Summons issued against Parrcel2Go

[dx100uk]

its war

 

hit quote on this post and try typing

[Its WAR]

53 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

its war

 

hit quote on this post and try typing

Is this working?

[dx100uk]

looks like i've sorted it now.

 

dx

[Its WAR]

Thx DX.

 

Hi MattyPrice. I made a mistake stating it was Royal Mail 48, it was in fact ParcelForce 48.

 

The thing is the product I chose was described as Parcelforce 48 (that is why I clicked on it, because I wanted that service rather than any of the alternatives on offer).

 

What P2G supplied was not actually that product but a cheaper version of it which excluded the £100 compensation which the product called Parcelforce 48 always comes with.

 

I contend it should not have been described as ParcelForce 48 but called by another name distinguishing the two different  products.

 

But also I argue Contra proferentem, also known as "interpretation against the draftsman", which is a doctrine of contractual interpretation providing that, where a promise, agreement or term is ambiguous, the preferred meaning should be the one that works against the interests of the party who provided the wording.

 

Nowhere in P2G order process does it describe the differences between what I ordered and what I got. They did try to sell me additional insurance which is ambiguous as I chose not to buy extra insurance as I expected the product to already have it.

[dx100uk]

stick this working thread now

all the info is here from day one.

the other to save confusion i will hide.

[Its WAR]

I made a mistake . I was trying to decide how to deal with being away and missing the hearing that I forgot to send the £25 hearing fee and two days later the claim was struck out. (It turns out I couldn't have traveled anyway due to Covid restrictions). I have now advised the defendants that I will be issuing a new claim in 14 days and they might decide to take the chance to settle.