Beating Royal Mail in Small Claims Court

[JCP1992]

I wanted to create this post in order to help those who may find themselves in the same situation as me. I also used older threads by individuals on here and it helped me to successfully beat Royal Mail in Court. 
 

Here’s my story

I sold my iMac computer on eBay to help to raise some money during the cost of living crisis. I successfully sold the computer for £550 and shipped it the same day. I purchased a secure box, 2 wraps of 15M bubble wrap, multiple packs of bumper wrapping paper and I packaged the box in accordance with the Royal Mail guideline’s (this is important to note for anyone reading this currently looking to submit a claim) I paid for special delivery guaranteed before 1pm and I took photos of the box in its condition before shipping the item to the buyer on eBay. 
 

Two days later I received a message to say that the parcel had arrived and the iMac was damaged. The buyer sent through multiple pictures of the box and the computer. The box looked like someone had stamped on it and the top had completely collapsed/sunken in. I checked the tracker on the Royal Mail website and the picture taken by the courier outside the buyers addressed also clearly showed that the box had been damaged in the care of the Royal Mail. 

I immediately filed a claim on the Royal Mail website, submitting images of the damage to the box and the iMac. I then waited to receive their feedback and what I thought was to be a pretty cut and dry return of my money based on the evidence I had. A month had passed and I had not heard from the Royal Mail, so I decided to call them and I was then informed that they could not tell me the outcome of my claim and that they would send another letter as I already supposed to have been made aware of the outcome via post. The letter never arrived. I had to call a week later as still no letter had arrived and this time the lady was kind enough to tell me that my claim had been denied as it was of the claims teams opinion that I had not met the Royal Mail packaging guidelines. The claim to which they had no evidence of as they had not physically seen the inside of my parcel. 
 

I was told during the call that I could dispute the claim and raise it with the claims team once again. I did. I then informed them that I would take them to court if the money was not reimbursed to me. Around a week later I received a letter saying that the claim was once again being denied as I did not meet the packaging guidelines. 
 

I immediately submitted my small claims court form and paid the fee, submitting all of the evidence that I had, including pictures of the parcel before and after, receipts, and proof of packaging. A few weeks later I was notified that the Royal Mail were not willing to budge and that I would need to once again proceed further and pay for my day to go against them in court. I once again submitted additional evidence as I was informed by the court of what was needed prior to the court hearing. I obtained a witness statement from the independent buyer on eBay and I then paid for my day in court. 
 

In the weeks building up to the hearing I was notified by the Royal Mail solicitors (DAC beachcroft) of their counter claim and I was sent a 170 page binder of their defence. They certainly do this to intimidate people and put them off of taking them to court. The binder contains sections and clauses of various postal schemes & acts, historical cases that the Royal Mail have won, and they claim to have no such liability in tort. To anyone reading this, there are small hidden sections that are included that do highlight that if you meet all of the conditions of the scheme, then you can take legal action and claim compensation. 

Royal Mail do admit that compensation can be made under section 91 of the Postal Services Act 2000 provided all of the terms of the scheme are complied with. They also include a section in the first 15 pages of their binder, look for section 17.2 as it also highlights once again that if you meet the conditions then you can sue. 
 

I finally had my day in court on 14th November and I won! 
 

The defence solicitor began the hearing by asking me a series of questions, the line of questioning, as expected, was all regarding the packaging in order to create doubt or pick flaws in the manor of which you packaged the item. I was ready for their questions as I had ensured that I met their packaging guidelines and I had submitted all evidence to support that the parcel and the iMac had been packaged correctly. I was asked about the size and width of the box I had purchased. The solicitor began trying to pick flaws in the box, claiming it to be inadequate, which presenting picture evidence (pictures that I had sent them) to support them. I immediately reaffirmed how I packaged the parcel, claiming in meticulous detail how it was packaged and what I used to packaged it. I was then asked about the guidelines as the solicitor wanted to once again create doubt that my package was inadequate (a claim to which they had no evidence during this entire process) I answered all questions and made sure to show the judge my picture evidence to support my statements. I also drew the attention back to the witness statement from the eBay buyer, who supported my by stating that my packaging was more than sufficient. 
 

Next, the solicitor went on about Harold Stephen’s vs the Post Office 1978. This case is used to highlight their non liability in tort and to support that they cannot be sued. The judge picked this section apart as the U.K. postal scheme 2000 highlights that of the conditions are met, you can claim compensation. 
 

we both gave closing statements, in which the Royal Mail solicitor once again said that the packing could not have met their regulations, if it did, it would not have been damaged, and once again highlighted their affinity with the crown and their non liability in tort. I responded by once again highlighting that I met their packaging guidelines by submitting meticulous picture evidence, that I met all of the conditions set out in the U.K. postal scheme 2000 and that the witness statement also supports that the parcel was packaged correctly. I stated that the Royal Mail had handled my parcel with gross negligence and that they were deliberately avoiding mentioning the damage they caused to the parcel.
 

