Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • March 23: As the coronavirus crisis escalates, the UK is placed into lockdown with strict limitations on travel. The Government guidelines state: “You should not be visiting family members who do not live in your home.” The prime minister tells the UK public they "must stay at home". People are warned not to meet friends or family members they do not live with. Those with symptoms had already been told to self-isolate     Friday 27 March: Downing Street On the day Cummings ran out of No 10, his wife, Mary Wakefield, appears to have been already ill, according to her Spectator article about the experience, in which she says: “My husband did rush home to look after me.”   Both Boris Johnson and Health Secretary Matt Hancock test positive for coronavirus, while chief medical officer Chris Whitty says he has symptoms of the disease and is self-isolating.   Mr Cummings said: "I suddenly got a call from my wife who was looking after our four-year-old child. She told me she suddenly felt badly ill." He went home and after a couple of hours his wife felt better and he returned to work. "There were many critical things at work and she asked me to return [to work] in the afternoon and I did." He then "drove up to Durham that night arriving at roughly midnight" with his family.     In spectator articles on 24th and 25th April * Wakefield (wife) wrote in the spectator that Cummings said “I feel weird” and collapsed 24 hours after he came home to look after her * She went on to explain that for the next 10 days “Dom couldn’t get out of bed. Day in, day out for ten days he lay doggo with a high fever and spasms that made the muscles lump and twitch in his legs.” * Cummings wrote that “at the end of March and for the first two weeks of April I was ill, so we were both shut in together.” * The following days, by Wakefield’s account, were a mixture of family idyll and health nightmare, as she made a “palace out of polystyrene packaging” with their son … even as Cummings’s breathing got so bad that she feared he should be in hospital. But 10 days after her husband first fell ill, she said, he began to feel better – just as Boris Johnson went into hospital. That would place the improvement in his condition around Sunday 5 April,     Sat March 28th Is apparently the day Cummings said “I feel weird” and collapsed 24 hours after he came home to look after her His wife went on to explain that for the next 10 days “Dom couldn’t get out of bed. Day in, day out for ten days he lay doggo with a high fever and spasms that made the muscles lump and twitch in his legs.” Cummings wrote that “at the end of March and for the first two weeks of April I was ill, so we were both shut in together.” 10 days from March 28th – would take us to the 7th April.   Mon March 30: Downing Street confirms Mr Cummings is suffering from coronavirus symptoms and is self-isolating.   Tuesday 31 March/1st April: Durham The police have said that on 31 March they were “made aware of reports” of Cummings’s presence in the area and had then contacted the family to “reiterate the appropriate advice around essential travel”.   2 April: During the night, Mr Cummings' four-year-old son "threw up and had a bad fever". Following medical advice, an ambulance took the child to hospital. He was accompanied by Mr Cummings' wife   3 April: Mr Cummings' son spent the night in hospital and woke up the next day having "recovered". He was tested for coronavirus and his mother, who was with him at the hospital, was told "they should return home". According to Mr Cummings, there were no taxis so he "drove to the hospital, picked him up and returned home". He said he "did not leave the car or have any contact with anybody on this short trip".   Sunday 5 April: The ‘Abba’ sighting (despite claims of ten days where he couldn’t get up with a high fever) Cummings alledgedly seen in Garden with AbbA blaring But 10 days after her husband first fell ill, she said, he began to feel better – just as Boris Johnson went into hospital. Which would place the improvement in his condition around Sunday 5 April, … Although the claimed 10 days after the 28th – the earliest point at which Cummings was said to have been symptomatic – would be the 7 April. The Guardian approaches Downing Street about the story, only to be told by a spokesman: “It will be a no comment on that one.” Mr Cummings said "after I started to recover, one day in the second week, I tried to walk outside the house". He confirmed he, his wife and his son went for a walk into woods owned by his father and it was at this point he was seen by passers-by but his family "had no interaction with them". The exact date is not clear but his second week isolating in Durham would have between 4-11th   6 April: At some point in the week leading up to this date, Mr Cummings discussed his decision to travel to Durham with the prime minister. "When we were both sick and in bed," he said, "I mentioned to him what I had done. Unsurprisingly given the condition we were in, neither of us remember the conversation in any detail."   Fri April 10: Number 10 is again contacted for comment regarding Mr Cumming’s trip by the Guardian. Instead of defending the journey, officials declined to comment.   Fri 10th/Sat 11th April: The 14-day period of Cummings’s isolation would have expired on 10/11th April, assuming it is counted from when Wakefield appears to have first fallen ill on 27 March or when Cummings fell ill 24 hours later.   