Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks. I do live in England but do not own any property.   I have not heard from the banks for a while so will go back to them to see what they can offer.
    • Hi Uncle and Homer,   Thanks for your replies. To uncle see that's what I don't understand as well. One place is telling me I am classed as homeless as my Section 21 now runs out in under 56 days (26 days nows) yet another place is telling me, what you are saying, that I'm not homeless until I'm evicted!   My homeless housing officer has already told me not to leave my home and stay put, which I have no intention of leaving anyway at the moment. But I think it's so unfair and wrong of the council to expect me to stay through the whole possession experience and then pay for the court costs that I will probably get stung with at the end. I'm only staying because the council is gatekeeping me and I really have nowhere else to go.   I'm also trying so hard to find a private LL again (and have been doing since 1st October) but have literally only found 2 LLs that will accept HB and none that will accept dogs. I have 2 1 year old German Shepherd puppies. I have a deposit and first months rent if needed, but this doesn't seem to matter.   To Homer I don't believe that my LL has acted illegally on anything now. He did previously with just giving me 2 months notice without doing it via a Section 21. I honestly didn't know any of this when he sent me the email telling me he wanted to sell up and I basically had 2 months to leave. It was only through googling the internet that I eventually realised he couldn't just evict me without the proper legal documents.   Thanks again, Lava
    • The new Credit 500, an index of the most influential people in consumer and commercial credit in 2022, has been finalisedView the full article
    • The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is to launch two market studies and gather further information to investigate access to wholesale dataView the full article
    • I unexpectedly had a couple of hours free this afternoon and thought I would have a bash at helping simeon drafting his counterclaim.  Everybody please feel free to comment on and - hopefully improve it!  (In particular I am not sure if I've got the terminology correct vis a vis counterclaimant and defendant - so that may need correcting).   I am aware that Andyorch and BankFodder often stress the importance of keeping POCs to the bare minimum so as not to give away your case too much.  Whether I've given too much detail - or not enough - here, I don't know.  As I say, it's free to be pulled apart, but simeon seems to have nothing else.   Paras 1 - 16 (in black typeface) are simply a precis based on what has gone before and I've used them to put the counterclaim in context. Paras 17 - 19 (in red typeface) are simply my attempt to provide a basis for simeon's counterclaim.   At the end of the day this is simeon's documant - nobody else's.  simeon has to satisfy himself that it is both accurate and true, and also says what he wants it to say.  He will also have to order and sort out any attachments.  As I said earlier, I'm NOT giving legal advice!   Here goes... ===================================================================================================== Counterclaim   1.      The defendant agreed to undertake building work (Project 1) at the counterclaimant’s property in relation to 3 specific areas of work for an agreed price of £4300.  The work was:   a. To underpin the bay window at the property, b. To replace and repair a previously removed chimney breast and, c. To install a new beam to the patio door.     2.      It was agreed that Project 1 was to be carried out under the instructions of a structural engineer engaged by the counterclaimant and that the defendant’s work would be as a result of instructions received following the structural engineer's assessment of the property.   3.      Between June and July in 2020 the counterclaimant provided the defendant with a full copy of the structural engineer's report which detailed instructions to the defendant for the works to be carried out.   4.      It was agreed between the parties that the works would commence on 13 August 2020.     5.      It was agreed between the parties that payments for Project 1 would be made in three instalments. The first payment would be made at the start of the defendant's work. The second payment would be paid at the halfway point of the defendant's work. The final payment would be made on completion of the total works.   6.      The defendant commenced work on 13 August 2020 and the first instalment due was paid.     7.      On 24 August 2020 the defendant asked the counterclaimant to arrange an inspection of his work by the Building Control Inspector.  The defendant also stated that Project 1 was approaching mid-way and the counterclaimant paid the second instalment due.   8.      The Building Inspector arrived to inspect the defendant’s work but the defendant was absent.  