Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Additionally, this case has some similarity to your own situation   but do make sure that you read up about the mediation stories elsewhere in the Hermes threads  
    • Please have a look at this thread which has some similarities to your own case   and in particular, have a look at the rather wordy assessment of the potential arguments for the forthcoming mediation    
    • Looking back over the thread I see You sent a laptop computer to a repairer using Hermes. This was in about August 2020 the laptop was worth £200 and you paid the Hermes insurance to cover it the laptop never arrived and eventually Hermes told you that it was lost. You put in a claim and Hermes refused to accept your claim and they also refused to honour the insurance contract Hermes suddenly changed their story and said that in fact the laptop had been damaged and therefore had been destroyed. They told you that because it was a laptop, it was on their prohibited items list and therefore was not covered by the insurance policy which they had sold you they have provided no evidence that the laptop was damaged – although it's not clear if you ask them for any evidence. You eventually issued proceedings they have defended on the basis that the laptop was damaged and that it was a prohibited item they have also suggested that the money you are claiming is beyond the level of the insurance cover of £200. In saying that the sum claimed is beyond the insurance cover, they have lumped together the court costs along with the value of the laptop.   I understand that you have a recording of a conversation where Hermes our first of all telling you on the telephone that the item is lost and then in the same conversation they go on to say that it has been damaged. Please can you confirm this. (It would be helpful if you could send a copy of this recorded conversation to ask confidentially at our admin email address please.) You are now set for mediation on Thursday. Have you read around the various threads here looking at other people's experience of the mediation process? I have to say that there is a definite suspicion with me that the item was lost all the time but because we have made such an issue that use of their prohibited items list to declined responsibility for a lost item is unfair and unenforceable – because it is an abuse of the concept behind prohibited items, that they then decided to say that it was damaged because that might be a sustainable argument for relying on their prohibited items list. Of course this would be a very serious piece of deception if it were true. Who knows if it's true? It's just a sense that this could be a possible scenario.   First of all, do make sure that you have read around the threads relating to the mediation process in relation to Hermes claims. There are several excellent summaries of how it all went and they tend to be similar enough to imagine that your mediation experience will follow broadly the same route. This means that in principle Hermes are prepared to pay you out something, but they will want to salvage their pride by getting you to compromise. Furthermore, the mediator will probably see it as a point of honour that they also managed to produce a solution in which you have compromised in some way. This may possibly mean that you are being asked to give up your court fees and accept simply the cost of the laptop. We would recommend very strongly that you stand your ground. You have an extremely strong case and if it went to court for a hearing by a judge, it is highly likely that the judge will find in your favour and you would have an excellent judgement which would probably be critical of Hermes and their systems and which we would then be pleased to publicise around the Internet. This means that Hermes has a lot to lose reputationaly and also if there was criticism of the use of the prohibited items list, this would be devastating for Hermes and I would envisage that we would be encourage a lot of people who had been denied a remedy so far to go back and claim retrospectively from Hermes. Your main points to the mediator will be: that first of all they spent several weeks telling you that the item was lost and it was only at the very end when they decided to rely on their prohibited items list that they suddenly changed their story and said that the item was damaged. You need to tell the mediator that you don't believe it and that you think that this is simply an excuse to deny compensation for the item which was really lost all the time. Tell the mediator that you will be putting this point to the judge and you will let the judge form their own conclusions but that you have no doubt that the judge will consider that in all probability Hermes are not being completely truthful. Tell the mediator that you understand very well that the use of a prohibited items list to deny liability for items which are lost is completely unfair and unenforceable and that is why Hermes switch their story to say that the item was damaged. Being a prohibited item could not affect at all the risk of the item being lost. There is no reason at all why it is more likely that a prohibited item is lost then any other item that Hermes carried. Tell the mediator also that Hermes are apparently asking for proof of the value of the laptop. Tell the mediator that you want Hermes to prove that it was damaged and that if they cannot do this you will be asking them to provide their evidence in court. Tell the mediator that the judge will agree that they should provide evidence of the damage and that as you are quite sure that there is no evidence of the damage, that the judge will agree with you that this is simply an excuse to avoid liability. In any event, the laptop was properly declared as a laptop and not only that Hermes were happy to sell you insurance for it. Tell the mediator that even if the item was on the prohibited items list, the fact that they knew that it was a laptop and your undertook to deliver it. The fact that they knew that it was a laptop and agreed to ensure it means that even if the prohibited items list might normally be binding, in this case the second of/collateral contract of insurance demonstrated that being a prohibited item was no longer part of the contract. Tell the mediator also, that when you enter into a contract with Hermes through their website, the prohibited items list is not prominent and also the list is so extensive – more than 70 items – that it is impossible really to go through it all and to understand. On the other hand, the insurance proposal is much more prominent – and this is clearly because Hermes want to make money out of the insurance and the prohibited items list is really a full-back device to allow them to escape liability if they can. Tell the mediator that it is clear that Hermes are very happy to take people's insurance money and then later on refuse to honour the insurance for any spurious ground that they can come up with.   