Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's a big shame that you didn't wait for us to give you the advice that you asked for yesterday. We responded within two hours and if you had checked back you would have found the proper way to deal with it and also to get your money back. You would have in any case have purchased a new laptop straightaway that you would have obtained your money back as well. By taking this action without make any conditional or proviso to the manager you may have compromised your chances. You may still be able to deal with it by sending them a letter if you want. You will have to act quickly as you have already put things in motion. It's up to you but if you want to deal with this then you better start reacting quickly and waiting for the advice that we give instead of rushing off on your own  
    • No I paid for it in full.   So, in short.    The laptop was bought new 2 months ago to take my Biomed year end exam, on 26th July.   It was also bought to have word for my dissertation.     The month to repair is the issue - I need a working laptop now for revision and exam in 12 days.    I did not think for one moment that it would expire at 2 months old - a terrible situation for a new one. I've been there this morning - they have taken the non working one to send off for 'repair'.  I've informed them that if it doesn't work or goes wrong again I want a full refund.  My only option today given the exam date was to buy another, I do not have the time to sit and wait sadly for a repair taking a month.  That was the issue - I did ask if they would honour £299 as paid before - they wouldn't.    I have paid £359 less 10%  - £323.10 that is all the Manager would do. Absolutely in future - will shop elsewhere.      
    • Briefly: Bought kitchen (£20000) July 2023 Promised 1 week fitting - took 5 Only drinking water was from outside tap, couldn't cook All sorts of problems deliveries, wrong parts, quality of doors, drawers not working, worktops de-laminating, none yet resolved Crux of the matter Wickes want to replace all the marble worktops - sounds reasonable That means no kitchen again for how long? They want us to accept a type of marble we didn't want in the first place and still don't want now, and they are not saying that they will make good any damage that may be done in the process We don't want this work done, we want them to leave the kitchen as it is and give us some compensation My wife and I are both in our 70's, I am disabled and we are both on heart medication, we don't want the stress and disruption again The ombudsman says we must allow Wickes to try again Advice please, is there any point in going to the small claims court?  Thanks  
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Evri lost my Ebay parcel £844 - court claim issued ***Judgment***


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Like many others before me who have used Evri in good faith but failed to have their parcel delivered and then hit a wall when trying to get Evri to resolve/reimburse, I am starting the process to take this matter further. I have been reading the forum for the past 2 weeks to get an idea of the steps to take and start preparing the required documents/evidence that I will need.

Summary/Timeline of issue:

  • Sold a phone on Ebay for £839. Delivery of the parcel was to be by Evri next day delivery. Delivery service was purchased through Packlink.
  • I selected the standard compensation (£25) provided on Packlink as that offers proof of delivery (signature). Total cost of postage with proof of delivery is £4.83.
  • The delivery service was paid for on 13th June on Packlink, and the parcel was dropped off on 14th June at the Evri collection point.
  • Tracking shows the parcel was collected the same day. However, it arrived at Evri's sorting hub on 17th June (already late as should have been delivered by 16th June). However, the tracking never moved from there on, and has not been delivered to the buyer.
  • Buyer raised a claim on Ebay for non-delivery and I gave a full refund to the buyer while emailing Packlink and/or Evri every day for updates on where the parcel.
  • On 22nd June, I emailed Evri asking for a complaint to be raised and gave Evri 14 days notice to locate and either deliver/return the parcel, or to reimburse me in full for the refund I had to give to the buyer. Otherwise I would start court proceedings.
  • Email from Evri received on 27th June confirming that since it was scanned at their sorting hub on 17th June, they have been unable to locate the parcel. I replied back re-iterating my previous email to reimburse me in full by 5th July at the latest (14 days from 22nd June) or I proceed to take this matter to court.
  • In the meantime, Packlink provided a Loss Claim form. They have refunded the postage cost (£4.83) and are in the process of providing £25 standard compensation.
  • Email received today (04 July) from Evri stating "We are unable to do anything more, because you did not pay us for service. As you wish, you can go to court. I would like to inform you that this is full and final correspondence on the matter and any further contact will be closed and the complaint remain closed. Kind regards, Anna"

I am therefore sending a Letter of Claim to Evri, via email and by post tomorrow. I have drafted this letter below and would be grateful for any comments or amends required before I post and email tomorrow. I will continue with my reading of other forum posts and researching, but any guidance would be much appreciated. Thank you!


 

Quote

 

EVRi Parcelnet Ltd trading as Evri

CAPITOL HOUSE,

1, CAPITOL CLOSE

LEEDS

LS27 0WH

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

LETTER OF CLAIM

 

PARCEL REFERENCE NUMBER REFERENCE: H00xxxxxx

 

On 13 JUNE 2023 I used your service to send a parcel under the above reference number using Evri’s next day delivery service. The parcel never arrived at its intended destination.

