Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone, I'm in need of some urgent advice please. Apologies for the long post - I felt it was better to provide all the information clearly at the outset.   I purchased an office stool (that cost £104.39) online, which was delivered on 18th May. After assembling the stool, I found it wasn't suitable for me, so contacted the seller on 27th May to initiate a return.    The seller told me that there would be a "£24.95 handling charge" for returning the item. He quoted the terms and conditions from their website to back this up (please see below), although this is confusing because 35% of £104.39 does not equal £24.95: "Please note that furniture items are subject to a 35% restocking fee. Furniture returns will only be accepted if the item is unused and still in the original packaging. All furniture returns must be made within 14 days of delivery."   I told the seller that, under the Consumer Contract Regulations, the trader cannot charge any fees in the event of cancellation. The response was: "If you not happy to pay for the collection charge for us to arrange this with a courier to uplift then you can send this back to our office directly arranging your own courier, please note we would not cover the cost if this is the case."    I agreed to this, because from my reading of the CCR I thought that the customer was responsible for return delivery:  (5) The consumer must bear the direct cost of returning goods under paragraph (2), unless— (a)the trader has agreed to bear those costs, or (b)the trader failed to provide the consumer with the information about the consumer bearing those costs, required by paragraph (m) of Schedule 2, in accordance with Part 2. Also, from getting quotations online I thought I could arrange delivery, for what was at the time a smallish box, for a much cheaper price (£7-8).   However, when I tried to disassemble the stool for return, it would not come apart. I contacted the manufacturer for further guidance, but the only how-to video they had available was not applicable to the model, and the manufacturer representative was unable to provide further instructions.   I have now been sent a 'built box' to return the stool without the need to disassembly. The issue is that the size of the box means that shipping charges are now £30 minimum i.e. more than the 'handling charge' the seller quoted.    Am I obliged to pay this return fee, or should this actually be something the seller should pay for? 🤔 I feel like I may have two potential arguments against it: Return delivery would not be nearly so expensive if the stool had come apart as the manufacturer said it should.  The Consumer Contract Regs state that a consumer is not responsible for return shipping if the trader has not provided information about the right to cancel and about return shipping on a durable medium.    What even counts as a durable medium? The dispatch note that came with the stool had no such information, while the order confirmation email simply had a link to their terms and conditions (which includes the statement about the restocking fee quoted above).   Does this clause mean the seller is still obliged to pay return shipping? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! I'm starting to stress a little about this because the 28-day cancellation-and-return period will be in two working days (although I realise that may be extended if it can be considered that the seller did not provide the required cancellation information).    Thank you in advance!  
    • so what you mean is that "each" parcel contained a single dinner plate. Thank you that clarifies things. As you been advised by my site team colleague, please make sure that you read around a substantial number of the Hermes stories on the sub- forum. You will get to understand the principles and also the similarities and approach from Hermes. Of course Hermes is being abusive of the system because they exploit a taxpayer funded under resourced justice system simply to put their customers into a kind of triage where only the most persistent finally get through to the end which is almost always – mediation – and then will manage to get their money or most of their money. Hermes are abusive of this system and of course they are actually going to spend more money than the value of your damaged items trying to smash you down. Because their attempts to crush you are effectively subsidised by the taxpayer, they don't really care. Make sure you understand what they will say about the prohibited items list because your plates are made of china or porcelain and will be prohibited items, according to Hermes. On the other hand, they were correctly declared and they were accepted for delivery. The values were correctly declared – and once again after you have completed your reading, you will understand the significance of this. Hermes will also try to say that you didn't have a contract with them and you should sue packlink – who conveniently – are based in Spain outside the jurisdiction. They were say that you are attacking the wrong people. Once again, when you have completed your reading you will understand the standard reply to this. Once again you will discover that this is Hermes being abusive of the system and misleading their customers as to what their rights are. Make a formal complaint to Hermes. Tell them that they are responsible. Don't give them a deadline, but wait a reasonable time – 10 to 14 days – after which you will send them a letter of claim if they haven't put their hands up by then or if you have had no response. By that time, you will have done enough reading to understand the way it goes but we will advise you and support you all the way.   Come back here when you have been knocked back by Hermes and we will take you through the next step  
    • @BankFodder is this ok to send to all contacts at aviva regarding the final notification debt letter theyve sent   I received your correspondence regarding the notice of debt dated 8th June received 12th June giving me 7 days to make payment. I don’t owe this money and the policy was taken out by my brother by a fraud in which you were complicit. The police are aware I have a crime reference number 1XXXXX this fraud is being investigated by PC XX, she will be emailing yourselves I give full authorisation for her to discuss any aspects of this case with yourselves.
    • Hi @BankFodder. If you would care to look at the original post from last night it details 2 Parcels and Contents and also the approx value . The value is the combined price of the 2 Parcels excluding postage.  In my reply to you i stated the contents were a Dinner Plate. That was 1  in each of the parcels. And No i did not purchase extra insurance as the standard £25 would cover each parcel
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Business Insurance Policy broker cant find policy wording to support my claim.


