purchase - lost in transit

soolin

Legally any seller who sends an item that goes astray is still responsible for that item, being persuaded to use a different courier makes no difference to the seller's liability.

However, and this is something where the actual facts need to be entirely clear, a private 'collection only' sale where a seller is persuaded to send something could be argued as being outwith that scenario- ie, item was to be collected therefore the courier is almost immaterial . If I were the seller here I would try that angle if it went to court, but would consider myself lucky if I won, but I might try it purely because it is not as clear cut as someone offering an item for sale with postage.

I'm not always clear with my explanations- so I will give an example. If I offer something on facebook for £80 including insured postage and buyer tells me not to worry about the insurance and to quote him for an uninsured parcel - I still remain 100% liable for that item and would be stupid to allow a buyer to dictate terms, as the insurance is entirely for my benefit. However, if I offer somehting for £60 collection only and buyer asks me to arrange a courier that he recommends and charge him for it whilst I am almost certainly still liable I would consider that with an entirely private sale I would have a very small outside chance of winning in court.

I think any chance the seller has of winning in court would depend entirely on any evidence showing he acted under duress almost to use a courier . Only the OP here knows the exact scenario and can decide whether to risk adding more costs to the loss by going to small claims.

EDIT: I think making it public on a forum where the sale took place was unfortunate, keeping it off the public arena may have been wise with a brief email to admin notifying them there was an issue would have been sufficient.

dldbsl

soolin wrote: »

Legally any seller who sends an item that goes astray is still responsible for that item, being persuaded to use a different courier makes no difference to the seller's liability.

However, and this is something where the actual facts need to be entirely clear, a private 'collection only' sale where a seller is persuaded to send something could be argued as being outwith that scenario- ie, item was to be collected therefore the courier is almost immaterial . If I were the seller here I would try that angle if it went to court, but would consider myself lucky if I won, but I might try it purely because it is not as clear cut as someone offering an item for sale with postage.

I'm not always clear with my explanations- so I will give an example. If I offer something on facebook for £80 including insured postage and buyer tells me not to worry about the insurance and to quote him for an uninsured parcel - I still remain 100% liable for that item and would be stupid to allow a buyer to dictate terms, as the insurance is entirely for my benefit. However, if I offer somehting for £60 collection only and buyer asks me to arrange a courier that he recommends and charge him for it whilst I am almost certainly still liable I would consider that with an entirely private sale I would have a very small outside chance of winning in court.

I think any chance the seller has of winning in court would depend entirely on any evidence showing he acted under duress almost to use a courier . Only the OP here knows the exact scenario and can decide whether to risk adding more costs to the loss by going to small claims.

EDIT: I think making it public on a forum where the sale took place was unfortunate, keeping it off the public arena may have been wise with a brief email to admin notifying them there was an issue would have been sufficient.

hindsight is a great thing and on reflection it was a big mistake to post on the forum given the sellers response - and similar from his mates who seemed to already 'primed' knowing what the seller / myself had discussed.

Ive tried to keep it simple on here with the facts but did wonder why seller previously mentioned it being my 'courier'. I didnt realise he was going to use the defence that I coersed him into using a particular courier with or without insurance - it was merely a suggestion. As time goes on I remember more things about the phone conversation.

when the seller responded to my advert he wanted £xxx but was open to close offers. His reply did not specify collection only. He agreed shipping by courier for £xxx provided the cost was under £xx. I wouldnt have paid by bank transfer there and then if that was not the case but rather paid on collection at his address as most folk do.

As I said Ive tried to limit the damage I caused and potential libel action by apologising and amending my posts and just hope its suffice. The libel issue just clouds the original issues and garners sympathy from other Peugeot forum users.

In the meantime your advice has been spot-on soolin and I cant thank you enough for your help.

D

dldbsl

soolin wrote: »

Legally any seller who sends an item that goes astray is still responsible for that item, being persuaded to use a different courier makes no difference to the seller's liability.

However, and this is something where the actual facts need to be entirely clear, a private 'collection only' sale where a seller is persuaded to send something could be argued as being outwith that scenario- ie, item was to be collected therefore the courier is almost immaterial . If I were the seller here I would try that angle if it went to court, but would consider myself lucky if I won, but I might try it purely because it is not as clear cut as someone offering an item for sale with postage.

I'm not always clear with my explanations- so I will give an example. If I offer something on facebook for £80 including insured postage and buyer tells me not to worry about the insurance and to quote him for an uninsured parcel - I still remain 100% liable for that item and would be stupid to allow a buyer to dictate terms, as the insurance is entirely for my benefit. However, if I offer somehting for £60 collection only and buyer asks me to arrange a courier that he recommends and charge him for it whilst I am almost certainly still liable I would consider that with an entirely private sale I would have a very small outside chance of winning in court.

I think any chance the seller has of winning in court would depend entirely on any evidence showing he acted under duress almost to use a courier . Only the OP here knows the exact scenario and can decide whether to risk adding more costs to the loss by going to small claims.

EDIT: I think making it public on a forum where the sale took place was unfortunate, keeping it off the public arena may have been wise with a brief email to admin notifying them there was an issue would have been sufficient.

Hi Soolin - thought I would give an update on this to say that Ive managed to settle this without the need to take things further with the seller. We decided to share the 'loss' equally so I have gotten 50% back....

Thank you Soolin youre advice was brill. Thanks also to everyone else who contributed to replies

xx

dldbsl

Hi Soolin - thought I would give an update on this to say that Ive managed to settle this without the need to take things further with the seller. We decided to share the 'loss' equally so I have gotten 50% back....

Thank you Soolin youre advice was brill.

xx

James2k

strange double post 5 hours apart.