 

Following my enquiries via email with Evri’s Executive Office, it has been confirmed that the parcel cannot be located since it was last scanned at Evri’s sorting hub on 17 JUNE 2023.

 

Evri’s delivery service was purchased via a third party (eBay Packlink) but I am pursuing yourselves as I am entitled to do under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties Act 1999). In particular, as Evri cannot locate the parcel at its own sorting hub, it cannot demonstrate that it has managed the delivery of my parcel with reasonable care and skill while in possession of the parcel.

 

Value of item = £839.99 + Postage £4.83 = £844.82

Packlink reimbursement = £4.83 (postage cost) + £25 (standard compensation) = £29.83

 

Total loss to me (amount of claim) = £814.99 + any applicable Interest

 

In emails with Evri’s Executive Office, I have requested reimbursement for the full amount above, which Evri has so far failed to reimburse.

 

I therefore intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court without further notice unless you reimburse me the above amount in full within 14 days from the date of this letter.

 

Sincerely,

 


 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine.

Register with the MoneyClaim online County Court Internet account and start preparing your claim.

Post up a draft of your particulars of claim here before clicking it off.

Later on you will have to indicate whether or not you are prepared to go to mediation. EVRi will say yes but we are now saying that it would probably be the best idea if you decline mediation but go directly to trial.
It's up to you but to forget we are a campaigning group as well and we would like to get some judgements on this issue of third party rights as well as additional judgements relating to the insurance requirement.
As you probably realise, we have three judgements already. In fact we have 1/4 but the person we helped in respect of that claim has refused to provide us with any details allowing us to obtain a copy of the judgement.

When you win, we hope that you will help us get a copy of the judgement so that we can add it to our arsenal against EVRi and the rest of the courier company that use these fake insurance schemes

 

Incidentally, once you post up your draft POC, we will probably want to make one or two particular amendments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your comments. I have now registered on the moneyclaim.gov.uk and will do more reading and research on this forum over the next few days. This will also help me with my preparation for the claim and when drafting the POC this weekend. I will then post the draft on here for any comments/enhancements.

The next few days will also give me a chance to think about whether or not to go to mediation. I've seen some forum posts where mediation has been successful, however I do understand this is a campaigning group. If my case goes to court, i am happy to share a copy of the judgement so it can support this group and other claimaints.

I found 2 judgements in other forum posts - one against parcel2go and the other against parcelhero.

Could anyone please direct me to the 3rd judgement as i'd like to read it and consider it, along with the other 2 judgements when building and preparing my claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will get my hands on with the judgement and put it up – although it doesn't bring anything new to the argument. It simply adds weight to the principle that the insurance is unenforceable and seeks to sell duplicate rights.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The third case has now been added. If you go back to the post containing the other two judgements and also the skeleton argument you will find that there are now three judgements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for this. I'll take a look at the 3rd judgement and the skeleton argument as part of my research and prep work this week.

For anyone looking for the judgements and skeleton argument that @BankFodder is referring to, they can be found on this forum via this link: 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The LOC draft in my earlier comments was sent to Evri on 5th July, in the post (recorded delivery) and also by email. I'd also registered with the moneyclaim website.

Since then, I've been reading other people's posts/journeys with Evri including the particulars of claims. I've now drafted my POC and a timeline of events, f anyone wants to review or give any guidance, happy to take on board your feedback. I'll then be ready to submit the POC on 15th July.

 

Quote

 

Particulars of Claim

The defendant in this case is Herme s Parcelnet Limited trading as EVRI.

I am claiming as a beneficial third-party within the meaning of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999.

The claimant sold a Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra mobile phone for £839.99 on Ebay.co.uk and then used the defendant’s courier service to deliver the mobile phone parcel to a UK address. Tracking reference number: H00xxxx. The parcel never arrived at the destination and the defendant's courier service has confirmed the parcel cannot be located since it was last scanned at the defendant’s parcel hub, and therefore deem it lost.

The defendant has refused to reimburse the claimant on the basis that the claimant purchased the defendant’s delivery service through Packlink. This does not impede the defendant from executing the next day delivery service of the claimant’s parcel with reasonable care and skill. Where the defendant fails to carry out the agreed service with reasonable care and skill, the claimant has the right to seek reimbursement from the defendant.

The defendant’s own tracking service evidences the defendant had possession of the claimant’s parcel and that the defendant is unable to locate the parcel and have deemed the parcel to be lost since it was last scanned at the defendant’s parcel hub. The defendant cannot demonstrate reasonable care and skill in managing the delivery of the claimant’s parcel. Therefore, the defendant’s refusal to reimburse the claimant is unfair within the meaning of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse their customers for lost or damaged parcels and this is contrary to section 47 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
The defendant is prepared to waive their exclusion if the claimant pays extra money for an insurance policy which the defendant describes as "enhanced compensation"
(xxxplease check that this is the name)xxx.
The claimant chose not to purchase the defendant's insurance policy on the basis that requiring customers to pay an extra fee in order to enjoy rights already guaranteed under the 2015 Act is contrary to ss.47 and 72 of the 2015 Act and therefore unnecessary and unenforceable.

