Parcelforce pulped my books

Zandoni

unforeseen wrote: »

But was that 'someone' Greg53 or the seller?

I'd say they belong to the OP, but they certainly didn't belong to Parcelforce.

ARandomMiser

Zandoni wrote: »

Yes you're missing the bit where Parcelforce threw someone elses property away.

I have a feeling that you may be trying to make a point but I have absolutely no idea what it is or its relevance?

Zandoni

ARandomMiser wrote: »

I have a feeling that you may be trying to make a point but I have absolutely no idea what it is or its relevance?

That's a shame, perhaps you should read through the thread again.

ARandomMiser

Zandoni wrote: »

That's a shame, perhaps you should read through the thread again.

I tried that and I still cannot work out what the relevance of your point is.
Not unless you are accusing Parcel Force of deliberately destroying or stealing the books - is that it? That is the only thing I can think of that makes your point relevant.

Zandoni

ARandomMiser wrote: »

I tried that and I still cannot work out what the relevance of your point is.
Not unless you are accusing Parcel Force of deliberately destroying or stealing the books - is that it? That is the only thing I can think of that makes your point relevant.

Well it certainly looks like Parcelforce did destroy 9 of the books.

AndyMc.....

Zandoni wrote: »

Yes you're missing the bit where Parcelforce threw someone elses property away.

And had the owner complained about it? Not that we know of.

Zandoni

AndyMc..... wrote: »

And had the owner complained about it? Not that we know of.

We don't know if the owner complained, if not they should.

ARandomMiser

Zandoni wrote: »

Well it certainly looks like Parcelforce did destroy 9 of the books.

Not really, we know that they disposed of 9 books because they were considered not fit for delivery, we don't actually know what or who destroyed them - maybe they had fallen into a vat of pig manure (maybe you think they should still be delivered, personally I would appreciate it if someone used common sense to deal with a situation), we just don't know - and there is absolutely no requirement on Parcel Force to explain itself to the OP who did not have any contract with them.

As I said
Books ordered -> some damaged in transit -> remaining delivered -> missing books being resent -> end of story

There is no need to make a mountain out of this tiny little molehill.

Zandoni

ARandomMiser wrote: »

Not really, we know that they disposed of 9 books because they were considered not fit for delivery, we don't actually know what or who destroyed them - maybe they had fallen into a vat of pig manure (maybe you think they should still be delivered, personally I would appreciate it if someone used common sense to deal with a situation), we just don't know - and there is absolutely no requirement on Parcel Force to explain itself to the OP who did not have any contract with them.

As I said
Books ordered -> some damaged in transit -> remaining delivered -> missing books being resent -> end of story

There is no need to make a mountain out of this tiny little molehill.

I disagree, they should have notified both parties. These books could have been autographed or unique in some other way.

They had no right to dispose of someone elses property without permission, they should also be apologising for their poor handling of other peoples goods.

KeithP

Zandoni wrote: »

I disagree, they should have notified both parties. These books could have been autographed or unique in some other way.

They had no right to dispose of someone elses property without permission, they should also be apologising for their poor handling of other peoples goods.

Doesn't post#16 go some way towards addressing that?