs charges levied and any other charges payable.

 

I hope you have found this information helpful. If there is anything else we can help you with though, please let us know.

 

Regards

[obiter dictum]

This will cover all the other courier companies as well who levy a handling charge on behalf of HMRC

 

The Postal Services Act has now been amended as of 2011

 

In place of Universal Service Provider, "Postal Operator" has now been inserted

 

 

So the likes of TNT, DHL, FedEx etc can lawfully impose this handlig fee as they are licenced as "Postal Operators"

 

It is up to the recipient which carrier they decide to use as to the cost of that handling fee

Edited November 4, 2015 by obiter dictum

[Conniff]

As they are collecting on behalf of HMRC it should be HMRC that pays them.

But it does have a cost and if refusals to pay an admin charge increase I can see carriers refusing to do the service and the parcel being dumped in some customs warehouse somewhere awaiting collection.

That will be more than the admin charge.

[SabreSheep]

"(7)Any charge payable by virtue of this section may be recovered by the universal service provider concerned and in England and Wales and Northern Ireland may be so recovered as a civil debt due to him."

 

 

This would apply to the person that contracted the courier to do the delivery.

 

That would be the sender.

 

Royal Mail choose to try and make the recipient responsible but the legislation does not say this.,

 

It does not grant power to create a civil debt for a service to a third party that they did not request.

 

AND it is a CIVIL debt and therefore normal common law applies.

 

 

Also their terms and conditions are not relevant to the third party.

 

ONLY IF the receiver contracts the company to make the delivery directly do their T+Cs bind them.

 

In many cases it is the SELLER that decides the method of postage and therefore the contract T+Cs bind them and not the receiver.

 

SO other than a bad interpretation and mis application of statute, do you have any evidence that they can bind a third party to their T+Cs?

[Mike_hawk]

"(7)Any charge payable by virtue of this section may be recovered by the universal service provider concerned and in England and Wales and Northern Ireland may be so recovered as a civil debt due to him."

 

 

This would apply to the person that contracted the courier to do the delivery.

 

That would be the sender.

 

Royal Mail choose to try and make the recipient responsible but the legislation does not say this.,

 

It does not grant power to create a civil debt for a service to a third party that they did not request.

 

AND it is a CIVIL debt and therefore normal common law applies.

 

 

Also their terms and conditions are not relevant to the third party.

 

ONLY IF the receiver contracts the company to make the delivery directly do their T+Cs bind them.

 

SO other than a bad interpretation and mis application of statute, do you have any evidence that they can bind a third party to their T+Cs?

 

That's plainly wrong and very naive........ the consignee contracts the carriage, there's no getting away from incoterms. This has been discussed numerous times on this forum.

[SabreSheep]

Secondly the act states "Recovered"

 

Charging a fee is not a recovery

[obiter dictum]

Point one there is no such thing any more as a Universal service provider since 2011

 

Point 2 is that the postal operator under licence is allowed to invoice this processing charge on behalf of HMRC.

 

The legislation allowing that has already been posted

 

I will comment no more as that is referenced fact and not personal opinion

Edited November 4, 2015 by obiter dictum

[SabreSheep]

Yes it says charges may be recovered, but for it to be a recovery I think you will find that it needs to have been paid out first. AN ADMIN FEE IS BEING CHARGED AND NOT RECOVERED and therefore the legislation you posted does not support that

 

It also does not state as a matter of fact that a thrid party can be forced into a civil debt.

 

 

You have posted fact and chosen an interpretation.

 

I disagree with that interpretation

 

There is no case law to back your argument

 

Also just because something is provided by ROYAL MAIL does not make it cast iron evidence. Nor can it be said to be impartial.

 

So after examining the legislation I can still not support your position. THE FACTS do not support it.

[SabreSheep]

Point one there is no such thing any more as a Universal service provider since 2011

 

Point 2 is that the postal operator under licence is allowed to invoice this processing charge on behalf of HMRC.

 

 

ANd also your qutoe

 

"The Postal Services Act has now been amended as of 2011

 

In place of Universal Service Provider, "Postal Operator" has now been inserted"

 

SO point 2 is not really a point at all

[obiter dictum]

No your opinion does not suport the referenced facts

 

The legislation itself cannot be in error as we have to comply with that legislation, and i use primary and delegated legislation, Not Stare decisis

 

That was my very last comment and i am signing off now as there is nothing left to be proved and you are entitled to your own opinion

Edited November 4, 2015 by obiter dictum

[SabreSheep]

The primary legislation you referenced to was this

 

"(7)Any charge payable by virtue of this section may be recovered by the universal service provider concerned and in England and Wales and Northern Ireland may be so recovered as a civil debt due to him." which is from the link you referenced.