The inspector was obviously very displeased by the standard of the defendant's work.  The inspector spoke to the defendant by telephone, asking him why he was absent and interrogating him about the work he had done.  The inspector then gave him some instructions over the telephone and also left a list of instructions with the counterclaimant to be passed on to the builder.  The building inspector then said he would be getting in touch with the counterclaimant’s structural engineer with his findings and the counterclaimant should hear from the engineer soon.   9.      The counterclaimant passed on the Building Inspector’s instructions to the defendant who agreed to follow them.   10.  The structural engineer visited and recommended piling to complete the underpinning for Project 1.  The defendant explained that he could not undertake this work. The structural engineer then suggested an alternative company to the counterclaimant to do the necessary work and this company was engaged by the counterclaimant to complete the necessary piling at an additional cost to the counterclaimant of £3300. (See receipt at Attachment1).     11.  The defendant asked if the counterclaimant needed any more work to be done and, despite the problems encountered on Project1, the counterclaimant agreed on 7 September 2020 to have more work done (Project 2) at an agreed price of £2580 and on similar payment terms to Project 1.     12.  As work commenced on Project 2 and was continued on the remaining work for Project 1, the counterclaimant had occasion to make several complaints to the defendant regarding the standard of his work.   13.   Barely a week after starting on Project 2, the defendant demanded payment for that work.  After a period of negotiation the counterclaimant agreed to pay him £2000 on 18 August 2020.    14.  The counterclaimant subsequently paid the defendant  £1500 in cash.  Both parties agreed that this left a balance outstanding on Project 2 of £1080.     15.  It later came to the counterclaimant’s attention that the defendant had removed material (including a steel beam) from the counterclaimant’s property that the counterclaimant suspects either belonged to him or had been paid for by him in connection with Project 1.  When challenged the defendant admitted he had done this.  The counterclaimant has included the value of this material in his counterclaim detailed below.   16.    On 21 September 2020 the counterclaimant highlighted and sent a snagging list to the defendant (Attachment 2).  Over a month later the defendant sent an employee to attend to this work.  It was not carried out satisfactorily and resulted in an updated snagging list being sent to the claimant (Attachment 3).  All of this snagging work remains undone by the defendant.     17.  Apart from the outstanding snagging work referred to in para 16 above, the defendant also left other work from Projects 1 and 2 uncompleted.  That work which was not completed is listed at Attachment 4.   18.  During the course of carrying out work on Projects 1 and 2 the defendant also negligently caused substantial damage to the counterclaimant’s property (as itemised in Attachment 5) by not executing the work with the skill expected of a reasonable tradesman.   19.  The counterclaimant seeks an order from the court directing the defendant to pay to the counterclaimant the sum of £nnnnnnn {Simeon - put in the actual total amount here} in respect of:   (a)   the cost of the piling referred to in para 10 above which the defendant could not undertake and another contractor had to be paid to complete; (b)   the cost of completing work the defendant had left undone from Projects 1 and 2; (c)   the cost of remedial work to put right the damage negligently caused by the defendant and referred to in para 18 above; and (d)    the cost of the steel beam referred to in para 15 above.   A receipt in respect of item (a) - see Attachment 1 - and two priced quotes in respect of items (b) and (c) - see Attachments 6 and 7 - are attached in support of this counterclaim.     =================================================================================================================   What I'm not entirely clear about are two points.   First, it's not 100% clear to me whether simeon can properly claim the £3300 in paras 10 and 19(a) or not.  What I mean is, simeon is arguing that this work required by his structural engineer was always within the agreed scope of Project 1.  But it's not clear to me if it was within scope or whether it was entirely new and unforeseen work.  As I see it simeon can only counterclaim this amount from the builder if it had already been incuded in Project 1.   Second, the basis of the counterclaim still seems extraordinarily thin to me.  Is it sufficient at this stage just to allege that the builder caused any damage negligently and is therefore liable to pay to put it right.   That's it from me I think...    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Court Claim Against Hermes - items sent via Packlink were damaged and unusable.


