Jump to content


Another stolen Hermes item - Razer laptop


Recommended Posts

So I have my date .. 24th May.  Right at the top it says "Preliminary hearing will take place to determine whether there is any contractual relationship between the parties and/or if the claim should be struck out"

 

...so everything hinges on the rights of 3rd parties act being upheld at the hearing? 

 

Thanks!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well have a look at the contract (rights of third parties) act so that you understand some of the principles.

Broadly speaking you enjoy all the rights of a direct contracting party if you are either a named beneficiary of the contract or you are part of a class of person who might reasonably be expected to be a beneficiary of the contract.
In this case your position is that you are both.
You are a named beneficiary in that they are clear that you have used Packlink in order to deliver your property to a purchaser.
It is you who have commissioned the contract – you have brought into existence by organising the delivery.
Clearly you have done this for your own benefit and in any event, the sender of any parcel who arranges for a parcel to be delivered is clearly intending to benefit from the delivery contract.
It would be extraordinary if Hermes try to argue that there was no benefit to you or that they could not foresee any benefit to you and that in some way you are simply sacrificing yourself by paying money for a parcel to be delivered simply out of the goodness of your own heart.
Also you should make the point that in any event Packlink is domiciled in Spain and that if Hermes were allowed to escape liability on this basis, it would effectively be an unfair term of their contract with you and therefore unenforceable under the consumer rights act.

Hermes must be nuts to go to court on this because if they lose – as they surely will, then the game is up for them.

When you get the judgement in your favour we will be asking you to get a transcript of the judgement and we will pay for it and we will then use the judgement in support of other claims against Hermes and the other players in the courier industry who tried to rely on the same get-out excuse.

These people are so stupid that they are blinded by their own short term greed.
Who is the Hermes person who is signing off all these documents?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you!  You mean the Hermes legal rep noted on the documents I have?  Also baffled that they would take this route given how clear cut it seems to be - which is why I would like to be prepared.  Am I allowed to ask them ahead of time on what planet they think this doesn't apply?  Or better to wait for my day?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wait for your Big Day.
Maybe it is still part of the bluff game and they will come to their senses and make you an offer expecting you to back down and accept a compromise. However, stand your ground.
If you get a judgement on this then frankly it will be a brilliant result for you and for everybody else.
Yes I was interested to know who is the person who signing off on these documents. Who is their legal person. Is it Chloe something or other?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you could usefully do would be to send Hermes an SAR.

I would expect it to produce clear evidence that they knew that you were the sending party and that will put it beyond doubt that they were able to identify you as a beneficiary under the contract.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chloe Higgs – our Chloe. Bless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

..so it's my big day tomorrow - still no contact from EVRi - wish me luck!!

 

Also occurred to me that I have emails between EVRi themselves and I after I reported the issue to them initially as I knew they were the end courier.  They were happy to engage with me, doesn't this show that they recognized that I was the beneficiary at that stage?

 

Thanks!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck!

CAG Site Team and Forum Helpers are unpaid volunteers

Over the years CAG has probably helped hundreds of thousands of people, only a small number of people come back and let us know what happened or to say thank you

and an even smaller number of people ever think to make a donation.

If you are able, without leaving yourself short, consider donating, all donations go towards Site hosting and maintenance - help us stay live for future people in need.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

 

Essential Reading: Dealing with Customer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you just remind us what is meant to be happening tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Have you done your reading about the contracts (right of third parties)? act

Link to post
Share on other sites

..I have read the act yes, and all of your comments based on it.

 

This seems to be the crux:

 

Right of third party to enforce contractual term.

(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if—

(a)the contract expressly provides that he may, or

(b)subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him.

(2)Subsection (1)(b) does not apply if on a proper construction of the contract it appears that the parties did not intend the term to be enforceable by the third party.

 

What is (2) driving at though?  I'm clearly qualified under 1b as previously discussed here.

 

thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means that it must be possible to recognise that you were an intended beneficiary of the contract .

 

Here you are either the person who sent the parcel in which case clearly they realise that the parcel is being sent on your behalf or you are the recipient of the parcel in which clearly the parcel is being sent for your benefit .

 

Either way, you are clearly intended to benefit from the contract and therefore you have third-party rights

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ... makes (2) sound a bit redundant but whatever.

 

So key points:

- I'm a clear beneficiary and EVRi engaged me as such in the support email thread I have

- Therefore I have rights under 3rd party to engage EVRi directly

 

I think that's all they want to cover today.  I'll ask for transcript either way.

 

Wish me luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't be able to get a transcript. You have to apply through a transcription agency .

 

Let us know the result and also please send me the details of the case name and number and which court by direct message and I will order the transcript for you

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK .. notes to follow, but the summary is:

  • Judge interprets clause 2 as meaning that the EVRi/inpost contract may prevent me claiming as a 3rd party and as such EVRi are being asked to submit that contract in due course for review at a further hearing (they didn't show up of course)
  • He thinks I should be pursuing inpost - I thought this wasn't possible

..if point one is correct it makes a bit of a mockery of the 3rd party legislation - but that's just my view.

 

I'll dm you the details as requested shortly.

 

Thanks!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to get something in writing for my clarity, and might be useful to others - the flow goes like this:

 

- Sell something on ebay, you arrange shipping using Packlink (Spain registered, hard to litigate against) - your contract is with them

- Packlink sub to inpost

- Inpost have an agreement (of what kind I do not know) to deliver parcels that enter via inpost

 

So in theory I could pursue either EVRi or Inpost (as a 3rd party) and if judge is correct there might be something in either contract to exclude me from exercising that right.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

correct.

 

You need to see the contract. They had an opportunity to produce it and they have chosen not to. They are well resourced and well advised and they should realise the significance of the contract.

Frankly the judge was wrong to have given them a second chance to produce the contract. Without the evidence the judge had simply found in your favour and then it will be up to the other side to appeal if they wanted to.

(Don't tell the judge that he was wrong)

Link to post
Share on other sites

...I felt like the judge wasn't on my side perhaps :-)

 

So if their contract with inpost, or inposts contract with packlink (if that's where this heads) protects them from 3rd party claims then I'm out of luck?  I dont really get the point of the clause which allows this to be honest, it's not even a loophole it's so obvious - any lawyer would immediately ensure this is in a contract to protect their interests surely.

 

I guess for the sake of £700 I can hope that EVRi might not want to share parts of their contract - not exactly good press to see them try to worm out of well intended protective legistlation like that. 

 

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...