Parcel Monkey Ts and Cs a Joke !!!!!

Sagwala

Recently sent a parcel that I sold on ebay via PM using Citylink. The day after delivery I had an email from PM advising that Citylink had acknowledged damaging the package. This is the first I knew. After making enquiries with the buyer, she confirmed the damage and sent me photographic evidence. I then raised a claim using PMs online service. this was 6 days after the parcel was delivered.

Despite PM being the first to advise the damage they are refusing a claim, stating their Ts and Cs state that all claims for damage must be instigated within 24 hours of the parcel delivery.

5.2. For damaged items, The Company must receive notice of your claim within 24 hours of the delivery date, with all paperwork regarding the claim submitted to the Company within 7 working days.

My argument is that having acknowledged the damage the day after , PMs own system should have logged the potential for a claim pending the evidence. They are saying that by entering into a contract with them and paying for the service, and also ticking that I had read and agree with their Ts and Cs I have breached the terms for making a claim by not logging it within 24 hours, so therefore with regret and sincere apologies blah blah blah we cannot investigate this further.

I am absolutely disgusted and want to take it further, I feel that my consumer rights have been abused, but am being told by them, in effect, that by ticking PMs Ts and Cs I cannot take it any further. is this really the case? Have I foregone my rights simply by ticking a box, that I admit I did not read.

The fact remains, CityLink damaged the goods and acknowledged the fact to PM within 24 hours. Surely I can take this further, even though I haven't conformed to their somewhat short timescale Ts and Cs.

Any advice appreciated.

unholyangel

Were you acting in the course of a business? Or was it a one off sale of your own personal goods?

Sagwala

unholyangel wrote: »

Were you acting in the course of a business? Or was it a one off sale of your own personal goods?

It was a one off personal sale.

unholyangel

Sagwala wrote: »

It was a one off personal sale.

It should then be covered by unfair contract terms.

2.4.2 The OFT is likely to object to a term that frees the supplier from his
responsibilities towards the consumer where the consumer does not make a
complaint immediately or within an unduly short period of time. This applies
particularly where:
(a) a time limit is so short that ordinary persons could easily miss it
through mere inadvertence, or because of circumstances outside
their control, and
(b) faults for which the supplier is responsible which could only become
apparent after a time limit has expired.

You couldve missed it via the recipient not telling you within 24 hours. Or because the courier left it with a neighbour and the recipient never received it until a few days later.

Theres lots of reasons it would be outside your control to notify them within 24 hours and the timeframe given is more than unreasonable imo. All it does is seek to get them off the hook for genuine claims rather than avoid fraudulent claims.

Sagwala

unholyangel wrote: »

It should then be covered by unfair contract terms.



You couldve missed it via the recipient not telling you within 24 hours. Or because the courier left it with a neighbour and the recipient never received it until a few days later.

Theres lots of reasons it would be outside your control to notify them within 24 hours and the timeframe given is more than unreasonable imo. All it does is seek to get them off the hook for genuine claims rather than avoid fraudulent claims.

I completely agree, the timescale of 24 hours is wholly unreasonable. Where is that quote taken from? Statutory rights?

unholyangel

Sagwala wrote: »

I completely agree, the timescale of 24 hours is wholly unreasonable. Where is that quote taken from? Statutory rights?

Sorry, http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/unfair_contract_terms/oft311.pdf

under group 2(d).

I think (from memory) if you look at the annexes, it has examples of terms which have had action taken. It gives the original term and the new term. And i'm pretty sure there are ones in there saying 7 days to notify of damage etc and they were made to change them to something along the lines of "you must notify us as soon as reasonably possible".