11 April: Believing he had recovered by this date, albeit "feeling weak and exhausted", Mr Cummings said he "sought expert medical advice". "I explained our family's symptoms and all the timings and asked if it was safe to return to work on Monday or Tuesday, seek childcare and so on. I was told that it was safe and I could return to work"   Sunday 12 April: Barnard Castle Wakefield’s birthday, according to Companies House records – they allegedly made a trip to Barnard Castle, a charming town 30 miles from the Cummings’s family property, described on the English Heritage website as having “fantastic views” and “plenty to do for families on a day out”. That detail emerged in an interview with Robin Lees, a retired chemistry teacher who lives in the town. Lees, who says he has a photographic memory, told the Guardian he was “a bit gobsmacked” to see Cummings, and then was so incensed that he made a note of the family car’s numberplate and checked it online when he got home. Cummings acknowledges he drove to Barnard Castle, 30 miles from his parents' home in Durham, with his wife and child. He explained this episode as needing to test his driving was fine before making the long drive back to London. He said he'd been having problems with his vision   Tuesday 14 April: London The Guardian asked Wakefield to confirm whether the family had been in London throughout the lockdown period, but received no reply. Cummings was photographed back in Downing Street on 14 April   Sunday 19 April: ‘bluebell’ woods - Cummings and Wakefield in Houghall woods? Could Cummings have then gone back to the north-east from London? Downing Street is emphatic that he did not. The denial came after another witness claimed to the Guardian and Sunday Mirror that they had seen Cummings and Wakefield on a country walk in Houghall Woods, a beauty spot near his parents’ property in Durham. According to this account, Cummings said: “Aren’t the bluebells lovely?” Cummings says he did not return to Durham   Monday 20 April Cummings seen in London again   May 23: Downing Street statement: “Owing to his wife being infected with suspected coronavirus and the high likelihood that he would himself become unwell, it was essential for Dominic Cummings to ensure his young child could be properly cared for.” The statement said: “At no stage was he or his family spoken to by the police about this matter, as is being reported. “His actions were in line with coronavirus guidelines. Mr Cummings believes he behaved reasonably and legally.” Speaking outside his home, Mr Cummings reiterated: “I behaved reasonably and legally”. When a reporter suggested to him that his actions did not look good, he replied: “Who cares about good looks? “It’s a question of doing the right thing. It’s not about what you guys think.” Later at the daily Downing Street briefing, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said Mr Cummings had the PM’s “full support” and that Mr Johnson “knew that he was unwell and that he was in lockdown”. Mr Shapps said it had always been permissible for families to travel to be closer to their relatives as long as they “go to that location and stay in that location”. Meanwhile, deputy chief medical officer for England, Dr Jenny Harries, said that travelling during lockdown was permissible if “there was an extreme risk to life”, with a “safeguarding clause” attached to all advice to prevent vulnerable people being stuck at home with no support.   Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak have tweeted their support for Mr Cummings.   Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said on Monday morning that Mr Cummings had "set out absolutely clearly and absolutely categorically he didn't break the rules and didn't break the law". The attorney general, Suella Braverman, tweet on Saturday in which she quoted the full text of the No 10 statement on Boris Johnson’s chief aide in which the prime minister said he had behaved “responsibly and legally”.   (Disgraceful) Boris Johnson said at the weekend Cummings acted “responsibly and legally and with integrity”   “The PM’s risible defence of Cummings is an insult to all those who have made such sacrifices to ensure the safety of others,” said Johne Inge, the bishop of Worcester, on Twitter.   “What planet are they on?” asked a front page headline in the Daily Mail, an influential right-wing paper usually supportive of Johnson.   https://descrier.co.uk/politics/dominic-cummings-and-wife-tried-to-cover-up-lockdown-breach-in-articles-for-the-spectator/   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/24/dominic-cummings-timeline-what-we-know-about-his-movements   https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/uk/timeline-the-coronavirus-lockdown-and-dominic-cummings-trip-to-durham/   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52784290   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/25/attorney-general-faces-calls-to-resign-defends-dominic-cummings-suella-braverman   https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-cummings/what-planet-are-they-on-no-respite-for-johnson-and-aide-idUKKBN2310UE   https://cyprus-mail.com/2020/05/25/what-plant-are-they-on-press-slams-johnson-and-cummings/
    • simply tell them on the phone writing only sorry as I might want to escalate this to the fos or court. sorry but no speaky..speaky   you night find this interesting?   https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/jun/09/life-insurance-misselling-aviva-hamilton-life   dx
    • I've had a few missed calls and then text from RBS wanting to talk about the letter I sent, two posts up.    Am I best to wait for them to write? Didn't really want to get into a discussion with them about it ideally!
    • I haven’t even looked.  I doubt some PR bod would have been in the loop.
    • Gove will be rubbing his little hands together in glee. He been quite careful in his limited wording in 'supporting demonic. but he poo'd his own pot a bit with that priority preferential test   No confidence vote (in PM not party).
  • Our picks

