Courier company, damaged item, what rights do I have?

Timmy C

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
7,973
Reaction score
1,822
Points
1,604
Age
51
Hi all,

To cut a long story short, I sold a couple of power amps in the classifieds, posted in original packaging using Parcelmonkey/City Link but the boxes arrived looking knocked about so buyer signed unchecked. Upon opening, the amps appeared fine but after actually setting them up to use, one of them turned out to be damaged internally.

So as I'd taken out extra full insurance, I gathered all the required evidence including photos of packaging and proof of sale price etc and put in my claim on the Tuesday. The amps had been delivered on the previous Thursday. However they have rejected my claim as in their T&C's they say there's only a 24 hour window to report damage.

So my question is, do I have any legal rights based on the fact that the damage was internal and therefore not immediately obvious? Or any other grounds that may help me with my claim? Much as I will appreciate anyones thoughts, I'm hoping for info on my rights (or lack of!) rather than the 'you haven't got a leg to stand on as it's in their T&C's' comments I've found on other similar threads on the net.

Thanks in advance for any advice!
 
City link T&Cs say they must receive notification of intent to claim within 3 working days after delivery, for deliveries within the UK.
And they must then receive the details of the claim with 7 working days.

24 hours seemed ludicrous to me, right enough.
And, really, the recipient should have signed for the box damaged if damage to the packing was visible.
That's a real facepalm there.
 
cant you just go striaght to parcel monkey if you bought the service through them? Surely they should be responsible for taking it up with city link, you should be refunded once they (parcel monkey) make a decision.
 
Parcel Monkey (whoever they may be, never 'eard of 'em) do say 24 hours notification for damage, which is very unreasonable and far from the norm.
Strange, but gives them an excellent 'out'.
 
Well that's the thing, I am dealing with Parcelmonkey as they are the ones I paid for the service. It's their t&c's that say 24 hours. I have no doubt City Link won't want to know at all.

I was rather hoping there would be some sort of consumer rights law that says I should have a reasonable time to discover/report a problem as 24 hours is absurd as you say.
 
Parcelmonkey have been around for a few years and I've used them loads of times with no trouble in the past but then never had a missing or damaged item until now.
 
Parcel Monkey (whoever they may be, never 'eard of 'em) do say 24 hours notification for damage, which is very unreasonable and far from the norm.
Strange, but gives them an excellent 'out'.
They are one of these sub-contracting courier services like Interparcel who buy up big blocks of deliveries from the likes of City Link and sell them on. So if City Link have a 3 day limit, then they will have a shorter limit as they are City Link's client and they have to raise it with City Link.
 
So is it the general feeling that I don't have any rights due to their T&C's then? If I could find any legal rights in my favour I would be happy to go to a small claims court as T&C's aside, they're clearly in the wrong if that makes sense!
 
If the customer doesn't report the damage at point of delivery then I don't think the carrier will accept it's transit damage.

I think your buyer has dropped the ball on this one and I'm pretty sure this is how a lot of carriers will respond to any claim made.

edit* I also know from experience that City Link do not accept "Unchecked" on pods for claims against them (although in my case it was a shortage not a damage)
 
Last edited:
Even it if the 24 hours were 3 days, I suspect you would still have real difficulty claiming :-

No damage reported at delivery
No external damage on the power amp

They would just say the electronic fault existed before it was sent, or happened after safe delivery - even though not true you can't prove otherwise.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
No true I can't prove otherwise although there is apparently something now rattling around loose inside the amp. Surely they could say the same if it arrived cracked in half....I couldn't prove it wasn't sent that way.
 
If the customer doesn't report the damage at point of delivery then I don't think the carrier will accept it's transit damage.

I think your buyer has dropped the ball on this one and I'm pretty sure this is how a lot of carriers will respond to any claim made.

edit* I also know from experience that City Link do not accept "Unchecked" on pods for claims against them (although in my case it was a shortage not a damage)


Well if that was the grounds they were trying to use to avoid paying out I would discuss things further with the buyer but at the moment they are claiming it's the time frame that's the problem. If I can get them to agree to reassess the claim and they then insist the items should have been rejected due to the damaged packaging then that's another story but so far they haven't questioned why the package was accepted in the first place.
 
No true I can't prove otherwise although there is apparently something now rattling around loose inside the amp. Surely they could say the same if it arrived cracked in half....I couldn't prove it wasn't sent that way.