Tubcat
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

After reading the many invaluable accounts on CAG, I think I have case to bring against Hermes and would like some advice on this please.

 

I sold two light fittings to the same buyer on eBay and paid for postage (both lights together) using Hermes via Packlink. The value of both lights was £250 and I also paid for enhanced compensation. I bought proper packaging material and a suitably sized box from a packaging retailer. I packaged the items extremely well and took photos of the packaged items.

 

Annoyingly, several weeks later the buyer reported the lights as damaged and requested a full refund via eBay (they were just within the refund window). I opened a claim with Packlink uploading necessary photos of the packaging and lights before and after the damage. Packlink completed their initial investigation stating that;

 

Quote

“After completing the investigation with the carrier the shipment has been confirmed as damaged. I am writing to let you know that the dossier has been transferred to the Claims department for the final evaluation.”

 

However, their claims department incorrectly asserted that I had used Packing Paper and rejected the claim due to insufficient packaging. I have tried to get them to reconsider based upon their incorrect identification of the packaging material – it was Shredded Cardboard much thicker than Packing Paper. But so far they have not come back to me.

 

I’ve tried to contact Hermes but can’t get beyond their automated bot with my reference number, as it just tells me to take it up with Packlink.

 

Do you feel I have a case to start a Money Claim against Hermes based upon the following points;

 

  1. The damage inflicted upon the lights (they were very badly bent and misshaped), suggests that they were subjected to manhandling far in excess of that you would expect in transit.
  2. And given the fact that Packlink stated that “the carrier has confirmed that the shipment was damaged”.

 

Any advice much appreciated. If I do start a claim, I’ll update this post with all the details.

 

Thanks
🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably you have photographs of the damaged lamps.

Have you supplied these to Hermes? Have you begun a formal complaint against Hermes?

If you haven't done then begin that now and in the meantime read around all the stories on these sub- forums so that you understand the way it goes.

After about 10 days, if you have been knocked back or if you haven't heard anything then we will help you send them a letter of claim.

In addition to reading up on the stories here, please draft a letter of claim and post it here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I've got photos of the damaged lights and all the packaging. Can upload photos here if that would be helpful?

 

Haven't started formal proceedings yet, just wanted some advice on the strength of my case. Will kick things off this week if you think I have a case?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't need to see the photos – but you do need to do the reading. Once you have done all the reading of the stories on the sub- forum then you will understand the strength of your case.

This forum is about self empowerment – although we will guide you.

Begin your formal complaint and then start doing your reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi

 

I've been doing my reading around on this forum and have issued Hermes with a Letter of Claim

 

They have responded by directing me to Packlink and denying that Hermes is responsible.

 

My letter of Claim gave Hermes 14 days before I commence legal proceedings. I've drafted the Claim Details and chronology which I'll post below. If someone can offer any feedback, it would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

Hi
Sorry for not responding sooner. I’ve only just had to reimburse the eBay buyer for the items they purchased which were damaged and crushed during the Hermes delivery.


I’ve been reading around the different Hermes/Packlink topics on the forum as well as reading the official government guidance and I think this is the course of action I have to take;


1. Send formal Letter of Claim to Hermes (uploaded below) informing them of the damage to my shipment, my financial loss and giving them 14 days to reimburse me before I take action in the County Court.


2. Start the Money Claim online. I’m a bit confused which of the two system I should use – can you advise?
 

WWW.MONEYCLAIM.GOV.UK
WWW.GOV.UK

How to take legal action if someone owes you money (small claims court), how much it costs, what happens next. Includes information...


3. As part of completing the online claim I will submit a Particulars of Claim detailing the facts of the case and timeline of events (uploaded below).


4. Hermes will probably send a standard letter disputing my claim at which point I will be sent an additional questionnaire by the Court and asked to pay extra court fees. I should both fill out the questionnaire and pay the fees as well as agreeing to mediation if applicable.


5. Should it go to mediation then I’ll follow the advice offered within this forum.
Any pointers and advice much appreciated. I’ll be posting the Letter of Claim to Hermes in the next day or two pending any feedback.

 

 

 

Quote

Claim Details with Chronology

 

 

 

The claimant used the defendants courier service to deliver a parcel containing two Laura Ashley ceiling lights value £250 to an address in Surrey. The claimant took out insurance against damage or loss caused by the defendant's own breach of contract or negligence. When the parcel arrived at the destination the contents were so badly crushed and damaged that the recipient requested a refund. This was caused by the defendant’s own breach of contract or negligence. The claimant brings this action under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. Claimant seeks the value of the lights £250 plus delivery and insurance costs £9.99 under the County Courts act 1984

 

The following is a detailed chronology of the events surrounding this claim.

 

26/09/2021

The claimant sold two Laura Ashley ceiling lights in excellent condition on eBay. The buyer paid £250 for the lights plus £9.99 postage.

