RM lost package disptues

[jk2054]

Hello,

So I've had 5 royal mail claims denied and one where they've paid maxmimum compensation but not the actual compensation that equals to the items value (sold for 180 but used tracked 48 so only comp available 150).

I'm aware that RM have a more difficult procedure for court becuase you can't hold them accountable under the consumer rights act apparently? only their dodgy scheme

All the claims relate to buyer claiming non receipt and RM disputing this.

a) is this something I can pursue in court with reasonable chance of success?

b) what would my lines of argument be? I struggle to see what the legal challenge is outside of consumer rights but we can't use that for this?

Will donate as a thanks for assistance 

[whitelist]

When delivering postal items, they use a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) that records the delivery. Does not matter if the item requires a signature or not. Even normal postal packets have a Three D barcode on them  scanned at the point of delivery.

These PDA units ping the GPS position when scanned at doorstep[.

If Royal Mail suspects the recipients are pulling a fast one, then you can request that GPS data, then your claim will be with those recipients.

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[jk2054]

The GPS’s dont match though

[whitelist]

Then Royal Mail is in breach of contract,

What did they say when the GPS data showed they did a misdelivery of your item?

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[BankFodder]

How about giving us some details – something we can go on – instead of these generalisations.

You know what we need – you done it before.

Thanks
 

[jk2054]

They said they can't rely on 3rd party mapping softwares.

 

The issue with breach of contract is there is no contract. From what I've been told Royal Mail services don't enter a contract because they're covered under postal scheme

 

That's why I'm not really understanding the legal aspect to a challenge in court

[whitelist]

The Three D mapping software that they use is their own.

Did they tell you this in writing or on the phone?

[jk2054]

They give co-ordiantes on their website, put those co-ordinates into google and used that.

All communication is in writing via email or signed for letters so i have logs/copies

[whitelist]

Have you sent a rebuttal in writing reference to the PDA Data excuse and alleged negligence and did they respond?

[jk2054]

nope, took it to redress who did Oh flip all.

 

deciding whether to sue RM or not. Just a bit concerned about lack of legal strength of case because RM aren't held accountable under Consumer rights act 2015, and you also can't claim a breach of contract because there is no contract formed. Rm services are exlcuded from contractual agreements

[whitelist]

And how far off from your address are those GPS co-ordinates

Rm services are NOT excluded from contractual agreements

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[jk2054]

The GPS aren't my address, but all are off by a few houses/streets. Some of the GPS dont even match to a road they match to a field

Parcel one - Contained a shoe valued at under 150 gbp (maximum insurance level)

Parcel two - contained a shoe valued at under 150 gbp (maximum insurance level)

Parcel three - parcel contained a shoe valued at 500 gbp (maximum insurance was 750 - shoe never in box when it arrived - I received this parcel but also bought the label)

Parcel four - contained a shoe valued at 180 (max insurance was 150 GBP as per tracked 48 T+C

Parcel five - Contained a shoe that I sold for 750 GBP. Max insurance was 750.

Insurance for parcels 1,2 and 4 was 150 as per tracked 48

insurance for parcels 3 and 5 was 750 GBP

RM defences for parcels 1,2,4 are that the POD photo + GPS proves delivery.

RM defence for parcel 3 is that I have no evidence it was tampered with during shipping to me

RM defence for parcel 5 is that "The delivery officer confirmed delivery"

Submitted all to Postal redress having exhausted PRP and escalations. 

So far postal redress have come back and rejected Parcel one, rest are at adjudication/Company to respond status, but I've looked at POSTRS figures and they only uphold 4% of claims and partially uphold a further 5.8% so I've not got high hopes

Postal redress reason for rejection of parcel one was that "Whilst I do not dismiss the possibility that the package may have been delivered to the wrong address – on balance, I am not persuaded that it is more likely that this happened." They refuse to clarify what factors they took for this balance.

[whitelist]

You need to  understand the relevant case law, That being Harold Stephen & Company Ltd v Post Office [1977] EWCA

 

Having paid for the extra insurance is a separate contract outside of the Postal Services Act. Tracked items as well are not covered under the Universal Service Obligation being a separate commercial enterprise.

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[BankFodder]

We've had one or two cases on this forum before against the Royal mail and they have settled.

I can't remember where they are or what the circumstances were.

The whole thing is very complicated and what I'd like to know is where does it say that Royal mail won't be liable in contract for its breaches.

Also I'm intrigued that you seem to be sending parcels each one containing a single shoe.

[PIXeL_92]

In a few of your posts you are making it out as they are being shipped to your address. Surely you can claim back from the sellers if these purchases and then they can chase Royal Mail.

[jk2054]

no you’ve clearly understood wrong.

[PIXeL_92]

31 minutes ago, jk2054 said:

RM defence for parcel 3 is that I have no evidence it was tampered with during shipping to me

 

39 minutes ago, jk2054 said:

The GPS aren't my address, but all are off by a few houess/streets. Some of the GPS dont even match to a road they match to a field

Both these comments come across as if it's your address that the items are being sent too.

I'm assuming these are online marketplace (eBay) sales that have gone wrong? The problem you will have is if it is buyers that have opened dishonest claims and items have actually been delivered and RM can prove this then you have no case against them, you will be able to use RMs proof of delivery to potentially go after the dishonest buyers however.

[jk2054]

again you’ve not understood.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[whitelist]

Postal Services Act 2000

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

---

An Act to establish the Postal Services Commission and the Consumer Council for Postal Services; to provide for the...

The above is the Postal Services Act and liability. But that means nothing, as Tracked items are outside of the Act and the Universal Service Obligation being a new commercial product.

[BankFodder]

Thank you for this but what section are you referring to.

I have seen a reference in about section 91 or so which says that there is no liability for tort but I am asking you for the rule which says that there is no liability for contract

[whitelist]

As far as i am aware nothing in the Statutory Act, only existing case law which is obsolete as it deals with internal industrial relations and delays with postal items. But Royal Mail still cites and reference.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[BankFodder]

Rather what I thought. So what we have here is a self-perpetuating myth – which could be dispelled if somebody could come up with an authoritative source – and nobody can.

So although the 2000 act gives them immunity from actions for tort – nobody yet has come up with any source which gives them immunity for actions and contract.

If that's the case then it seems that the way is clear to see them in contract.

[whitelist]

And Tracked is a separate commercial product outside of the Postal Services Act.

Another thing to consider is that the Universal Service Obligation stipulates Royal Mail has to provide an Insured Item service?

Royal Mail does not offer an insurance product, only a compensation policy for consequential loss 

Edited August 3, 2023 by whitelist

[BankFodder]

The list of items sent and which has been posted above by the OP is rather sparse.

We like to see – date sent, identity of item, actual value, insured – y/n

Also please can you number than one, two, three – et cetera so that we can refer to them easily

[jk2054]

12 hours ago, PIXeL_92 said:

In a few of your posts you are making it out as they are being shipped to your address. Surely you can claim back from the sellers if these purchases and then they can chase Royal Mail.

nope you're not understanding at all.

 

thx anyway

BF - Yea will do and will send over in the next few hours