    • View this quiz Employment status during COVID-19
      What do you do if you’ve been told not to come to work due to the current crisis.  Watch the video here or on the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page.

      Did you learn anything? Do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 0 replies
    • One Parking Solutions - Damning judgement. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421148-one-parking-solutions-damning-judgement/
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 63 replies
    • View this quiz Coping with extreme hardship
      Life can be tough when you're entering the world of work and in the present virus crisis, things are even more difficult.

      Watch the video below or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page . Afterwards, you can see if you've understood the points which are being made by taking the quiz.
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
    • View this quiz: Pre-pay meters
      An explanation of how some gas and electric companies offer emergency quarantine support.

       
      Watch the video here – or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page and watch it there. Then come back here and do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 6 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
splendiferous

Royal Mail wouldn't refund full value - can I sue?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4893 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everybody, to cut a long story short, I bought some 4GB MP3 players from somebody on Ebay, who is in Hong Kong. He charged about £40 postage and the bids started at 99p, and the average cost of each player was £3.00 plus the £40 postage. I bought a lot of these items (about 25), knowing that the £40 postage was really the cost of the item, as 99% of Chinese and Hong Kong sellers used to do this on Ebay, as they only pay fees on the final value of the item, i.e. they only pay fees on £3.00, instead of on the £40.00.

 

Anyway, they arrived and all turned out to be faulty - they weren't 4GB, they were 2GB ones that, if you copied over more than 2GB of files, then corrupted the files and became unusable, as you can't format the solid state memory to fix the problem. So I contacted Paypal and they froze my payment to the seller (thank god), and the seller agreed to give me a full refund. I then sent them back in three parcels, as I could only get insurance up to £500 per parcel via Royal Mail, and other services from other companies were about £80 - £100 for the lot of 25 players, whereas the Post Office was about £9 per parcel of 8 or 9, IIRC.

 

Two of the parcels reached the seller fine, the final one went missing. It had nine or ten players in it. He finally agreed to refund me the amount I paid for the ones that he had received, including the 'postage' cost of £40 each, thus reflecting the true value of the items.

 

But when I claimed for the missing parcel, I sent the printouts of the Ebay auctions, and fully explained that the VALUE of the items, which I insured for £500, was £40 or more EACH, not the £3.00 average that the final bid was.

 

The Royal Mail eventually sent me back a cheque (after two months!) for £75 odd pounds, claiming that since I had only paid £3.00 each (or something like that) per item, they couldn't take the obviously inflated postage costs into account.

 

I sent back the cheque with another letter explaining that the value of the items was the cost of the final bid PLUS the majority of the 'postage' costs, as the cost to send them to me from Hong Kong was only about £40.00, according to the stamps on the box they arrived in. Therefore the REST of the money I paid was obviously the VALUE of the items. I also sent them quotes from manufacturers of the same MP4 players (or very similar ones) showing them the current market price (which I also stated was less than it was three months ago, when they were 'lost').

 

They sent me back the cheque and said there was nothing they could do. I then wrote to Postwatch. Who then wrote back saying unfortunately there was nothing THEY could do either, as the 'value' of the item was the 'price I paid'!

 

I'm sure there are lots of people here who have brought items on Ebay from abroad, and knowingly paid inflated postage costs because the item's final bid price was so low. What can I do?

Can I sue the Royal Mail, as the items' value clearly WAS £40 each, and I think I did more than enough to prove this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got caught! What the seller was doing was fraudulant, effectively swindling eBay out of their final value fees. You were complicit in knowing he was doing this and inflating the value of the postage to cover the cost of the goods.

