Couriers again. This time from seller perspective.

workshy_2011

OOOPS.

I just read the chat transcript again. Parcel2go have the squiggle (signature) but the courier company hasn't confirmed exactly where the parcel was delivered to yet.

So there is a possibility they will say it was delivered to the wrong address, and presuambly go round and get it back.

Sorry for being premature. But it's interesting anyway.

workshy_2011

I'm interested in this view that keeps coming up in threads about couriers, ie that the customer should take out insurance to cover losses caused by the couriers failure to do their job properly.

I'm strugglig to think of other services where this view is taken as the norm.

It's also a stance which seems at odds with the rest of this website, which is about standing up for your rights and getting the service you pay for.

ThumbRemote

workshy_2011 wrote: »

I'm interested in this view that keeps coming up in threads about couriers, ie that the customer should take out insurance to cover losses caused by the couriers failure to do their job properly.

I'm strugglig to think of other services where this view is taken as the norm.

It's also a stance which seems at odds with the rest of this website, which is about standing up for your rights and getting the service you pay for.

There is no 'insurance' on parcels. Every courier company knows they will lose or damage some parcels, and have to pay out compensation. Therefore they need to price their courier service according to parcel weight, dimension and value.

Simply put, if a company carries 1,000 parcels valued at £1 each and loses 10 of them, it's not a big deal. If they carry 1,000 parcels valued at £1,000 each and lose 10, they have a lot more to pay out.

The initial cost of the courier service has to have an element based on value.

You have chosen to pay for the correct weight and dimension, but for an incorrect value. Imagine if everyone did this - no-one is paying into the compensation pot, so where would the courier get the money to pay them all?

Jakg

FWIW I was in a similar situation (£120 item damaged, only £20 insurance*) and Parcel2Go offered me something like £60 in pre-pay credit to use with them in future rather than £20 in cash.


*overall I've saved money not using insurance on the hundreds of deliveries I've probably used - just got to eat a loss sometimes.

visidigi

workshy_2011 wrote: »

I'm interested in this view that keeps coming up in threads about couriers, ie that the customer should take out insurance to cover losses caused by the couriers failure to do their job properly.

I'm strugglig to think of other services where this view is taken as the norm.

It's also a stance which seems at odds with the rest of this website, which is about standing up for your rights and getting the service you pay for.

How is it any different from the Royal Mail?

Even if you insure it for £500 they will only pay out what you can prove you paid for it - they are even worse.

As others have mentioned, it is not insurance you buy, its liability coverage.

And like you say get the service you pay for, you didn't get the service you paid for if they have lost it. Therefore you get a refund of the service you paid for. The liability of the item going missing is a separate amount. This is to keep the cost of the service low (which you clearly target by using a cheap middleman with limited rights).

When you buy from couriers direct the compensation structure is different, much higher and usually relational to the weight of the package.

You cannot have your cake and eat it when it comes to couriers, I wish the threads we get on this every week would appreciate that.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

ThumbRemote wrote: »

There is no 'insurance' on parcels. Every courier company knows they will lose or damage some parcels, and have to pay out compensation. Therefore they need to price their courier service according to parcel weight, dimension and value.

Simply put, if a company carries 1,000 parcels valued at £1 each and loses 10 of them, it's not a big deal. If they carry 1,000 parcels valued at £1,000 each and lose 10, they have a lot more to pay out.

The initial cost of the courier service has to have an element based on value.

You have chosen to pay for the correct weight and dimension, but for an incorrect value. Imagine if everyone did this - no-one is paying into the compensation pot, so where would the courier get the money to pay them all?

I think the OP's question was why are couriers excluded from covering losses resulting from a breach of contract.

I understand what you say but I was under the impression that normally if a consumer pays for a service and suffers a loss as a result of a breach of contract they can recovery their loses without have to pay extra for so called "compensation".

visidigi

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head wrote: »

I think the OP's question was why are couriers excluded from covering losses resulting from a breach of contract.

I understand what you say but I was under the impression that normally if a consumer pays for a service and suffers a loss as a result of a breach of contract they can recovery their loses without have to pay extra for so called "compensation".

Couriers don't pay consequential loss - that's what liability coverage/insurance is for.

Its very similar to other things - for example, car insurance. You declare you drive 1,000 miles a year and your car is worth £500 = car insurance £100.

You actually drive 15,000 miles a year and your car is worth £50,000 = car insurance £500

Your car gets vandalized or you hit a patch of diesel in the road etc and you have to claim - should your insurance cover you for £50,000 because you declared your car to be worth £500?

No is the simple answer...because you didn't pay for sufficient coverage. Now you could argue they should have due care etc etc. But the point here is P2G will refund the service bought IF it turns out it was the couriers fault. Costs beyond the service itself is where the paid for liability kicks in.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

visidigi wrote: »

Couriers don't pay consequential loss - that's what liability coverage/insurance is for.

Its very similar to other things - for example, car insurance. You declare you drive 1,000 miles a year and your car is worth £500 = car insurance £100.

You actually drive 15,000 miles a year and your car is worth £50,000 = car insurance £500

Your car gets vandelised or you hit a patch of diesel in the road etc and you have to claim - should your insurance cover you for £50,000 because you declared your car to be worth £500?

No is the simple answer...

Car insurance isn't the same, the insurer hasn't failed to supply the service they sold.

I'm not suggesting the stance is incorrect just asking why they may legally cause a loss to the consumer whilst breaching the contract.

visidigi

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head wrote: »

Car insurance isn't the same, the insurer hasn't failed to supply the service they sold.

I'm not suggesting the stance is incorrect just asking why they may legally cause a loss to the consumer whilst breaching the contract.

And the courier is not failing to refund the service they sold. We're not debating whether they will refund the service the failed to provide - we're debating the liability in excess of the package declared value. Which works in the same way as insurance. You have the insurance aspect that covers you for what you declared at a cost you agree with the supplier.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

visidigi wrote: »

And the courier is not failing to refund the service they sold. We're not debating whether they will refund the service the failed to provide - we're debating the liability in excess of the package declared value. Which works in the same way as insurance. You have the insurance aspect that covers you for what you declared at a cost you agree with the supplier.

OK but if I hire an electrician and my TV blows up due to their negligence can I claim my losses without paying extra just in case they screw up?

So the courier screws up but I have to pay extra to cover my loses, it's obviously legal as they all do it but what law is covering them?