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

In 2016 my business was subject to a fraud regarding a Rolex watch which we had taken in as part exchange from a local and well known customer. We took his steel Rolex and he paid a few thousand £s extra and bought a pre owned gold one from us.  Having bought his watch, part of the deal was we would not sell it until he returned from over wintering  in Australia after a few months. Upon his return he was planning to either part exchange the pre owned gold one back and buy a brand new version of it,  or he might like to simply  buy his original one back.  The watch therefore sat in my safe for nearly a year. At which point we attempted to contact the customer only to find his obituary. He was ill before he travelled so we suspect he knew he might not return.

 

It was a few weeks before Christmas so we put his (which was now ours) watch in the window (as it was) to sell and sold it within a few days. Had it not sold before Christmas we  would have sent it to Rolex for service and refurbishment, and subsequently offer it for a higher price in the spring (Rolex would also have identified it as fake). Two years later the customer that bought the watch returned it quite upset after he had sent it to a national watch buyer to sell, but was told it was a high end counterfeit (ie not your $20 Chinese throwaway, but one purposely manufactured to deceive).

 

After some checking ourselves, we refunded the customer and spoke with our insurers.

 

Our business insurance provided all risks cover with a few exclusions (terrorism etc) and was a very well known policy that many/most UK retail jewellers take up. Indeed we had held the policy for many years.  Fraud is an insured risk.

 

It is my view that a customer selling us a fake watch is a fraud. The broker enquired with underwriters and they have said it is not covered. I am not satisfied and have asked the broker to send me the wording of the policy so I can read the exclusions. I am told they have searched their archive but cannot find the policy so cannot send it to me. They have asked me if I have my copy? I haven't found my policy document either and fear I threw it away upon renewal. But wonder, if I do keep looking, whether it would be a good tactic to let them have my copy. We have been renovating the house for a year and the attic is absolutely chock a block with stuff, a thorough search through the old books would take a week or more.  I have suggested if they cannot find the wording sold with my policy they should settle the claim. Clearly they cannot reject the claim without the wording? It sounds odd to me that they even need to retrieve the policy to find the wording. 

 

I am quite certain a claim for fraud is an insured risk. I guess somebody has to judge whether the transaction was fraudulent first though. I am quite happy to issue a summons if the insurers reject my claim by trying to suggest the risk was not covered (unless it obviously isn't), which is why we need the wording.

 

Comments and a strategy would be very useful to understand whether or how to proceed. The claim is for £3500.

Edited by Its WAR

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that if the wording of your policy does cover "fraud", it will probably mean the criminal offence of fraud.  So far as I'm aware, that would require your original customer - whom I think you say you knew well - to have known it was a fake and to be acting with dishonest intent when he sold it to you in 2016.

 

So can you satisfy your insurer (or a court) that your long-standing customer was acting dishonestly when you bought it from him?

 

3 hours ago, Its WAR said:

 

It is my view that a customer selling us a fake watch is a fraud.

 

I don't think a court or your insurer will necessarily agree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance companies are required to keep copies of policy wordings they have issued for at least 6 years beyond when the last related policy was in force. It is a requirement of FCA to have robust administration systems in place to ensure they can underwrite the risks they have accepted. If they don't keep copies of wordings, they might not be able to satisfy FCA that they have sufficient resources to administer and settle any claims they received.

 

Agree with @Manxman in exile
that you will have to prove fraud which is difficult as the deceased may have thought the watch was genuine.

 

Also surely your business should have been more diligent in checking the watch. I would find it difficult to believe Insurers would cover mistakes made by jewellers in accepting fake watches. 

 

There was opportunity to have taken the watch to a Rolex specialist before the original trade was done and given the value of these, this would be a reasonable requirement of Insurers to expect a business to have done.

 

Don't think I would take the Insurers to Court without a lot more thought about this. If you cannot find policy wording and the Insurers cannot provide it, may be the option is to ask for your premiums back (providing no other claims made) as the Insurers cannot prove they have been providing Insurance.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Manxman. I agree. I cannot show my customer acted with intent as he is now dead. He may well not have known his watch was fake. Although I argue the one fact we know is that  nevertheless the watch was fake. 

 

I agree UB. Surely the documents must be available via the broker and in any case they would know who the underwriters were for that year. If they cannot find the policy wording document (even if I can, which I haven't yet), I think that should strengthen my claim. I accept I should have been more diligent, but as we were not expecting to sell the watch, it went straight into my safe rather than to Rolex for verification. I suppose really, because my customer spent £5000 on the one he part exchanged for, my guard was down. I accept the point entirely the insurer would want to cover my mistake, but my mistake is not what I am claiming is covered, I am claiming a fraud.........and that is covered. Of course lots of other things are covered even if the jeweller makes a mistake, eg  by turning away from the counter and leaving an  item more easily taken by snatch and run. Or la mistake leaving a display counter unlocked and an item mysteriously disappearing. So I think I have a valid argument, just not yet a very strong one. I would have regarded myself as a watch specialist but just made a mistake that would not have happened had we not had the circumstances of this transaction. The watch would normally have gone immediately for service, refurb and verification. Surely the insurer can prove cover simply by looking at the invoice, sadly it is the policy wording I need to show the strength of cover, more particularly the exclusions.

 

And Woody, yes, I don't know the insurance company or underwriters. Probably Lloyds of London. I expect the broker knows and will be able to turn up the paperwork from them, even if they have lost theirs.......which I find hard to believe.

 

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...