Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @ReuTheo Thanks very much. Coincidentally, it has now been exactly over 1 year since I sent my parcel with Evri and began my enquiries with them as to where my parcel is (and eventually coming to this forum / starting this thread). I understand how you are feeling. It's why I kept this thread active and detailed, so anyone who reads it, can clearly understand what was happening at each stage of the process, so they don't feel anxious or overwhelmed with the process through MCOL, mediation, arranging for trial, working through the WS / Court bundle, and finally going in front of a judge. The work has been put in so hopefully you (and everyone else) now has a good WS template to use and build the case. I agree the legal language and specifics are not easy to understand at first glance by layman / non-legal persons. What I found useful is reading the WS and researching some of the Acts in my own time so that I could understand the legal speak. This reading / research really helped me to have a clear idea of what the rules/laws are and how they apply to my case (and likely your case also). As you know, this is a self-help forum so you certainly got to put in the time/work to understand your case/argument. It will be worth it in the end (I say this from personal experience - given this time last year, I was banging my head against a wall with Evri and couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel). Above all else, the team on this forum such as @BankFodder and @jk2054 are a tremendous help with getting the WS in the right state and giving guidance. Don't be afraid to ask questions on this forum - it's for your ultimate benefit (even if sometimes the responses seem harsh - don't take it personally. If my experience is anything to go by, it'll help give clarity and maybe even close a potential gap in your case). Good luck with your case.
    • Savers are pouring money into cash Isas as they look to protect the interest on their nest eggs from tax. They put more than £11bn into cash Isas in April.View the full article
    • The stock ended the trading day at nearly $136, up 3.5%, making it more valuable than Microsoft.View the full article
    • More from the Second Sight guys in the Law Gazette. Post Office Inquiry: Second Sight accountant accuses lawyer of conspiring to pervert course of justice | Law Gazette WWW.LAWGAZETTE.CO.UK Second Sight accountant found compelling evidence in two cases that evidence was withheld, public inquiry is told.  
  • 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
      • 161 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

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


Recommended Posts

Ooops - one to many also s..... my draft reply should read as: 

Thank you for your response Mr Schnur 

I set out my position quite clearly in my letter of claim and nothing has changed.

Your insurance requirement is unlawful and is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, and also section 72 of the same statute. I would also refer you to the outcomes in PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729). 

My deadline for action - 1 May 2024 - still stands, and if P2G wish to avoid the addition of court costs and interest to my claim, you may wish to respond positively before that date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine. My taste is for something rather more brusque and that he won't forget – but it's your letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing is that you are making a big mistake imagining that they are at all concerned about wasting court costs et cetera.

They are only concerned about being obstructive and discouraging others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bank – I took your cynicism / experience on board and responded thus:

Thank you for your response Mr Schnur 

I set out my position quite clearly in my letter of claim and nothing has changed.

Your insurance requirement is unlawful and is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, and also section 72 of the same statute. I would also refer you to the outcomes in PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729). 

My deadline for action - 1 May 2024 - still stands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep thats good letter send it off.

 

next move is theirs not yours

 I do not hold any legal qualification.

Nothing I say is meant as or should be taken as legal advice.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Natalie, whom I assume works for Mr Schnur, emailed me to advise that "Please be advised that Parcel2Go.com is not an insurance broker and is not backed by any. We do not offer any kind of insurance policy on any of our services. We give all our customers the opportunity to cover their goods to a preferred value so that if a claim does arise, we are able to compensate them. All our claims are self-certified, and we are not a regulated company." (full copy of her email attached) 

I responded: 

"
Good afternoon Natalie 

Have you read my email below? Are you aware of the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘protection’ on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to settle both cases (by then also incurring court costs and interest) in full.
This will happen again with this case if I am not recompensed in full (£265 + £9.10 = £274.10) before 1 May 2024.
 

Tick tock, tick tock……"

22Apr24 - email from P2G responding to my email to Schnur of 19Apr24.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Channell J in Prudential v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [1904] 2 KB 658 gives a broad definition of insurance.

 Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Limited [2011] EWCA Civ 1413 confirms that extended warranties are insurance must be regulated.

Over 90% certain that the parcel delivery companies parcel protection schemes are "insurance" and that they are unregulated and therefore the parcel delivery companies are committing an offence by selling it.
Regulated means that the insurance is authorised but possibly exempted from certain conditions by the FCA.

Notice that on all the parcel delivery companies websites, they are at great pains to avoid using the word "insurance". But in all probability that is what it is.