True, but in the meatime, they have your money, you have broken equipment, and it's up to you to demonstrate that they did it otherwise they aren't going to volunteer anyhing.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
So is that legally the case? I'm just talking hypothetically here but if this were a court case are you saying I have to have some sort of evidence that they caused the damage? Surely nothing short of video evidence of the amp working up until point of collection and further video evidence of testing at the point of delivery would actually prove the damage occurred in their hands.

This isn't entirely relevant at the moment anyway. What I was hoping to find out is if the 24hr clause in their T&C's is reason enough for them to refuse to pay out or is there any law about fair terms and conditions that can help me.
 
Could one not argue that only having 24 hours to put a claim in for damage compensation, considering it doesn't allow sufficient time for an amp set up test, be unreasonable in terms of fairness. I would consider speaking with Citizens Advice, who now deal with consumer protection advice, (formally consumer direct) or your local trading standards department of the Council, regarding 'unfair terms' in the contract.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/about-the-oft/legal-powers/legal/unfair-terms/what-is-unfair

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/contents/made
 
Could one not argue that only having 24 hours to put a claim in for damage compensation, considering it doesn't allow sufficient time for an amp set up test, be unreasonable in terms of fairness. I would consider speaking with Citizens Advice, who now deal with consumer protection advice, (formally consumer direct) or your local trading standards department of the Council, regarding 'unfair terms' in the contract.

What is an unfair term?  - The Office of Fair Trading

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Thank you! That was the way I was looking at things. 24 hours does seem to be a bit of a joke. I felt that claiming on the Tuesday after a delivery the previous Thursday was certainly reasonable given that ignoring the weekend, that was only the Friday and Monday that nothing was done on my part. I think I'll call Citizens Advice tomorrow.
 
Sounds like a plan. Let us know how you get on.
 
Hope it goes well for you, and I do agree that 24 hours to notify is a bit short, but you have a lot against you

Does the courier state up front the 24 hour requirement - YES
Does the sales process ask whether you agree with the T&Cs - I'm guessing YES
Did you check that you had read and agree with the T&Cs - I'm guessing YES
Did the recipient sign that the packaging was damaged - NO
Was the damage reported within 24 hours - NO

Seems the courier has a lot on his side. I guess it will come down to whether 24 hours is an acceptable amount of time regardless of what is in the T&Cs.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
Oh I totally agree and that's why I posted, to see if there's any law that will come down on my side on the grounds that 24 hours is unreasonable. After all, if I agreed to T&C's that stated that the delivery driver had the right to deliver the goods straight up the recipients backside if he didn't like his haircut, that still wouldn't make it acceptable to do so.

I've seen a number of websites in the past that have stated no right to return unwanted items or a re-stocking fee can be charged but no mention of the 7 day right to return DSR ruling. I was just hoping that in this instance there might be something that can help me despite their 24hr time limit.
 
Couriers are arses. Not all but a lot find it funny to smash boxes, kick and stamp them. I've seen this happen in front of my eyes both when i did some work for a courier and amazingly when i was collecting something as a customer.
I try never to use them, the few times i have, the stuff is often broken at the other end. The last time i used a courier, i bought a ladder, it was bent by the time i got it. They must have really put some effort in to bend a ladder but i suspect ruining the stuff they carry classes as entertainment for some of them. Sorry to hear about your amps, good luck with the claim.
 
Hello

Can anyone tell me about a courier company refusing liability on damaging 2 items being moved from the courier van to the flat. The 2 items were damaged only from moving the items from the van to the flat. I entered into a contract via email (the emails were the contract). No T&C's were mentioned but Goods In Transit Insurance was mentioned only when I said I wasn't happy and that I wanted compensating. I do not think this company is registered with the National Guild of Removers and Storers.

Thanks
 
What proof do you have that the goods were damaged from van to flat and not in transit?
 
Couriers are arses. Not all but a lot find it funny to smash boxes, kick and stamp them. I'
I try never to use them, the few times i have, the stuff is often broken at the other end.

The few times you've used one the stuff is often broken, really

I have an ebay business, this month I sent 30 items by courier, hermes ups and parcel force and probably double that by royal mail , most items are electronic, some fragile , none lost, none damaged, not one

In fact in 10 years I've never had to make a claim, the service is that good I never insure anything over the minimum they offer in the price.

To the OP

I think you're wasting your time, if the box was signed for without any damage reported they could quite rightly argue the courier handed it over ok so the recipient must have dropped it.

It's one of the risks of posting something to a third party and not spelling out if the box is damaged refuse the delivery
 
He really would be wasting his time if he was still trying to resolve it, this thread is 4 years old! :D
 
the first part of my post is still valid , if the poster is still alive :D
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom