Charges for stopping lost (in post) cheque

barak

Royal Mail will pay up to a maximum of £46 for 1st class items lost in the post.

The problem is that you must have evidence of posting and loss. A "proof of posting" receipt [free of charge] would help, but it's difficult to prove that the recipient hasn't just lost or mislaid the letter.

Much better - when sending important documents or cheques - to pay 95p for Recorded Delivery/'Signed For' where the recipient must sign for the letter so cannot claim it has not been delivered.

---

Lovelyjoolz I think you've missed the point that djpuds is the issuer and the payee on the cheque - but not the recipient.

custardy

barak wrote: »

Royal Mail will pay up to a maximum of £46 for 1st class items lost in the post.

The problem is that you must have evidence of posting and loss. A "proof of posting" receipt [free of charge] would help, but it's difficult to prove that the recipient hasn't just lost or mislaid the letter.

Much better - when sending important documents or cheques - to pay 95p for Recorded Delivery/'Signed For' where the recipient must sign for the letter so cannot claim it has not been delivered.

---

Lovelyjoolz I think you've missed the point that djpuds is the issuer and the payee on the cheque - but not the recipient.

what would the OP be claiming for?
what is the value of the lost cheque?

barak

custardy wrote: »

what would the OP be claiming for?
what is the value of the lost cheque?

The claim would be for the cost of replacement i.e. £10 to cancel the original cheque and issue a new one.

custardy

barak wrote: »

The claim would be for the cost of replacement i.e. £10 to cancel the original cheque and issue a new one.

Then the claim would fail.
That is a consequential loss,not the value of the lost item.

barak

custardy wrote: »

Then the claim would fail.
That is a consequential loss,not the value of the lost item.

I'm not sure about that. I would have thought that the value of a lost item might reasonably be considered to be the cost of replacing it - unlike any penalty or other expenses incurred following its loss, which would indeed be consequential loss and not be recoverable.

A share certificate has no more intrinsic value than a cheque, but I have been assured that when using Recorded Delivery, if a certificate were to be lost in the post I would be able to claim compensation for the cost of replacing it.

The other advantage of using Recorded Delivery, as I said, is that the recipient cannot claim they haven't received it when it has been signed for.

ChiefGrasscutter

I thought you needed "special delivery" for that.

I've always understood that "Recorded" is where you need merely a "record" that the person received the item.

JuicyJesus

barak wrote: »

I'm not sure about that. I would have thought that the value of a lost item might reasonably be considered to be the cost of replacing it - unlike any penalty or other expenses incurred following its loss, which would indeed be consequential loss and not be recoverable.

A cheque has no intrinsic value, as you say. The cost of replacing it is nil, as 99.9999% of cheques are issues free of charge. A stopped cheque charge is a consequential loss as really, it is at the discretion of the issuer as to whether they stop it or not.

barak

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

I thought you needed "special delivery" for that.

I've always understood that "Recorded" is where you need merely a "record" that the person received the item.

You can certainly get higher compensation with Special Delivery - with Recorded Delivery [Signed For] there is a maximum of £46.

missile

barak wrote: »

---

Lovelyjoolz I think you've missed the point that djpuds is the issuer and the payee on the cheque - but not the recipient.

I think OP wrote a cheque on his HSBC account and sent it to be credited to his account with his mortgage provider. Thus he is payee and recipient.
As has been suggested, it might have been easier / quicker / safer to do a bank transfer online.