eBay parcel worth £265, booked via Parcel 2 Go, 'lost' by Evri

[BankFodder]

That looks fine

[grumpy59]

Many thanks Bank - I'll keep y'all informed of developments.

[grumpy59]

My Civil MoneyClaim against P2G has now been issued and they are required to respond by 21 May (although they apparently request an extra 14 days.....)

[BankFodder]

Yes, absolutely normal for them to waste everybody's time and money by asking for more time – which they are entitled to do, of course – but it is simply a waste of time.
They use prepared template defences. They know they are in the wrong but they simply want to make your life tough because they don't care about you.

However do keep an eye out. You never know there is just a 1% chance that they could miss the deadline in which case you should apply for judgement immediately.

[grumpy59]

Exactly right Bank! 

I had an email this morning from HM Courts and Tribunals Service Civil Money Claims:

Dear Mr xxxx

Claim number: 527MCxxx

Parcel2Go.com has been given an extra 14 days to respond to your claim.

They need to respond to your claim before 4pm on 4 June 2024. 

Anyone would think you've been through this before!

[jk2054]

typical typical

[grumpy59]

Afternoon All - after 3 weeks of silence, this morning I received an email from HMCTS advising that P2G have rejected my claim.

 

They have requested mediation, I’m sure not least to drag the case out even longer, but I can see no benefit to me in this and so shall reject it.

As ever, I’d welcome your thoughts guys.

g59 

 

[BankFodder]

Please will you upload the defence in a PDF format document

[grumpy59]

Now attached

23May24 - 527MC352-claim-response.pdf

[BankFodder]

Okay everything is normal. No surprises.

I'm assuming that you are prepared to carry on. It's a pretty amazing defence because they even agree that the box arrived empty but even more astonishingly they agree that your parcel hasn't been handled with due care and attention.

Their sole defence is that they limit liability to £20 unless you purchase extra insurance.

In other words they contravene section 57 of the consumer rights act unless you purchase a secondary contract of insurance which is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act.

These people are more stupid than the people at Evri.

I suggest that you carry on. We suggest that you avoid mediation. I believe that a new compulsory mediation scheme is coming in but I think that this is for cases which were begun after your claim date.

We suggest that you go completely to trial and get every penny. Your chances of success are pretty well 100%.

I hope you understand where you are on this and what the procedures are now. If you haven't then you have more reading to do.

We suggest that you pay the money to continue and that you decline mediation.

[grumpy59]

Thanks Bank - that's exactly what I was thinking. Good of them to concede the parcel hadn't been handled appropriately and that it arrived minus its contents, and the oft quoted precedents would appear to scupper their 'claimant didn't take out our additional 'parcel protection' defence. 

I shall indeed decline the mediation, and pay the additional cost to take the case to a hearing. 

[BankFodder]

They will be really stupid to allow this to go to trial and they should probably put their hands up – but frankly I am crossing my fingers that they do go to trial and you get the judgement and you will help us get a transcript to put it up on the forum to add to the others that we have.

 

[jk2054]

ayy its dianne!

 

53 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

I suggest that you carry on. We suggest that you avoid mediation. I believe that a new compulsory mediation scheme is coming in but I think that this is for cases which were begun after your claim date.

 

 

It's in but there's a way to avoid it. If you use the OCMC system (the new one like this person has used) mediation is still optional

[grumpy59]

Absolutely. If they do defend it they'll also likely incur travel and subsistence costs as I'm in Twickenham and they're in Oldham, and my understanding is that court cases invoving individual claimants are scheduled for their local court rather than that of the defendants.

[jk2054]

oh they wont turn up, that would require effort...

 

they'll send an underpaid LPC advocate to argue for them....

 

yes it will be in twickenham

Edited Thursday at 18:33 by jk2054

[BankFodder]

Stick to your guns. Stick to your plan. Don't be diverted.

Don't imagine that the thought of a few quid or a few hundred quid is going to worry them. These people don't make decisions based on business, sense.
Just keep on going. If you're happy to avoid mediation then go to trial. Go to mediation as part of their business plan. They want to place obstacles in the way of litigants and then settle at the very last moment.



 

[grumpy59]

OK - I have rejected mediation and said I wish to proceed to a court hearing. I said 'Yes' to :

Do you consider that this claim is suitable for determination without a hearing, i.e. by a judge reading and considering the case papers, witness statements and other documents filed by the parties, making a decision, and giving a note of reasons for that decision?

since they appear to be relying solely on my failure to purchase their additional 'parcel protection coverage/insurance' which my submission of the PENCHEV and SMIRNOVS transcripts should kick firmly into touch.  

 

[BankFodder]

Frankly I think you should go to a hearing unless you feel especially nervous .

If you have any worries then you should follow our link to find out about a county court familiarisation visit

 

 

You shouldn't forget that county Court judgements are very helpful but they are not binding. They are only persuasive. 

It is difficult to see you losing but it might be better to be there in order to counter any arguments from the other side

[grumpy59]

That's fine - I'm quite happy to attend court if necessary. The question was phrased in such a way that had I declined the 'consideration on the papers' option, I would have had to explain why I didn't think such consideration was appropriate, and since P2G appear to be relying on a single (arguably flawed) issue, I thought it might result in a speedier determination.

[jk2054]

you should email contact OCMC immediately and say you want an in person hearing.

 

stupid to not

[grumpy59]

Thanks jk2054 - email now sent to OCMC requesting an in person hearing.

[jk2054]

good good

[BankFodder]

Do I take it that you had already informed the court that you wanted the case settled on the papers rather than by way of a hearing before you came here and told us?

[grumpy59]

Yup, sorry - defo should have checked with you guys first. But with the case only being argued on one point, and the Penchev & Smirnovs precedents to be presented in my bundle, I thought it would be an easy slam dunk! 

[jk2054]

Going without trial opens up to an opprortunity of a judge skim reading things or missing thingd and not accepting the weight of the oral argument