The claimant seeks the value of the item of £839.99, plus eBay fees of £21.80, plus interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts act 1984.


Timeline

13 June 2023

- Purchased Evri next day delivery service with reference number H00xxxx for the item sold on eBay. This was purchased via Packlink. Parcel is packed and prepared for drop off.

 

14 June 2023

- Parcel dropped off at local ParcelShop. ParcelShop accepts the parcel and provides me with an Evri receipt and tracking number. Evri’s online tracking confirms that at 09:42 the parcel was received at the ParcelShop and will be collected shortly. Tracking at 13:24 confirms the parcel has been collected by Evri.

 

15 June 2023

- Evri’s online tracking informs that at 09:51 the parcel was received at the ParcelShop and will be collected shortly. Tracking at 13:06 confirms the parcel has been collected by Evri.

 

16 June 2023

- Evri’s online tracking informs that at 13:21 the parcel was received at the ParcelShop and will be collected shortly.

- I notice that the parcel should have been delivered by today as Evri’s next day delivery service was used. I try to contact Evri by webchat on the Evri website, and send an email to [email protected] (CEO) and [email protected] (COO) explaining that the tracking is just repeating itself and my concern that Evri has lost my parcel.

- I contact Packlink to make them aware of my concern. Packlink inform they will follow up on this delivery with the courier.

 

17 June 2023

- I email Packlink to inform that my priority is to get to get assured that the package has not been lost and will still be delivered, and request that they push Evri to deal with this as a matter of priority, and provide an update.

- Evri’s online tracking informs that the parcel is being processed at their hub. Email received from [email protected] that my parcel enquiry is being looked into by the Customer Services Team.

 

19 June 2023

- Packlink email me to inform that the parcel is on its way for delivery. They also inform that Evri also confirmed this same feedback in their last email. I inform Packlink that there is no change to the tracking status since 17 June 2023.

- Email received from Evri’s Executive Office informing that the tracking has not updated since 17 June 2023 and they want to carry out further investigations. Further information of the parcel including description of the contents and packaging is requested. I provide this information with supporting photos of the parcel and packaging to Evri on the same day.

 

20 June 2023

- eBay Buyer requests refund of £839.99 for non-delivery of the item. I provide a full refund on 23 June 2023.

 

24 June 2023

- Evri’s Executive Office confirms that they have been unable to locate my parcel and therefore they deem the parcel lost in the network. They further inform that while the parcel was sent using the Evri network, Packlink are regarded as the carrier in this situation and any claims for lost parcels will need to go to them.

- Further email enquiries are raised between 24 – 28 June 2023 requesting Evri to reimburse me for the full amount as I am now at a loss due to their negligence and to deal with this matter as a formal complaint.

 

29 June 2023

- Packlink inform me that Evri have declared the loss of the parcel in transit. Packlink requests to submit a Loss Claim GB20xxxx. I file the Loss Claim on the same day, and Packlink confirms a formal investigation has been opened for a lost parcel with Evri.

 

30 June 2023

- Packlink confirms compensation amount of £25 and a refund of postage cost. This is done unilaterally without my agreement. Compensation is paid 13 July 2023.

 

05 July 2023

- I make further attempts to resolve this matter with Evri with requests for reimbursement and to deal with this matter as a complaint. Evri explains that I did not pay for their service and the agreement of my parcel is with Packlink as I had paid them for the service. Evri inform that I can this further down the legal route.

- Letter of claim sent to Evri today clearly stating that I would issue a county court claim against them in 14 days and without any further notice unless they reimburse me in full before that date.

 

 

Edited by BankFodder
Edits in red
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please check the edits in red. Make sure that you are happy with it and it is all correct.

I think we need to start referring to their enhanced compensation scheme as "– insurance" – which is what it is.

I have indicated that they call it enhanced compensation – please check that that is the correct term. It might be parcel protection or something else. Amend the suggested particulars of claim as necessary.

Let us know if this is the version you want to use.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for your amends.

On Packlink, the non-insured option for delivery by Evri did not offer proof of delivery, so I chose delivery by Evri with "standard insurance" which provides proof of delivery.

Evri have not declined to reimburse me because of the insurance. Instead, they are saying that while the parcel was sent using the Evri network, Packlink are regarded as the carrier in this situation and any claims should go to Packlink.

Therefore, I'm unsure if your amends apply in this situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm aware of that but put it in any way. It will pre-empt the situation.

