Shock !!EVRI has lost my parcel PS5 - court claim issued

[Mickgibbons1]

Thank you so much for all your help and advice. I hope they are monitoring this thread, as I am a person of principle and will take this to the end, regardless of the outcome. It is shocking that they allow their employees to get away with this! 

I will get the letter in the post (recorded) today, sort the account and start on the particulars of the claim.

[BankFodder]

The way it works is this:
the insurance is unlawful. Although it is an insurance product – they are running it themselves and they aren't buying in insurance at some commercial rate from a conventional insurer.

This means that all of the money is basically net profit. I'm quite certain that the parcel delivery industry is making billions of pounds per year.

It helps the parcel delivery industry if a possessor of parcels are lost or stolen because then it encourages ordinary innocent people to decide that they need to protect themselves by buying parcel delivery insurance – which of course all adds up to the net profit.
Parcel delivery insurance is unlawful. Limitation or exclusion of liability for failure to perform a contract service is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. It is also prohibited to use a secondary contract to basically achieve the same ends. The unregulated and unlawful insurance that they use amounts to a section 72 prohibited secondary contract.

 

[Mickgibbons1]

Happy New Y

Please see below for the draft Particulars of the Claim.

Also, i sent the letter of claim on the 28th Dec 23, tracked, next day delivery, signed for but it is still showing as undelivered by Royal mail.

Do i still go ahead with the claim on the 14th day or do i send another letter first?

Any advice you can offer would be great.

 

Particulars Of Claim

Item Declared: Games

Sold value: GAmes console £409.99 

Evri Delivery and insurance fee: £30.76 

Insurance cover is valued at £495

The total claim is £440.75 + any applicable interest.

 The claimant used the defendant's courier service to deliver an item a PS5 valued at £409.99 to a UK address. Evri parcel reference    under tracking number C00HHA04255XXXXX.

 Following my enquiries via email with Evri's Customer Care Department, it has been confirmed that the parcel cannot be located since it was last scanned at Evri's sorting hub on 10 November 2023. The claimant's parcel appears to have been the subject of a theft. 

The defendant has failed to deliver the goods as per the terms of the contract and as such has breached section 49 of the cra 2015.

The defendnat has admitted in writing they lost the goods.

The defendant has not located the parcel to date nor offered any reasonable explanation for the item's disappearance. The claimant has followed Evri's missing item policy to the fullest and submitted a claim directly to the defendant.

The claimant completed the defendant's claim form however  the defendant refused to reimburse the claimant, stating this item was a non-compensation item despite the contents of my parcel being properly declared to you.

You even offered to sell me your insurance coverage even though that is prohibited by section 72 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and is also an insurance product that the FCA does not regulate under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse their customers for lost or damaged parcels, contrary to section 47 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  based on the fact that the claimant's item was on the defendant's prohibited item list, despite the fact that attempting to exclude their liability in such a way is contrary to section 57 and 72 of the cra and is therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, The defendant has refused excludes their liability to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase the defendant's extra insurance despite the fact that requiring customers to pay extra to enjoy rights already guaranteed under cra 2015 is unenforceable and therefore unnecessary.

Furthermore, the claimant believes the defendant's insurance policy to be illegal as the claimant is not registered nor regulated with the FCA which is contrary to UK Law

The defendant is clearly in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 because they have failed to carry out their contractual obligations with reasonable skill and care.

 The claimant is pursuing the defendant for the total costs under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Furthermore, the apparent theft of the claimant's property was likely committed, on the balance of probability, by a person working for the defendant. This amounts to the tort of conversion contrary to the Interference with Goods Act 1977

The claimant seeks the sold value of the stolen item, £409.99 in respect of the lost goods  + £30.76 in respect of postage costs  plus interest under pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

[jk2054]

way too much waffle

Firstly, Yes you need to make sure they receive your LOC. did you not email it as well?

Secondly, Your POC is too long 

Try something more like this.

POC START

The claimant sent X valued at X via the defendnat courier service under tracking number XX

The defendant has failed to deliver the goods as per the terms of the contract and as such has breached section 49 of the cra 2015.

The defendnat has admitted in writing they lost the goods.

The defendant has refued to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase the defendant's extra insurance depsite the fact that requiring customers to pay extra to enjoy rights already guaranteed under cra 2015 is unenforceable and therefore unnecessary.