 

Irrespective of whether the goods he eventually supplied were not as described (2Gb instead of the expected 4Gb), your bill of sale was also a 'false instrument' as when the goods arrived in the UK, you did not pay HMC&E the correct import duties and VAT, this in itself is a criminal act and leaves you open to an action to defraud. THe goods probably had no import duty charged on the incorrect value either, possibly due to a mis-decription by the sender. It doesn't matter that the items were eventually returned, but at least you could mitigate any charges by saying they were returned.

 

Now to Royal Mail, why to you expect them to support your sellers improper practices simply because you expect everyone to take notice that the cost was REALLY hidden in the postage fees? Sorry, RM is right, and if you take any action against them, you might even find yourself defending a criminal action for false importation and fraud.

 

I'd chalk it up to experience and keep your head down. Don;t trade in this way, the only people who benefit are the [problematic].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that EVERY Chinese and Hong Kong seller did this at the time, Ebay have now stopped them from doing it, but I wasn't actually trying to con Ebay out of anything - they created the problem by refusing to listen to customers' complaints about this. Ebay can hardly complain at ME about their refusal to police their own site, when tens of thousands of buyers have been complaining about it for years...

I didn't actually even think about the import duty - I wasn't setting out to defraud anybody.

I didn't expect the Royal Mail to support the seller's practices - his part in this is irrelevant to my claim with the Royal Mail. The contract I entered into with them was for them to insure my goods for their value.

 

You surely realise that probably millions of such transactions have gone through on Ebay before they finally got their act together and stopped sellers from doing it? The forums were full of customers complaining about this practice, for years, and they did nothing about it.

 

You seem to think that the whole reason behind me buying these items was to defraud customs and excise, when actually that had nothing to do with it - nobody else was selling them at a 'normal' price with realistic postage charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - it don't think you were in this to defraud, you were taking a risk - which yoiu clearly accepted - but the flipside is the 'true' value is not what you paid for it, but the value you can prove to others.

 

Your purchase, and the way in which it was transacted put you on shaky ground, therefore when one part of the chain goes sour (the return of the goods) your requirement to prove the value to RM depends on the proof you supply. They do not compensate for postage, they never have - onlyt the cost of the goods. You'll also find you'll not get the cost of the postage you paid to send the parcel back, ONLY the price of the goods that were contained therein.

 

As I mentioned, because of your expouire to all sorts of additional horrors, I wouldn't make an issue of it with Royal Mail. They DO accept eBay print-outs as satisfactory evidence of the auction cost which is OK for most of us, but when sellers load the postage to effectively pay for the goods, they buyer always loses out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're lucky in one respect that the eBay seller didn't have to refund postage paid, you could have been far more out of pocket than you are.


Ex CAG helper ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I wasn't even aware I was taking a risk when I bought them. I didn't realise it was illegal (as there were literally thousands of such transactions taking place on Ebay every single day). I just thought it was 'just the way things were', until Ebay finally got round to listening to their customers and acting on their wishes. (And that can take a LONG time...)

 

Anyway, I won't ever do it again, in fact I'm not going to buy anything from Ebay that comes from China or Hong Kong ever again, I'd rather buy from a U.K. seller and get it within a couple of days anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not as easy as you might think. My last eBay purchase of a Memory Card shown the item located in 'Ilford, Essex'. When I checked his feedback I discovered he was based and shipped from China. I provided eBay with a list of 8 of his auctions, expecting him to be barred. They remioved the 8 I reported, lefy 20 similar auctions, and he carries on trading. Not only do you need to be careful, you need to be clirvoyant too! Sorry you got stung, BTW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ebay is poor. dont get me started on paypal........


post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah eBay is poor but all they say is that they are a venue end of, i wouldn't buy anything of value or importance from there anyway.


Ex CAG helper ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You got caught! What the seller was doing was fraudulant, effectively swindling eBay out of their final value fees. You were complicit in knowing he was doing this and inflating the value of the postage to cover the cost of the goods.

Sure, but none of this has anything to do with the Royal Mail.

 

Naturally, they require evidence of the value of the goods, before refunding that value for losing them.

 

Personally, I'd have thought the mere fact that the poster paid for £500 insurance rather than some lower amount is evidence that the value was greater than 99 pence each. After all, the poster did not know one of the parcels was going to be lost in the post.

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrespective of whether the goods he eventually supplied were not as described (2Gb instead of the expected 4Gb), your bill of sale was also a 'false instrument' as when the goods arrived in the UK, you did not pay HMC&E the correct import duties and VAT, this in itself is a criminal act and leaves you open to an action to defraud.

 

This is wrong, the value of postage and packing is included when assessing import duty and VAT, so there was no criminal act.

 

See

 

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000014&propertyType=document#P66_5558

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, I'd have thought the mere fact that the poster paid for £500 insurance rather than some lower amount is evidence that the value was greater than 99 pence each. After all, the poster did not know one of the parcels was going to be lost in the post.

 

What you overlook is the fact many people insure half-bricks in the mail, and base this and a false invoice on claiming their 'rightful' replacement cost. But all this is a side show to the main event, you were still happy to let the seller defraud eBay from their fees because 'everyone else did it'. It is still contrary to eBay's T&Cs.

 

As to the RM settlement, they'll pay what the invoice says the goods are worth, not what it cost you in 'carriage' to receive them OR send them back. Your original post wanted to know if you could raise an action to get them to pay you. The answer remains the same, of course you can - but the chances of a judge supporting such a practice would be highly unusual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is wrong, the value of postage and packing is included when assessing import duty and VAT, so there was no criminal act.

 

A few things to note - when an item is underdeclared in value, it misses out on the calculation of VAT and import duty and is delivered without penalty. However, in the REAL world, the cost of shipments are unknown to the C&E as the bulk of shipments are on a contract basis and not priced individually, usually invoiced to the sender in arrears - so the carriage cost seldom is an issue. IF there are stamps shown, then they can calculate, but most don't bother, sticking to the £18 personal import limit.

 

Moving on. You've never actually explained how much tax and duty you actually paid for recieving this batch of MP3 players? If you were 'lucky' in not being called to pay the dues, there is an expectation that on receipt you would, as a matter of honesty, contact C&E and ask for the assessment to tax etc could be paid. You didn't do this, so effectively you had smuggled goods and did nothing to mitigate the oversight. You did send them back again, but not having the goods still does not excuse the original act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you overlook is the fact many people insure half-bricks in the mail, and base this and a false invoice on claiming their 'rightful' replacement cost. But all this is a side show to the main event, you were still happy to let the seller defraud eBay from their fees because 'everyone else did it'. It is still contrary to eBay's T&Cs.

 

It wasn't really up to me... Ebay members in their thousands (probably tens if not hundreds of thousands) have complained to Ebay about it, to try to get them to ban sellers who do it. They did nothing about it, and that's why almost all of the Chinese sellers inflate P&P charges.

Ebay has nothing to do with it! It's the Royal Mail who refused to refund me the value of the goods.

The VALUE of the goods is the MARKET value. I proved beyond all doubt that they were worth at least £40 each, yet the Royal Mail didn't refund me this amount.

 

 

As to the RM settlement, they'll pay what the invoice says the goods are worth, not what it cost you in 'carriage' to receive them OR send them back.

 

You're quite right to put 'carriage' in quotes, because it's exactly that: carriage in name only. Clearly! A 250g item doesn't cost £40 to send from Hong Kong, and ten of them certainly don't cost £400 to send!

 

Your original post wanted to know if you could raise an action to get them to pay you. The answer remains the same, of course you can - but the chances of a judge supporting such a practice would be highly unusual.

 

Why? Has anybody ever tried it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving on. You've never actually explained how much tax and duty you actually paid for recieving this batch of MP3 players? If you were 'lucky' in not being called to pay the dues, there is an expectation that on receipt you would, as a matter of honesty, contact C&E and ask for the assessment to tax etc could be paid. You didn't do this,

 

Pardon me? How do you know I didn't contact C&E?

 

 

so effectively you had smuggled goods and did nothing to mitigate the oversight. You did send them back again, but not having the goods still does not excuse the original act.

 

 

Who lost out the most here? Me - who lost over £400 due to the Royal Mail worming their way out of their insurance agreement, or C&E?

 

I didn't even think about the customs charges when I bought the items on Ebay, so I therefore wasn't TRYING to do anything illegal, even if I did so, by default.

 

You make out that Ebay has somehow lost out because of the 'evil' seller, and because of me! That's a laugh! Everybody here surely knows how much Ebay make in profits every year, and how absolutely atrocious their customer service is, and how they DON'T LISTEN to their customers when they complain about people breaking their rules, just like this case!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ebay is poor. dont get me started on paypal........