Now we have to deal with the issue of the recording. It would be very helpful if you would let us have a private confidential copy of this recording so we can understand exactly what has been said. However, you should understand that you are completely entitled to record conversations. There is nothing against the law. However, there would be difficulty if you try to publish it or to make it available for non-legitimate purposes. In this case, our view is that if you needed it in a court case then you would be entitled to use it – although you would have to ask the permission of the judge first. I think you should refer to the recording and tell the mediator that you have a recording of Hermes telling you that the item was lost and then changing their mind and tell you that it was damaged but it was prohibited. Hermes will try to say that it is unlawful for you to have taken the recording. Hermes will also try to say that you would not be allowed to use the recording in court. I can imagine that the mediator themselves will not understand what the rules are for privately recorded conversations. The position is this. You are entitled to use the recording for your own private purposes – and this includes for a court proceeding. To use the recording in court you would have first to ask the judge for permission. However, there is nothing against you making a transcript of the recording – in other words making a written record of the sound recording and producing that in court. I think you should make it clear to Hermes and also the mediator – if the mediator seems to be telling you that the recording is unlawful – that you disagree and that at the end of day it is a matter for the judge. Tell the mediator that you will only need to use the recording if Hermes denies what has been said on the recording. In other words if they tell a different story – which is clearly not true. In that case, I think you will have little difficulty in persuading the judge to listen to the recording. Your argument would be that Hermes are about to give a different version of events and which is untrue and which is in fact misleading the court. You would say to the judge that in this case, the judge should grant you permission to produce the recording court to show that Hermes is misleading the court. Tell the mediator that it is on this basis that you will reuse the recording. Tell the mediator that if Hermes will agree that the recording is true and will confirm the conversation that was held and that they did say that the item was lost and that eventually they change their mind and said it was damaged, then you will not need to produce a recording in court because there will be no dispute over the conversation. You will need to be very assertive about all of this because you will come up against resistance both from Hermes – and probably the mediator. I suggest that you start making a transcript of the recording – maybe you would like to publish that here. There is no problem about this. And once again, it would be helpful to hear the recording ourselves if you would forward it to us in confidence. Also, you can tell the mediator that if they recording is accepted into evidence and the judge listens to it, it then enters the public domain and you will be entitled to distribute it over social media. At the end of the day, Hermes are likely to offer you the entire value of the laptop and they will try to withhold your court fees. There is absolutely no reason for you to accept this compromise – and you should tell the mediator that you refuse to compromise and that you want everything. Tell the mediator that the benefit to Hermes is that it will not go any further and they will avoid a judgement against them and they will avoid exposure in the court and in the public domain. For Hermes, that would be a big win. Please let us know if you have any questions  
    • HI DX   I didn't report the matter to the ICO because Barclays apologised for passing the account on to the DCA and compensated for their error. I did recall the account being terminated by the CCA notice in 2008 but could not find it. The bank, therefore disagreed that the account was statute barred from 2014. I sent a DSAR for copies of termination notices etc,  but the bank could not locate anything. The account was always "live" until the settled status in 2019. Settled accounts stays on ones file for a further 6 years after a settled status, the consequence is a 17 year hit of negative data.   PW
    • Thanks TOR. Funnily enough I came across that very complaint last night whilst browsing. I have no doubt that I have a good case for ombudsman. If I was continuing paying this by the time I finish I will have paid 8600 or thereabouts for a loan of 2000. Absolutely shocking. I know for the most part it is made clear at the start but I was desperate. My weekly payment is 50 and last week I offered 150 per week as my bf was going to try help me.I told them in the complaint that 150 was not even affordable to me but to try and clear the loan ASAP I was getting other help. They rejected 150 per week which is shocking also. 
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1803 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

