Jump to content


Damaged auction lots, seller wont pay out


Dave421
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just need a bit of clarification on this. I run my own online business so I think I've got it right, but just good to have some clarification.

I bought some items via ibidder auction site. Typically trade and liquidated items for sale there. 

The items were men's fragrances and as I gather, auctioneers skip out of a load of the legal consumer right act jargon (from what I recall). Anyway. Several of these fragrances arrived smashed to bits. I logged it with the auction house with all photo's and evidence, and the staff responding even agreed with me that it was clearly damaged in transit. 

Anyway, rather than refund me right away or ask me to return said damaged items to get a refund (as should happen right? After all, they pay insurance for their own benefit, to protect themselves as the sender), they put a claim in without refunding me. It's like they have been waiting for compensation to pay me, and if that didn't happen, it's no money for me. 

To stop this getting long, the courier refused the claim because the items they sent were prohibited. Terms state anything made partly of wholly of glass won't be compensated and even so, fragrance rules is no more than 4 per parcel (they sent me around 10). Of course that's not my fault, they are responsible for shipment of goods and if they choose to cut corners, then regardless of it being trade lots, that's on them, not me.

They've breached compensation terms of the courier and yet because of them not getting compensation, they wont give me my money back, even though they agreed from the evidence that items were clearly damaged in transit. 

My thoughts on this (please tell me if I'm wrong):

First port of call as they aren't forthcoming via emails is to put the pressure on them. Truthful bad reviews on sites like trustpilot will surely make them want to do the right thing? (That step is already done, by all means I'm happy to hear that I was wrong or it was stupid). 

 If that fails then it's down to an LBA, not just for the amount lost out on but also for loss of value of other items in the package (glass, liquid damage to those items reducing the value) and reasonable hours lost where instead of putting into my own business, I've been dealing with them. 

 

The sum is low, some £50 or so. Yet it's the principal. I have to deal with customers day in, day out and if I cut corners by not fully insuring shipments, then it's me who takes the brunt and has to refund the customer anyway, so why should another businesses risk mean I've lost out?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

you sue the courier.

type in hermes in our search top right of the red banner and get reading up.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

you sue the courier.

type in hermes in our search top right of the red banner and get reading up.

dx

 


That's completely false info though.

The contract is between the sender and the courier.

The responsibility is purely on the sender. I.e... If I were to send you something and chose to dodge insurance, does that mean you lose out if it went missing? Of course not. I would have chosen to dodge insurance and if you didn't get your money back, then it's all under the consumer rights law.

I sue the courier even though the sender has sent goods which breaches the couriers t and c's of compensation?

If I sent a glass framed picture in the post, even though it was against the policy of the courier, but I just took a risk, does that mean if it breaks then it's tough **** and the customers problem?

The senders are responsible for making sure it's within the rules of the courier and if they think it's worth the risk, having insurance, then that isn't my fault. I have to sue the courier for what? Enforcing the rules? Not turning a blind eye to a sender who disregarded their rules? 

Edited by Dave421
Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing is that if you slow down a bit and read the Hermes stories on this forum, you would understand why you are completely wrong when you suggest that because the contract of carriage is between the sender and the courier, that you have no right to sue.

You say that you are running your own business and so you have got things right, but if this has been your understanding while you have been running your own business – then Big Fail.

On the other hand, I'm afraid that I disagree with the view of my site team colleague that you can definitely sue the courier.
 

In most circumstances you certainly could – but this case, the items were made of glass. Glass is on the prohibited items list and they were broken. Often we find that couriers rely on the prohibited items list to disclaim liability even for glass items when they have been lost.
In those cases, the fact that the item is made of glass is irrelevant and the courier is still liable. However, with the item is broken because it is glass – exactly the kind of risk which is foreseen in the prohibited items list – then I'm afraid that there is probably no claim.
The courier service has made it clear that they won't be held liable for the consequences of the particular sensitivity of certain items – and the sender accepts that as part of the contract.