 

Clearly you cannot make any more comments as I have challenged your flawed interpretation of the primary legislation that you yourself referenced, which is not surprising as you yourself has said in the past that you have along history at a company that deals with post. Hardly a an unbiased position.

 

You may sleep now

Edited November 4, 2015 by SabreSheep
formatting

[ericsbrother]

all the common carriers do this as they process the customs paperwork on your behalf and deliver the item before they make this charge. The alternative is that evrything sits in their bonded warehouse until the recipient pays up or if they refuse the goods go back to where they came from.

I have said before, people are entitled to do their own customs paperwork, I did with my business but it is not straightforward and you can be charged fees for holding the goods in the warehouse if you dont do them in a timely manner.

The real problem is that there are many stupid people in this world who are ignorant of the laws of their own countries and then bleat about things they should have known about after the event. I agree that DHL do themselves a slight disservice by actually delivering items without collecting the duties and their charges upfront but this does mean they are not buried in parcels. UPS collcet the money at the time of delivery and if you dont want to pay the £10-15 charges then they send the goods back. Buy stuff from the EU and you wont have this problem. No doubt the OP likes the idea of unregulated medicines being available at the click of a button but there is always a price to pay

[Conniff]

Point one there is no such thing any more as a Universal service provider since 2011

 

Reforms introduced in 2011 and 2012 ensure that Royal Mail is the designated provider of the Universal Service until at least 2021 (10 years from the passing of the Postal Services Act 2011).

 

http://www.royalmailgroup.com/about-us/regulation/how-were-regulated/universal-service-obligation

[obiter dictum]

Yes that is correct but other private carriers can now do postal services as an end to end suppler of those postal services under licence

 

That is why postal operator has now replaced universal service provider under he act

 

In a few years time we will be getting every tom dick or harry delivering our postal products

 

TNT/Whisti as an example

 

If you require clarity might i suggest referencing OfCom who are the regulator

 

But that particular point is "off topic" to the original question raised by the OP

Edited November 5, 2015 by obiter dictum

[ericsbrother]

If anyone fancies suing DHL you will find they are a common carrier and have the same protections in law as RM. The railways used to be in the same boat but as they dont carry loose goods any more I am not sure if they still are. This is not the same as being a universal service provider which is about delivering everywhere for the same price under the same terms.

[SabreSheep]

Yes that is correct but other private carriers can now do postal services as an end to end suppler of those postal services under licence

 

That is why postal operator has now replaced universal service provider under he act

 

In a few years time we will be getting every tom dick or harry delivering our postal products

 

TNT/Whisti as an example

 

If you require clarity might i suggest referencing OfCom who are the regulator

 

But that particular point is "off topic" to the original question raised by the OP

 

 

I thought you were leaving this thread. 3 times now?

[sillygirl1]

Be aware that there are [problem] emails coming out claiming to be these delivery companies and they want money to redeliver a parcel, plus the customs fees etc....I've had a few lately even though I haven't ordered anything from abroad.

 

I did get money back from the Royal Mail who overcharged me VAT (I had a VAT exemption certificate at the time) and that took several months to happen. They had NO reason to charge the VAT as it was clearly stated on the parcel and accompanying invoice that it was a VAT exempt item coming from the USA - AND they overcharged me on the 'assumed price' of the item - which was an old needlework kit - costing 10 quid - they said it was 100 quid..

[turbocharge]

Had a call from DHL in response to my query. A pleasant gentleman reassured me that all carriers charge an admin fee, and he explained that the process of obtaining custom clearance was more involved than just pressing a few buttons on the computer. He agreed to waive the admin fee on this occasion (£8, which is currently £10). So I ended up paying the VAT amount.

 

Whilst I'm not convinced that, given the huge number of parcels they process, £10 is a fair charge. Neither am I sure about the legality of this under contract law as has been extensively debated on this and other threads.

 

I've decided to keep things simple for myself in future; either I will limit myself to ordering items costing no more than £15 (no VAT or admin fee payable), or I will factor in VAT and admin charge to the total cost to work out whether I'm saving money by importing.

[SabreSheep]

A good result

 

As for "everybody does it", "All the banks sold PPI - Didnt make it right then either"

An industry standard does not decide legality