The defendant also attempts to exclude their liability as the claimant's item is on the prohibited list, however doing so is once again contrary to cra 2015 and therefore unlawful

The claimant therefore claims X in respect of the lost goods + x in respect of the shipping cost + interest pursuant to section 69 of cca 1984 from date of loss until date of judgement

 

POC END

also just so you're aware, where you've said 

You even offered to sell me your insurance coverage even though that is prohibited by section 72 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and is also an insurance product that the FCA does not regulate under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse their customers for lost or damaged parcels, contrary to section 47 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

This is completely wrong so don't include this

[Mickgibbons1]

THank you for your help

 

I did not email it. I never bloody thought of that.  I will Resend the letter tomorrow, also email a copy of the letter stating 2 letters have been posted and the dates they are posted.

[jk2054]

When you go to PO tomorrow, send it first class unsigned for, Get a proof of postage.

 

15 days from the date on that receipt issue your claim on MCOL

 

EVri wont reply to your LOC but they monitor this forum so if they see that you've admitted the LOC didn't arrive they'll ask the judge to strike your claim and it is pretty serious so the judge may agree

[Mickgibbons1]

The bit you said is wrong was added to the LOC by Bankfodder?

[Nicky Boy]

4 minutes ago, jk2054 said:

Get a proof of postage.

And keep it safe!

It's amazing how many have been lost by forum users... "This little slip of paper can't be that important".

[jk2054]

hahaha 

not the first time you've made me laugh

OP - BF was probably a bit rushed, you can ask him to look again but the wording is wrong.

I'll edit your POC for you now

OP - I've now edited your POC. My edits are in red and I've struck out the things that I don't think you should include.

The stuff with lines in it means its not wrong just unnecessary

I've completely removed things that are simply factually incorrect to avoid you including incorrect things.

In reference to the bit BF wrote, Section 47 is digital, 57 is for services, so your claim here would be under sections 57 and 72. 

Also the FCA stuff isn't to do with the CRA. It's what's called common law.

[Mickgibbons1]

I do not mind Evri monitoring the postage bit, thats the reason i asked the question and will repost and email again. Once this is done, ill restart the 14 days ands submit the claim. I will email and send the particularrs of the claim by post to them as well.

 

Nicky, i have kept the reciepts. 

[jk2054]

You don't email the POC nor send by post.

 

You raise a claim on the government's MoneyClaim website and the gov send everything to evri.

 

The only thign you need to send EVRi throughout this whole claim until mediation will be your letter of claim.

 

Everything else GOV does.

/assets/images/opengraph-image.png

Self Register - HMCTS Access - GOV.UK

HMCTS-ACCESS.SERVICE.GOV.UK

In the meantime go ahead and set up an account here. 

Don't make the mistake and use MCOL. Use only the new one.

 

Although actually now I think about it @BankFodder may be able to clarify if you'd need to wait the 14 days. Since technically you've already sent them a LOC and you have POP you might not need to wait since PAP just refers to sending it and if you have proof you sent it, even if they didn't sign for it im not sure if you'd need to wait. 

 

BF should be along shortly to advise

[Mickgibbons1]

JK, 

Thank you. I have redone the Particulars of claim, I had trouble reading yours as it went all messed up (please see attached). Please can you recheck, i did have insurance so i have changed that bit. 

Particulars Of Claim

 The claimant used the defendant's courier service to deliver a PS5 valued at £409.99 to a UK address under tracking number C00HHA04255XXXXX.

 The defendant has failed to deliver the goods as per the contract terms and breached section 49 of the CRA 2015.

The defendant has admitted in writing they lost the goods.

The claimant completed the defendant's claim form. However, the defendant refused to reimburse the claimant based on the fact that the claimant's item was on the defendant's prohibited item list, even though attempting to exclude their liability in such a way is contrary to sections 57 and 72 of the CRA and is therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse the claimant despite the claimant purchasing the defendant's extra insurance coverage on rights already guaranteed under CRA 2015. 

Furthermore, the claimant believes the defendant's insurance policy to be illegal as the claimant is not registered nor regulated with the FCA, contrary to UK Law.

The claimant seeks £409.99 regarding the lost goods + £30.76 for postage costs plus interest under Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

 

Screenshot 2024-01-05 at 13.38.53.png.pdf

[jk2054]

ah your in a different mode theme that's why its so messed up sorry about that.

Actually I've decided I don't like the wording of one of the bits I did before

 

Instead of "The defendant has failed to deliver the goods as per the contract terms and breached section 49 of the CRA 2015.The defendant has admitted in writing they lost the goods."

I think something like this might work better

The defendant has failed to deliver the goods and in doing so has breached the contract between the claimant and the defendant for the delivery of the goods.