 

27/09/2021

The claimant purchased suitable heavy-duty cardboard box and shock absorbent packaging material from a specialist parcel and packing retailer.

The claimant packaged up the items with considerable care and attention. The packaging consisted of a sturdy new cardboard box securely sealed and marked as fragile. The majority of the packaging used was good quality shock absorbent shredded cardboard. In addition, foam, polystyrene filler and bubble wrap was also used to fill any voids and provide additional strength and shock absorbance. In all, the packaging was more than sufficient to withstand the normal bumps and vibration expected during transit. It more than conformed to the packaging guidance on Hermes own website that states, “Your parcel needs to be wrapped well enough to stay intact should it fall off a conveyor belt (which can be up to 1.2m high).” -  https://www.myhermes.co.uk/help-and-support/how-to-wrap-a-parcel

 

See uploaded photo evidence illustrating;

 - The light fittings in excellent condition prior to postage.

 - The comprehensive packaging of the items using the suitable packaging materials mentioned above.

 

 

 

28/09/2021

The claimant purchased a Hermes delivery Label and paid for additional insurance for the protection against loss or damage for the shipment.

The Hermes Tracking ID is H0067A0030190134.

 

See uploaded photo evidence illustrating;

 - The purchased Hermes postage label with additional insurance cover

 

29/09/2021

Shipment started its short journey from Brighton, East Sussex to Surrey.

 

 

27/10/2021

After receiving the shipment from Hermes, the buyer of the lights initiates an eBay returns request citing that the lights where so badly damaged that they are unusable. The buyer requests a full refund including postage costs.

 

See uploaded photo evidence illustrating;

 - The badly crushed and damaged metal light fittings upon delivery by Hermes

 

 

28/10/2021

After being unable to discuss the matter with Hermes customer service instead the claimant open a damage claim with Packlink whom the Hermes postage label was purchased from.

 

01/11/2021

Packlink update the damage claim stating "After completing the investigation with the carrier the shipment has been confirmed as damaged"

 

See uploaded photo evidence illustrating;

 - Packlink statement that their investigation with the carrier confirmed the shipment was damaged.

 

03/11/2021

Packlink incorrectly assert that packing paper was used for the shipment and dismissed the claim. The claimant immediately responded pointing out that no packing paper had been used and that the materials used were good quality shock absorbent shredded cardboard, foam, polystyrene filler and bubble wrap sealed in a new sturdy box. However, Packlink ignored these responses and offered no means for appeal.

 

23/11/2021

eBay completes the returns process by refunding the £250 plus £9.99 postage to the buyer having deducts the funds from my bank account.

 

See uploaded evidence illustrating;

 - The Claimants eBay Financial Statement for November 2021 showing total claims of £259.99 for the refund of the two lights.

 

29/11/2021

As Packlink are not based in the UK and are not under the jurisdiction of English County Courts, the claimants only hope of getting compensation for the financial loss incurred due to a breach of duty and care of services (under the Consumer Rights Act 2015), is to issue Hermes with a Letter of Claim with the threat to start legal action in 14 days if not financially reimbursed.

The claimant is being this action as a beneficial third-party under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

 

 

03/12/2021

 

Hermes acknowledges the claimant’s letter and provide details of the claim case number and how to respond.

 

07/12/2021

 

The claimant responds to Hermes reiterating the circumstances and that unless they work to resolve the matter the claimant will have no choice to claim against Hermes under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 in the County Courts.

 

08/12/2021

 

Unfortunately, Hermes responds by stating that they are unable to assist further with the matter and they update the status of this internal claim as solved.

 

See uploaded evidence illustrating;

-          Hermes complaint communications between the claimant and Hermes.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've crossed out a passage which is irrelevant and I have added an important statement in red.

It looks extremely comprehensive – and well done on having all the photographs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent, thanks for you speedy response.

 

One question I have regarding starting the Money Claim. Do I use the Money Claim Online website or the new online claim service at Gov.uk? It seems like the newer service offers a better experience for filing the details of claim. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about a new one. Please post a link

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the direct link to starting a claim on the service is

 

I see that it is in beta so it is still being trialled.

By means go ahead and try it out. I expect that it all leads to the same place in the end but maybe you can let us know what you think about it.

It certainly looks more friendly

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...