Signed for neighbour's parcel, then burgled

Fosterdog

Why did your FIL even take the parcel in? If you were away and he wasn't going to be at the house later for the neighbours to get it then he would have been better refusing delivery. The courier could then either leave it with another neighbour or take it back and it would be up to the neighbours who ordered to arrange redelivery.

Altarf

simonb4779 wrote: »

My insurance company said that the neighbour's parcel is not covered under our contents policy. ASOS say that as the parcel was delivered that it's no longer their problem.

There are a number of issues here.

Unless the neighbour specifically directed ASOS or the courier to leave the parcel with a neighbour then ASOS must give your neighbour a refund or send the goods again.

If ASOS are being stupid about this, if the neighbour paid with a credit card get them to to a s75 claim, or if a debit card a chargeback on the basis the goods have not been delivered.

And that is not delivered to the address on the delivery order.

As far as you are concerned, the courier decided to ask you to look after the goods they were responsible for delivering. They took the risk you would do so, and you did your best.

However even if you didn't look after them properly and decided to steal the goods, tear them up, set fire to them, then that is the couriers problem. Your neighbour could still demand a refund or replacement from ASOS.

The courier should have delivered to your neighbour (assuming they didn't ask to be delivered to you), so the courier took the risk that instead of delivering where they should they would leave it with you. That is the couriers problem, and whether they have to pay ASOS for those goods comes down to the contract they have with ASOS. Whatever it is, it isn't anything to do with you or your neighbour

Undervalued

Altarf wrote: »

There are a number of issues here.

Unless the neighbour specifically directed ASOS or the courier to leave the parcel with a neighbour then ASOS must give your neighbour a refund or send the goods again.

If ASOS are being stupid about this, if the neighbour paid with a credit card get them to to a s75 claim, or if a debit card a chargeback on the basis the goods have not been delivered.

And that is not delivered to the address on the delivery order.

As far as you are concerned, the courier decided to ask you to look after the goods they were responsible for delivering. They took the risk you would do so, and you did your best.

However even if you didn't look after them properly and decided to steal the goods, tear them up, set fire to them, then that is the couriers problem. Your neighbour could still demand a refund or replacement from ASOS.

The courier should have delivered to your neighbour (assuming they didn't ask to be delivered to you), so the courier took the risk that instead of delivering where they should they would leave it with you. That is the couriers problem, and whether they have to pay ASOS for those goods comes down to the contract they have with ASOS. Whatever it is, it isn't anything to do with you or your neighbour

Whilst that is all true up to a point there are other issues too.

Once the OP agreed to take in the parcel (and they didn't have to) they become responsible for its safe keeping. Yes, the neighbour has a claim against whoever sold the goods (not the courier as they have no contract with them) as they have failed to deliver (unless the terms and conditions allow delivery to a neighbour).

The seller then has a claim against the courier (again unless the t&c allow delivery to a neighbour).

Finally though the courier has a claim against the OP as they failed to take care of the goods. By agreeing to take them in (which they didn't have to) they are taking on a legal responsibility for their safekeeping. Whether or not the OP's insurance covers the goods is irrelevant.

In a way it is similar to if he had borrowed something from the neighbour then had it stolen in the burglary. Whilst it is in his possession it is his responsibility to take care of it.

boliston

Undervalued wrote: »

......

Finally though the courier has a claim against the OP as they failed to take care of the goods.....

If the neighbour did not act negligently then they DID take care of the goods.

iammumtoone

Undervalued wrote: »

Whilst it is in his possession it is his responsibility to take care of it.

He did take care of it, a burglary is not his fault but he did everything he could to mitigate the consequences of that ie he has insurance. That leads us back to the insurance company who are refusing to pay out.

Undervalued

iammumtoone wrote: »

He did take care of it, a burglary is not his fault but he did everything he could to mitigate the consequences of that ie he has insurance. That leads us back to the insurance company who are refusing to pay out.

So, in effect you are saying if he had borrowed something from his neighbour, had it stolen in the burglary and it wasn't covered by his insurance then that is the neighbour's loss and he has no liability?

I don't think so!

Undervalued

iammumtoone wrote: »

He did take care of it, a burglary is not his fault but he did everything he could to mitigate the consequences of that ie he has insurance. That leads us back to the insurance company who are refusing to pay out.

But unless the insurance company are wrong to refuse this claim (he will need to check the policy carefully) then he didn't have insurance as it wasn't covered!

iammumtoone

Could it be that the insurance company think its a scam? Easy for the neighbour to prove they ordered £260 worth of goods, easy to get the signature from the carrier (could be anyone). BUT not possible to prove that it was delivered to the OPs address as the carrier information/ticket will all be for the original address.

If the carrier has proof that they delivered it to the OPs address then this might help the OP?

iammumtoone

Undervalued wrote: »

So, in effect you are saying if he had borrowed something from his neighbour, had it stolen in the burglary and it wasn't covered by his insurance then that is the neighbour's loss and he has no liability?

I don't think so!

I see your point, going to have to check my insurance policy.

I do know one thing. I am never taking in a neighbours parcel again!

Undervalued

boliston wrote: »

If the neighbour did not act negligently then they DID take care of the goods.

That is a matter of degree. Clearly he didn't take sufficient care as to prevent it being stolen! Maybe his security was better than average and he was unlucky to be targeted by very determined thieves or maybe he had a flimsy door, a hairpin lock or an open window.

Ultimately if you have custody of somebody else's goods you are responsible for their safekeeping.