 

I agree. Ebay is now full of nothing but Chinese sellers (I think they get to list for free or something ridiculous like that) and it's almost impossible to find UK sellers for some items, not unless you don't mind sifting your way through literally scores of Chinese sellers' items first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And furthermore, the Royal Mail have defrauded ME and every other customer of theirs, by failing to honour the 'insurance' they offer. I've had numerous other items go missing (i.e. get stolen) and when I send off a claim form, I have about a 33% chance of ever hearing about it again. Thankfully in most of those cases, the items were only about £20 each. But just think how many items are being STOLEN every day by our 'Royal' mail service's employees, and what percentage are not compensated for.

I paid the extra for the insurance. I didn't receive the amount I insured the items for. I could have just as easily produced some sort of fake documentation (or real documentation) to say I'd bought them at £45 each and paid £2.00 postage. Next time I will do so. It's easy to edit the screen of an Ebay auction, just download it, search for the amounts you want to change, and change them, then print it out. But I didn't do this, I was foolishly honest - I thought the Royal Mail would understand plain English and refund me the MARKET VALUE I paid for the items.

 

Really Buzby, this idea that I am some kind of master criminal is ridiculous.

 

How many half bricks does one have to send before one goes missing, in order for it to be a money making venture? That's anecdotal evidence, and irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I didn't even think about the customs charges when I bought the items on Ebay, so I therefore wasn't TRYING to do anything illegal, even if I did so, by default.

 

 

unfortunately ignorance isn't an excuse in law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It wasn't really up to me... Ebay members in their thousands (probably tens if not hundreds of thousands) have complained to Ebay about it, to try to get them to ban sellers who do it. They did nothing about it, and that's why almost all of the Chinese sellers inflate P&P charges.

 

eBsy is a venue. Thry rely on members complaints to remove items that break the rules. Saying they did nothing is clearly wrong. The problem here is the same type of listings re-appear very quickly and I found over 30 from one seller (in China, and misrepresenting is location as the UK) so it still goes on.

 

Ebay has nothing to do with it! It's the Royal Mail who refused to refund me the value of the goods. The VALUE of the goods is the MARKET value. I proved beyond all doubt that they were worth at least £40 each, yet the Royal Mail didn't refund me this amount.

 

eBay is the outfit providing the proof of the value of your purchase, so are vwet much having something to do with it - unless of course you get your fraudulent seller to oblige?

 

A 250g item doesn't cost £40 to send from Hong Kong, and ten of them certainly don't cost £400 to send!

 

Really? A courier service from HK for a spare part for some important piece of machinery could cost double that for next-day delivery (and is common for mission-critical repairs) so I fail to see why you think such expense is 'obvious' as a cost contribution.

 

Why? Has anybody ever tried it?

 

Yes, and I lost. My item was stolen, the postwoman identified and dismissed but no civil remedy was possible as their Act of Parliament gave them immunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was foolishly honest - I thought the Royal Mail would understand plain English and refund me the MARKET VALUE I paid for the items.

 

And you somehow prove this with a fraudulent Invoice, and expect them to fall in line with your scheme? Dream on!

 

Insurance operates of full disclosure and trust, from what I can see your loss and RMs reasonable response are the cause and effect of an action that was not honourable, therefore you are not entitled to claim in the way you want, and whether you knew what you were doing was wrong or not, it is no defence. Next time you are in a similar situation, think twice about doing it in this way. And as for your indignation about how I did or didn't know whether you paid tax on the consignment, I'm sure you would have mentioned it as part of the injustice received but you didn't, so it is a fair assumption.

 

There is little for me to add, except if you attempt to take RM to court, this may open a can of worms best left shut. I spent three days in court with them before, and they try every trick in the book. Rest assured, your actions would not go unnoticed, even though they ostensibly had no bearing on the main event.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
unfortunately ignorance isn't an excuse in law.

 

Here's the law from http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/

 

"Inclusion of postage charges in customs value - Article 165 of EC Regulation (EEC) 2454/93 requires all postal charges levied up to the place of destination in respect of goods sent by post to be included in the customs value of the goods. However, this does not apply to gifts other than those sent by Express Mail Services."

 

I'd say the suggestion the OP committed a crime is simply wrong.

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...