Very Poor Service - Lost Parcel - my rights ?

Marktheshark

They will run the clock down, you do not wait for them to instigate action, you do it.
Serve a cancellation notice on them by Phone, e-mail and in writing with certificate of postage.

wealdroam

mancuk29 wrote: »

The order online says deliver by 9th Feb...

It's not February yet... might still arrive in time.

visidigi

mancuk29 wrote: »

The order online says deliver by 9th Feb which was accepted xos it said order accepted delivery by 9th jan

And it says next day delivery when you order

Very customer services are horrendous and they will hide behind yheir conditions xos their staff won't know the law only company policy

Next day delivery is not next day from order, its next day from dispatch.

Commonly misunderstood term.

frugal_mike

mancuk29 wrote: »

My question is - under Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) it states that I can claim compensation on missed delivery , the very system States delivery by the 9th is this sufficient for a delivery date ?

I don't see anywhere in the Consumer Contracts Regulations that says this, could you point me at the relevant section?

The closest I can see is section 42, Time for Delivery. This section says that the retailer has 30 days to deliver, unless agreed otherwise. If they fail to deliver then the consumer can either immediately treat the contract as nonexistent, or specify a reasonable period for delivery to be attempted. Once the contract is declared nonexistent the retailer must redund all monies paid without undue delay.

unholyangel

wealdroam wrote: »

No they cannot.



But at the time you made the purchase, you agreed to the terms and conditions.
So effectively, you agreed that although they told you the thing would be delivered on 9 January, you also accepted that they might not manage to deliver on that day.

All depends on how their T&Cs are worded and the reason for the delay.

2.6.5 Clauses excluding liability for delay may be acceptable where they are
restricted in scope to delays unavoidably caused by factors beyond the
supplier's control (see examples in Annexe A, Group 2(f)). But such terms
should not enable the supplier to refuse redress where he is at fault, for
example in not taking reasonable steps to prevent or minimise delay. Where
examples of such factors are stated, then, in order to be clearly fair, they
should only be matters which are genuinely outside the supplier's control,
not situations such as shortage of stock, labour problems, etc, which can
be the fault of the supplier.

wealdroam

unholyangel wrote: »

All depends on how their T&Cs are worded and the reason for the delay.

See post#6 for half the answer.

unholyangel

wealdroam wrote: »

See post#6 for half the answer.

thanks

A term such as that would likely be unfair - in fact theres one in unfair terms annexe a which was made to change their terms from wording such as very's to saying they cannot be liable for events out with their control.

If it was another company I might be surprised - not with very though! :rotfl:

mancuk29

unholyangel wrote: »

thanks

A term such as that would likely be unfair - in fact theres one in unfair terms annexe a which was made to change their terms from wording such as very's to saying they cannot be liable for events out with their control.

If it was another company I might be surprised - not with very though! :rotfl:

Can you clarify then where I stand as i am now really confused as most people are saying they are not liable and I can't claim anything but reading your updates your saying their conditions are unfair ???

unholyangel

mancuk29 wrote: »

Can you clarify then where I stand as i am now really confused as most people are saying they are not liable and I can't claim anything but reading your updates your saying their conditions are unfair ???

As above, it depends on the reason for the delay (and also that a specific date was named for delivery at the time the contract was formed).

If it was due to weather for example, thats outside of their control. But if it was within their control and they were negligent or failed to take steps to minimise the risk, then they would probably be liable.

Their term being unfair doesnt mean they're liable in all situations - it just means that it doesnt form part of the contract (unless a fair meaning can be found - where a term is perhaps ambiguous) and that they may end up in trouble themselves if the term was found to be misleading (as misleading consumers about their rights can amount to a criminal offence)

mancuk29

unholyangel wrote: »

As above, it depends on the reason for the delay (and also that a specific date was named for delivery at the time the contract was formed).

If it was due to weather for example, thats outside of their control. But if it was within their control and they were negligent or failed to take steps to minimise the risk, then they would probably be liable.

Their term being unfair doesnt mean they're liable in all situations - it just means that it doesnt form part of the contract (unless a fair meaning can be found - where a term is perhaps ambiguous) and that they may end up in trouble themselves if the term was found to be misleading (as misleading consumers about their rights can amount to a criminal offence)

so loss / theft by a delivery agent (who is actually part of the same group) i presume this is not outside their control ?

Thank you for your help so far i have again rang and am expecting again a phone call back at 1900hrs ... it doesn't help that very seem to have a off shore call centre and sometimes the member of staff doesn't understand uk law