Furtheremore, by losing the claimant's parcel the defendant has breached section 49 of the cra as they have acted without reasonable care and skill

 

Other stuff I'd change

 

I'd delete " coverage on rights already guaranteed under CRA 2015. "

at the bottom with amounts your claiming  I'd also change it to in respect of X and in respect of Y but thats just a formality tbh.

[Mickgibbons1]

 

New draft. Particulars Of Claim

The claimant used the defendant's courier service to deliver a PS5 valued at £409.99 to a UK address under tracking number C00HHA04255XXXXX.

 The defendant has failed to deliver the goods and, in doing so, has breached the contract between the claimant and the defendant for the delivery of the goods. Furthermore, by losing the claimant's parcel, the defendant has breached section 49 of the CRA as they have acted without reasonable care and skill.

The claimant completed the defendant's claim form. However, the defendant refused to reimburse the claimant, based on the fact that the claimant's item was on the defendant's prohibited item list, even though attempting to exclude their liability in such a way is contrary to sections 57 and 72 of the CRA and is therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse the claimant despite the claimant purchasing the defendant's extra insurance. 

Furthermore, the claimant believes the defendant's insurance policy to be illegal as the claimant is not registered nor regulated with the FCA, contrary to UK Law.

The claimant seeks £409.99 regarding the lost goods + £30.76 for postage costs plus interest under Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

[Mickgibbons1]

I am going to resend the Letter of Claim @jk2054 but can you edit this bit for me as you said it was wrong?

 

I would point out that the contents of my parcel were properly declared to you and you even offered to sell me your insurance cover even though that is prohibited by section 72 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and which is also an insurance product which is not regulated by the FCA under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Edited January 5 by Mickgibbons1

[jk2054]

The selling of the insurance cover is not prohibited by section 72.

There is no connectioned between the regukation by the FCA and the CRA

The CRA is nothing to do with the FCA.

 

Yes its an inusrance product not regulated but that bit is nothing to do with the CRA

is that in your LOC or your POC?

[BankFodder]

1 hour ago, Mickgibbons1 said:

I am going to resend the Letter of Claim @jk2054 but can you edit this bit for me as you said it was wrong?

 

I would point out that the contents of my parcel were properly declared to you and you even offered to sell me your insurance cover even though that is prohibited by section 72 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and which also happens to be an is also an insurance product which is not regulated by the FCA under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

try that

[jk2054]

Who put prohibited back in, I already said its not prohibited from s72 its just they cant enforce it from 72

[Mickgibbons1]

@jk2054 put it back in where? The paragraph i showed past was in the LOC, and i asked for you to reedit it as i am sending again. However, Bankfodder has done it

Edited January 5 by Mickgibbons1

[jk2054]

In bank fooders try that post prohibited by s72 is back even tho i took it out.

 

not sure why you put it back but its wrong so please take it out

[Mickgibbons1]

Thank you JK and Bankfodder

 

Please can you confirm you are happy with my draft POC

 

New draft. Particulars Of Claim

The claimant used the defendant's courier service to deliver a PS5 valued at £409.99 to a UK address under tracking number C00HHA04255XXXXX.

 The defendant has failed to deliver the goods and, in doing so, has breached the contract between the claimant and the defendant for the delivery of the goods. Furthermore, by losing the claimant's parcel, the defendant has breached section 49 of the CRA  consumer rights act 2015 as they have acted without reasonable care and skill.

The claimant completed the defendant's claim form. However, the defendant refused to reimburse the claimant, based on the fact that the claimant's item was on the defendant's prohibited item list, even though attempting to exclude their liability in such a way is contrary to sections 57 and 72 of the CRA aformentioned act and is therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, the defendant excludes their liability to reimburse the claimant despite the claimant purchasing the defendant's extra insurance despite the fact that requiring the claimant to pay more to enjoy rights already guaranteed under the consumer rights act 2015 is contrary to sections 57 and 72 of the aformentioned act and therefore unenforceable.

Furthermore, the claimant believes the defendant's insurance policy to be illegal   unlawful as the defendant is not registered nor regulated with the FCA, contrary to UK law.

The claimant seeks £409.99 regarding the lost goods + £30.76 for postage costs plus interest under pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

[jk2054]

you need to say consumer rights act not cra

cra is just something we say because consumer rights act is too long to type.

 

you cant put cra in the poc you need to put it in full

[jk2054]

see my edits.

 

Note that where it says about the FCA it says the claimant is not registered, its mean tto say defendant

[Mickgibbons1]

Thank you both

I have now started the claim at MoneyClaims and will submit it in 15 days.

LOC has now been emailed, and a further 1st classed tracked letter will be sent in the morning. Lets see what they say, if anything.

[BankFodder]

Post your draft particulars of claim here before you click it off