A defence to the offence of selling unregulated insurance is that you exercised due diligence and this would mean that the parcel delivery companies would have to show that they had sought and received counsel's opinion that what they were doing is completely lawful.

The fact that they are selling unregulated insurance to a certain extent is a sideshow because it still doesn't permit an exemption to section 57 of the consumer rights act.

So in other words, even if it was regulated insurance – they would still be contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act and also section 72 as it is an attempt to limit or exclude liability for failure to exercise reasonable care and skill

Link to post
Share on other sites

And Mr Schnur has responded to my email reply to Natalie:
 

Good Afternoon ****, 

Thank you very much for your email regarding the above mentioned shipment.

I am very sorry for the inconvenience experienced with your order.

Please note that we will not be able to increase the compensation as suggested by yourself as you have not taken out any protection to fully cover your parcel's true value.

We are currently in the process to liaise with the courier to see whether they can conduct some depot and lost property searches for you.

We will get back to you as soon we have heard back.

 Kindest Regards

David Schnur

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Dear XXX

Reference number XX

Thank you for your message of XXX date.

They had better hurry and find it because I will be issuing proceedings on XXX date as promised.

Believe me

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bank - I've just sent the following:

Dear David 

Thank you for your reply advising you are liaising with Evri. 

They had better hurry up and find the missing golf clubs, because if they fail to do so I shall be commencing legal proceedings against P2G on 1 May as promised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And in other news, I've been in contact with the original buyer of the golf clubs in Cardiff, who received the empty box a month after I despatched it. Unfortunately he has disposed of the box, but before he did so he took a couple of photos showing the cut/torn end through which the clubs were obviously removed. I wrapped the package, especially both ends, with yards of strong, black duct tape, there is no way it would have split.....

22Apr24 - photos of cut or torn box.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Send that also to the guy who's looking for it and tell him that this is what will be produced in court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's email from Mr/Mrs/Ms S Fernandez of the P2G Claims Dept advises he/she/they "have looked into your concerns and understand the parcel was received damaged by your customer." As a result they "have agreed on this occasion only as a matter of goodwill without prejudice, to make an offer of settlement for £100.00"

I replied to him/her/they that (a) the parcel was not received damaged, but empty and (b) that they have until next Weds, 1 May to recompence me in full or the court case will commence.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

classic P2G.

I'm sure dianne and Lesley will pop an email to you at some point.

Edited by jk2054

 I do not hold any legal qualification.

Nothing I say is meant as or should be taken as legal advice.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below:

Claim

Claim number: xxxxx
Reference: P2G MAY 2024
 
Claimant
xxxxx
 
Defendant

Parcel2Go
1A Parklands
Lostock
Bolton
BL6 4SD 

Particulars of Claim

The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to
exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest.
The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx
 
Details of claim

Amount claimed £276.80

I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys!

As ever, many thanks - G59

   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost.

And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept'

Good Morning, 

Thank you for you email.

Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email. 

When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item. 

Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again. 

Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion. 

If I can assist further, please do let me know. 

Kindest Regards

Claims Team

and my response

Good Afternoon 

Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest.

I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then.

Tick tock…..
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

what email did that come from

who signed it off

 I do not hold any legal qualification.

Nothing I say is meant as or should be taken as legal advice.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no i meant the email from parcel2go

which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)

 I do not hold any legal qualification.

Nothing I say is meant as or should be taken as legal advice.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like lesley.

They'll respond some rubbish I'm sure.

 

 I do not hold any legal qualification.

Nothing I say is meant as or should be taken as legal advice.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning guys

As Bank suggested, I've now re-worked my POC to include details of my parcel's original loss,  miraculous rediscovery a month later and subsequent delivery, albeit having been opened and the contents removed. Grateful for your thoughts please, as (P2G having gone very quiet) I intend to initiate court proceedings against P2G tomorrow - 1 May.

Claim

Claim number: xxxxx
Reference: P2G MAY 2024
 
Claimant
xxxxx
 
Defendant

Parcel2Go
1A Parklands
Lostock
Bolton
BL6 4SD 

Particulars of Claim

The defendant failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing 8 second-hand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and whilst Evri collected the parcel for delivery on 18 March 24 they then ‘misplaced’ it a day later, formally declaring it lost on 27 March. On 16 April they found it and delivered it on 17 April but, at some point before delivery, it had been opened and the contents removed . The defendant refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is also in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest.
The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx
 
Details of claim

Amount claimed £276.80

 

  • Like 1
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...