Parcel Force adding surcharge

Sandtree

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:
If it went to court it would be down to them to prove it was over sized, not for you to prove it wasn't. 

If it went to court the judge would look at the evidence presented by both parties and decide, on the balance of probabilities which is most likely to be true.

Both sides have to submit evidence/(witness) statements and so its not purely for the claimant to prove their case.

I do agree but if the company had proof it was oversized they would have offered this to the OP rather than asking them to prove it was as stated so would have little to base their claim on.

I understand that they do normally have an image taken by their machine which shows the parcel and its measurements however we have a middleman here and so I suspect the OP is slightly incorrect and its Parcel Compare that are demanding the £40 and not ParcelForce. 

Given how many parcels the companies deal with I suspect they just get a list of parcels and surplus charges every week and then reapportion them to their own customer... if they pay them first or after collecting I wouldn't want to guess (my assumption would be they have 28 day credit terms or such). I suspect as standard Parcel Compare doesn't get the evidence on each and every line item  

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:
If it went to court it would be down to them to prove it was over sized, not for you to prove it wasn't. 

If it went to court the judge would look at the evidence presented by both parties and decide, on the balance of probabilities which is most likely to be true.

Both sides have to submit evidence/(witness) statements and so its not purely for the claimant to prove their case.

I do agree but if the company had proof it was oversized they would have offered this to the OP rather than asking them to prove it was as stated so would have little to base their claim on.

I understand that they do normally have an image taken by their machine which shows the parcel and its measurements however we have a middleman here and so I suspect the OP is slightly incorrect and its Parcel Compare that are demanding the £40 and not ParcelForce. 

Given how many parcels the companies deal with I suspect they just get a list of parcels and surplus charges every week and then reapportion them to their own customer... if they pay them first or after collecting I wouldn't want to guess (my assumption would be they have 28 day credit terms or such). I suspect as standard Parcel Compare doesn't get the evidence on each and every line item  

Pretty much my thinking as well, although the OP's parcel may be questionable based on the dimensions, there have been a few threads over on the eBay MSE board where parcels have been stated as far bigger than they [apparently] were, particularly Hermes.

I imagine most people that face this do as they are told and pay or think sod that and forget about it, only a few people question the legitimacy and worry of the consequences of not paying so ask for help.

Really, just in my opinion, if they are asking for extra fees they should be providing the customer with proof of the parcel being oversized. 

Fi1964

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

Fi1964

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:
If it went to court it would be down to them to prove it was over sized, not for you to prove it wasn't. 

If it went to court the judge would look at the evidence presented by both parties and decide, on the balance of probabilities which is most likely to be true.

Both sides have to submit evidence/(witness) statements and so its not purely for the claimant to prove their case.

I do agree but if the company had proof it was oversized they would have offered this to the OP rather than asking them to prove it was as stated so would have little to base their claim on.

I understand that they do normally have an image taken by their machine which shows the parcel and its measurements however we have a middleman here and so I suspect the OP is slightly incorrect and its Parcel Compare that are demanding the £40 and not ParcelForce. 

Given how many parcels the companies deal with I suspect they just get a list of parcels and surplus charges every week and then reapportion them to their own customer... if they pay them first or after collecting I wouldn't want to guess (my assumption would be they have 28 day credit terms or such). I suspect as standard Parcel Compare doesn't get the evidence on each and every line item  

I'm pretty sure it's Parcel Force as we queried why it has taken them so long to contact us after it had been dropped off and they said their courier had only just informed them.

Yorkshire_Dangermouse

Fi1964 said:

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

Girth is the measurement right the way round the box - not just one dimension ?

Sandtree

Fi1964 said:

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

https://www.parcelforce.com/help-and-advice/sending/how-calculate-length-and-girth-your-parcel

Girth is the minimum circumference around the parcel so 2xW + 2xH

Fi1964

Sandtree said:

Fi1964 said:

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

https://www.parcelforce.com/help-and-advice/sending/how-calculate-length-and-girth-your-parcel

Girth is the minimum circumference around the parcel so 2xW + 2xH

Ok thanks so it should still be within the measurements.

y3sitsm3

Fi1964 said:

Sandtree said:

Fi1964 said:

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

https://www.parcelforce.com/help-and-advice/sending/how-calculate-length-and-girth-your-parcel

Girth is the minimum circumference around the parcel so 2xW + 2xH

Ok thanks so it should still be within the measurements.

No, it's 16 centimetres over.

The length + girth is 119.7 + (2 x 81) + (2 x 17.5)

Jenni_D

That's more understandable with a 49" TV, which would be 108cm x 61cm (plus bezels). The box dimensions indicate more padding in the vertical dimension (height), which makes sense based on how the box is expected to be oriented during shipping.

@Fi1964 unfortunately I think they're right in this instance, but it's a marginal overage. 😶 As said previously, ultimately they'd need to raise a court claim to force you (your son) to pay, so it's your call as to whether to brazen it out and assume they won't do so for such a low value.

Sandtree

Fi1964 said:

Sandtree said:

Fi1964 said:

Yorkshire_Dangermouse said:

Won't girth be(2x810)+(2x175), so added to the length gives 3,167mm ?

I don't see why they would add the measurements more than once.

https://www.parcelforce.com/help-and-advice/sending/how-calculate-length-and-girth-your-parcel

Girth is the minimum circumference around the parcel so 2xW + 2xH

Ok thanks so it should still be within the measurements.

You'd need to definitively check for the standard box for your TV but the 3m limit is the sum of the length and girth and so based on the numbers others are quoting its likely you are slightly over.