I can imagine that the only issues might be whether or not they are capable of admitting a wheelchair, although somebody else my know better.

 

I wonder whether it wouldn't be a reasonable requirement for the wheelchair to be up to turn around as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that as most of the larger supermarkets claim to be disabled user friendly and even provide those mobility scooter/wheelchairs then the space should be wide enough for one of those plus space for a normal shopper to pass with their trolley.

 

I suspect that these aisles seem to be much narrower over the Christmas period.

 

I would think that you might get an answer from a Health and Safety person.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pages 5 and 6 in the document attached give the recommended space for a variety of disabilities.

 

Interesting document.

inclusive-mobility.pdf

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Making access to goods and services

easier for disabled customers

 

And another.

 

sp5.pdf

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

36" is the minimum requirement? Wow, can't say that 3 feet exactly sounds like a wide space for a supermarket aisle. You'd have to institute a one way system at that kind of width.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the most relevant issue for me is the likelihood of aisles being cluttered with displays etc.

Even though I practically live next door, I no longer use Aldi at all because of how cluttered and narrow the aisles are - I'm too wary of getting stuck to use wheelchair or scooter and can't stand in the ever present queues long enough to walk.

Luckily, I have two post offices within reach because the one in W H Smith is also inaccessible, being right at the back of a store crammed with displays blocking even the main aisle. Complaints regarding the lack of access are generally met with complete disinterest.

The comments in the first document shared by CitizenB regarding slopes were also interesting - I though it was just me being totally unfit that caused even the slightest slope to be pretty much unmanageable, but it seems lots of manual wheelchair users find them difficult. The pedestrian crossing outside the building where I live is a case in point - even my son can't get me up the slope at the far end so we have to brave the dropped kerb on the junction instead. Perhaps I should be speaking to the local council?

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking this is all covered by the terms of the Equality Act and the duty to make reasonable adjustments so as to not put service users at a significant disadvantage when accessing goods or services. Basically a disabled person should be able to navigate a store as easily as a non-disabled user. Any publicly accessible building should therefore be equally accessible to disabled and able-bodied users within the confines of that disability - a wheelchair user for example should not only be able to use the service having left the wheelchair at the door. There is no specific width requirement, merely that the disabled user should be able to access without any special provisions and with the use of whatever aid is required to do so (wheelchair, walking stick etc)

 

Duty to make adjustments

 

(1)Where this Act imposes a duty to make reasonable adjustments on a person, this section, sections 21 and 22 and the applicable Schedule apply; and for those purposes, a person on whom the duty is imposed is referred to as A.

 

(2)The duty comprises the following three requirements.

 

(3)The first requirement is a requirement, where a provision, criterion or practice of A's puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled, to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage.

 

(4)The second requirement is a requirement, where a physical feature puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled, to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage.

 

(5)The third requirement is a requirement, where a disabled person would, but for the provision of an auxiliary aid, be put at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled, to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take to provide the auxiliary aid.

 

(6)Where the first or third requirement relates to the provision of information, the steps which it is reasonable for A to have to take include steps for ensuring that in the circumstances concerned the information is provided in an accessible format.

 

(7)A person (A) who is subject to a duty to make reasonable adjustments is not (subject to express provision to the contrary) entitled to require a disabled person, in relation to whom A is required to comply with the duty, to pay to any extent A's costs of complying with the duty.

 

(8)A reference in section 21 or 22 or an applicable Schedule to the first, second or third requirement is to be construed in accordance with this section.

 

(9)In relation to the second requirement, a reference in this section or an applicable Schedule to avoiding a substantial disadvantage includes a reference to—

 

(a)removing the physical feature in question,

 

(b)altering it, or

 

©providing a reasonable means of avoiding it.

 

(10)A reference in this section, section 21 or 22 or an applicable Schedule (apart from paragraphs 2 to 4 of Schedule 4) to a physical feature is a reference to—

 

(a)a feature arising from the design or construction of a building,

 

(b)a feature of an approach to, exit from or access to a building,

 

©a fixture or fitting, or furniture, furnishings, materials, equipment or other chattels, in or on premises, or

 

(d)any other physical element or quality.

 

Failure to comply with duty

 

(1)A failure to comply with the first, second or third requirement is a failure to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments.

 

(2)A discriminates against a disabled person if A fails to comply with that duty in relation to that person.

 

(3)A provision of an applicable Schedule which imposes a duty to comply with the first, second or third requirement applies only for the purpose of establishing whether A has contravened this Act by virtue of subsection (2); a failure to comply is, accordingly, not actionable by virtue of another provision of this Act or otherwise.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been known to 'accidentally' drag stuff off shelves as I'm passing in particularly narrow spaces - that tends to get their attention.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been known to 'accidentally' drag stuff off shelves as I'm passing in particularly narrow spaces - that tends to get their attention.

 

What can they say ? If they make to much of a fuss, tell them you want to make a complaint..

Link to post
Share on other sites
What can they say ? If they make to much of a fuss, tell them you want to make a complaint..

 

It's amazing how as soon as you may be causing damage, they are suddenly much more willing to listen to complaints about the width of their aisles!

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...