Also, make sure that you start referring it always as an "insurance policy"

Link to post
Share on other sites

 i'll add in your edits. Where necessary, i'll update the draft POC to say "insurance policy". I'll upload the updated POC this week.

Is there anything else that you think i may need to prepare to submit on MCOL?

I will begin to work on a draft skeleton document once I've submitted the POC on MCOL.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

tomorrow I submit the MCOL.

The last of the 14 days since my LOC is today and no response heard from Evri to the LOC (unless magically they respond in the next 30mins). 

I've been on the MCOL website working on my POC as there is a limit of 1080 characters / 15 lines.

The updated POC draft is below: 

I am claiming as a beneficial third-party within the meaning of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999.

The defendant has lost the claimant's parcel containing a xxxxx (valued at £839.99) that was sent to a UK address using
the defendant's delivery service (Tracking reference: xxxxx).

The defendant has failed to demonstrate reasonable care and skill resulting in the loss of the claimant’s parcel, but has refused to reimburse the claimant.

The defendant’s refusal to reimburse the claimant is unfair within the meaning of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and
therefore unenforceable.

The claimant seeks reimbursement of the value of the item £839.99, plus eBay fees of £21.80, plus interest from the defendant.


The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 23/06/2023 to 19/07/2023 on £861.79 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.19

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Claimant (C), claims as a beneficial third-party within the meaning of the Contracts (Rights
of Third Parties) Act 1999, that The defendant (D) lost the C's parcel, an xxxxx (valued £839.99) sent to a UK address using D's delivery service (Tracking reference: xxxxx).

D failed to demonstrate reasonable care and skill resulting in item loss, D refused to reimburse C, Furthermore, D excludes their liability to reimburse their customers for lost or damaged parcels and this is contrary to section 47 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. D is prepared to waive their exclusion if the C pays extra money for Parcel insurance which D describes as "enhanced compensation" 

C chose not to purchase D insurance policy on the basis that requiring customers to pay an extra fee in order to enjoy rights already guaranteed under the 2015 Act is contrary to ss.47 and 72 of the 2015 Act and therefore unnecessary and unenforceable.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1.item reimbursement value £839.99,

2. eBay fees of £21.80,

3. interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the county courts act 1984 on £861.79 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.19p until judgement or sooner

4.costs and Court Fees.

  • Thanks 1

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

i really dont know why we keep bloating these Postal claim POC's SOOO much

there is no need

the rest can be in your WS.

 

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

let it run please for a while.

we need to seriously streamline these parcel POC's 99% of what we currently advise is really not needed. at this stage,.

it can be fluffed out in your witness statement

as long as the REASONS why you are bringing the claim are clear and the law/rules you are relying upon are clear and the SUMS you are claiming are clear .....all the rest can be booted out.

  • Like 1

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

Worth noting that where interest is being claimed on the MCOL website, it auto-populates the interest wording thats in my draft POC.

I take on board your point about POCs. First time doing this and this is a learning curve. Will take on board your amends to my draft POC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

is this the new MCOL?

already made changes to above

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

Not sure if there is a new MCOL system as it looks like the same one i registered on a few weeks ago.

There is a limit of 1080 characters / 15 lines in the POC on MCOL so i dont think your amends will fit. My draft wording posted above today fits in the 15 lines limit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea i see what you mean . TBH not use to doing it. 

ive played with this before and could not work it..even though the count was only 992:pound:

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

Yeah its that 15 lines that makes it difficult. If you think my draft POC below is fine (same as one i posted above earlier), I'll continue to use that, as it fits in the 15 lines limit on MCOL:

I am claiming as a beneficial third-party

within the meaning of the Contracts (Rights

of Third Parties) Act 1999. The defendant has

lost the claimant's parcel containing a

xxxxx (valued at 

£839.99) that was sent to a UK address using

the defendant's delivery service (Tracking

reference: xxxxx). The defendant

has failed to demonstrate reasonable care and

skill resulting in the loss of the claimant’s

parcel, but has refused to reimburse the

claimant. The defendant’s refusal to

reimburse the claimant is unfair within the

meaning of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and therefore unenforceable. The claimant seeks

reimbursement of the value of the item of

£839.99, plus eBay fees of £21.80, plus

interest from the defendant.

The claimant claims interest under section 69

of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of

8% a year from 23/06/2023 to 19/07/2023 on

£861.79 and also interest at the same

rate up to the date of judgment or earlier

payment at a daily rate of £0.19

Link to post
Share on other sites

let @BankFodder make sure its ok.

dx

  • Thanks 1

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

On 09/07/2023 at 19:26, occysrazor said:

 

On Packlink, the non-insured option for delivery by Evri did not offer proof of delivery, so I chose delivery by Evri with "standard insurance" which provides proof of delivery.

 

Do they actually use this phrase – "standard insurance"?
If so, please can you link us to where they say it

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...