What is interesting though is that you are suggesting that the item has been insured. Do you know this for a fact? I would venture to say that if the courier has accepted insurance money for an item which is on the prohibited items list, then I think that overrides the prohibited items list and on that basis I agree with my site team colleague that you can sue the courier.

I'm afraid that your story is really not at all clear.

I think we need to know the identity of the seller, the identity of the courier. Was insurance taken out?
As the seller accessible in terms of knowing their name and address for the issue of a County Court claim?

The value of the item is irrelevant and in fact if it is only £50 then I think that it is excellent that you are prepared to enforce your rights for such a small sum when many other people would simply write it off.

 

We can certainly help you but you need to answer my questions and set the story out in a proper chronological timeline and a bit less of the narrative please
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance may be arranged to cover say fire, earthquake, theft, but not breakage when there is no other underlying cause for the loss.

 

So it is possible for Insurance to be valid with exclusions applying and for items to be excluded under Couriers t&c's.

 

 

 

 

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

I think the existing system is that you declare the item and the value – and then they go on to sell you the insurance for it. It would be easy enough for them to make it clear that the insurance for glass objects related only to loss.
They don't.

In fact on our experience here, Hermes routinely tries to disclaim liability for insured items which are lost simply because they apparently prohibited.

And of course, this is not a regulated insurance provided by a "firm". It's the courier's own little sideline. No doubt millions of items are successfully delivered every year. Millions of those are probably insured and the "premium" goes directly into the pocket of the courier has an additional little earner.

I think that if they have accepted insurance for something that has been correctly declared, then they have effectively waived their rights to rely on the prohibited items list. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks all for the responses.

As of part 1, hermes. Now the reason I might have seemed hasty was because I genuinely deal with Hermes all day long regarding parcels. When someone says about suing the courier and then mentions Hermes, I wouldn't think about looking as in my opinion (and some 500+ parcels sent that way), I've never had a relatable situation like this. 

Anyway to answer you in detail...

I bought off i-bidder auctions. The specific business involved was globalauctioneers who are selling off liquidated Debenhams goods. You pay about an hour after the auction has ended, they forward invoice to their shipping department and get a quote for shipping (yes, to be honest they could say £10000 and according to their terms you have to pay it, otherwise forfeit already paid for lots), but it's Debenhams, so not a scam. 

I come along and... Well... great items. Nothing mentioned in the terms with buyer warnings to shipping. 

On this specific auction lots (every Friday there) next one is

WWW.I-BIDDER.COM

Bid Live at Global Auctioneers's Friday Mega Make-up, Cosmetics & Fragrances! 30th July 2021! auction

 . I won around 10 lots (more like 8 but a few lots included multiples so 10 fragrances sent to me). As clearly indicated buyers have to forward the invoice which for a shipping quote, I did, I paid invoice for shipping....done...


No idea as to what courier they choose. Just went with it, had no choice. They chose parcelforce..

Sorry, I wasn't trying to promote anything, I pasted it in, saw it went to the big banner, deleted it but it still remained. Sorry folks

Edited by Dave421
Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree though, couriers do have an obligation but so do senders. 

If I were to send 20kg of cocaine and it was seized, does that mean the courier is liable? If it's black and white then you can only hold your hands up. 

In this case, the entire business of shipping was in globalauctioneers hands. Forced with no choice... a la...

Pay for won lots in 48 hours, if you don't then winning lots are re-lotted and you can expect a ban on i-bidder platform. 

And now stranger still... if you pay for lots... yet fail to accept and pay their postage request (whatever amount it may be) then you "forfeit" won lots and get nothing. 

People may say, why bother? Well I've had Givenchy Gentleman for under £15 inc delivery (it's £45+ in shops). So yes, it's worth going for a true Debenhams liquidation seller. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could save a lot of time by simply the answering questions.

I understand that the seller was a company called global auctioneers is this correct?

I understand that the courier company was parcelforce is this correct?

I understand that the items weren't insured is this correct?

You can sue you either of them. Which one do you want to go for?

 

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...