The judge awarded in my favour by stating that the fact that they had not even acknowledged my initial claim for compensation was surprising and that it was of her opinion that I had successfully met the packaging guidelines and the conditions of the postal scheme 2000.

To anyone reading this, please do not be scared to take your claim further with Royal Mail, should they reject it through their initial claims service. You can beat them if you have evidence and if you meet their packaging conditions. 
 

They try to scare you by using their solicitors to send huge amounts of legal jargon within their 170 page binder. They try to intimidate us and make us believe that we have no chance of winning and beating them. Plus, it takes a lot of time and money to win, something that they feel most people will not take the time and effort to put in. 
 

unfortunately for them, I am incredibly stubborn and the item they damaged was very expensive. I was awarded all of the damages, court fees and further damages. It ended up costing the Royal Mail a substantial amount in paying me and I am sure that their lawyers aren’t cheap either. 

The judge told them to issue payment in 21 days and I received an email from their solicitors a week later asking for my bank details. I received a bank transfer, no letter, no apology, no nothing. 
 

The Royal Mail really are a terrible company and they are constantly under scrutiny and legal battles as of late. 
 

I hope that this blog can help people and encourage them to take action in order to win against them should you also be in my position. 
 

best of luck, 

JP

 

[whitelist]

Can I ask what is the U.K. postal scheme 2000 you reference? That is new to me.

Royal Mail must have changed their solicitors, they have always used Weightmans?

[JCP1992]

Here’s the link: 

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...

 

I found two other posts on here from other members who won against Royal Mail, the first being 2013 & 2016. They make reference to DAC Beachcroft 

[whitelist]

That was the point i was making. Why did you call it the U.K. postal scheme 2000 and not the proper reference source?

DAC Beachcroft act for Royal Mail but normally High Court cases, not County Court

Edited December 2, 2023 by whitelist

[JCP1992]

There are two that are very similar. 
 

The Royal Mail UK Post Scheme & the U.K. postal services act. 
 

Both include sections that say you can claim compensation if you meet the guidelines.

[whitelist]

Can you reference which section you used under the Act in claiming compensation, please?

 

And what is the UK Post Scheme reference please?

Edited December 2, 2023 by whitelist

[JCP1992]

Section 91 of the postal services act 

section 17 of the U.K. post scheme, specifically 17.2 

https://www.royalmail.com/sites/royalmail.com/files/2022-04/UK_Post_Scheme_06-April-2022.pdf

[whitelist]

Thank you. Will have a nose

[BankFodder]

This is very interesting indeed and I'm sure will be very helpful to many people. Royal mail or a bit of an enigma.

If you have time I wonder whether you could possibly list out in a bullet point form – no narrative – what you think are the criteria for satisfying the packing requirements and also if you could list out any other pointers for people to take guidance from.

Finally, I wonder whether you might prepared to apply for a transcript of this judgement.

I expect it will cost about £50 but we will reimburse you or if you prefer we will pay you directly once you get the bill.

If you are prepared to do this then maybe you could email us on our admin email address but also begin the process by downloading the EX 107 form

Order a transcript of court or tribunal proceedings: Form EX107 - GOV.UK

WWW.GOV.UK

---

Use this form to ask for a written record (also known as a transcript) of what was said at a hearing, trial or tribunal.

 

There are a number of transcription services and if you are prepared to do it then maybe you could select The Transcription Agency as they have done transcript for us before and we have good relations with them.

Please let us know.

Thanks

You would be applying for – "main judgement"

[jk2054]

RM use DAC beachcroft for everything 

 

 

[jk2054]

Hi @JCP1992,

Sorry I’ve only just got round to reading this

 

 I notice you said you received their counterclaim.

 

Can you elaborate on what they claimed from you as part of their counterclaim?

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

On 02/12/2023 at 18:26, JCP1992 said:

In the weeks building up to the hearing I was notified by the Royal Mail solicitors (DAC beachcroft) of their counter claim and I was sent a 170 page binder of their defence

I think the OP refers to their defence/witness statement not an actual counter claim.

[unclehr]

Nicely told story, and I enjoyed your appropriate initials at the end

[BankFodder]

Yes it is a nice story. I do hope that the OP will come back and help us apply for the judgement transcript.

I think it will help a lot of people

[jk2054]

Hi OP,

 

Would you mind posting your original PDF particulars of claim, defence and DQ;s fully redacted for the use of other members.

 

Thanks

 

.