Holding parcel delivery companies accountable

moshop

Hello,

I've noticed that parcel delivery has become increasingly unreliable over recent years. I've had parcels delivered to neighbours without me being informed, and failed deliveries during the dedicated timeslot are now becoming routine. The companies refuse any compensation claim from the recipient, stating that all such claims have to come from the sender. Of course this is rarely going to happen, since the sender has pretty much terminated their relationship with the recipient once the item has been delivered, even though the delivery charge has been paid for by the recipient.

Hence the companies are able to avoid any responsibility to the very people who are paying for the service. I can't think of many business-customer relationships in which accountability for the quality of the service is so easily avoided. There is no ombudsman for parcel delivery services, does anyone know of any mechanisms by which the companies can be held accountable short of taking them to court? Is it even legal for the companies to refuse accountability to the recipient unless the sender gets involved?

user1977

moshop said:

Hence the companies are able to avoid any responsibility to the very people who are paying for the service. I can't think of many business-customer relationships in which accountability for the quality of the service is so easily avoided. There is no ombudsman for parcel delivery services, does anyone know of any mechanisms by which the companies can be held accountable short of taking them to court? Is it even legal for the companies to refuse accountability to the recipient unless the sender gets involved?

Yes, it's legal. It's the sender who is their customer and who is paying for the service. Your statutory rights (assuming we're talking about a retailer sending you something you've bought) are against the retailer. That's who you pursue, rather than wasting your time trying to chase the courier.

Merlin139

Your contract is with the seller.

Until you have the goods its the senders problem to deal with. Once they have done that they can recover the cost from the courier.

Had this happen probably half a dozen times in the last 5 years. As long as I get my goods that I paid for then I am happy. What happens behind the scenes dose not bother me.

Olinda99

What is annoying is when the courier shows the item as delivered when it hasn't been.

The seller is still responsible but not unsurprisingly points to the delivery confirmation.

Sandtree

Its not sender -v- recipient but the contracted party who will often be the sender but doesn't have to be. Certainly in the good old days before ecommerce really taking off its wasn't that uncommon for me to arrange a courier to collect an item from an independent shop who didn't offer deliveries after buying over the phone.

These days you more often see the recipient contracting when it comes to returns of goods but the same principles apply.

Ultimately if you have paid for a service with the seller (eg specified delivery time) then its up to you to challenge the seller when the courier fails. Its up to the seller if they counterclaim from the courier or if its not financially worth while and so it just feeds into the process of selecting their courier the next time the contract is up for tender.

moshop

Over the past 2 years I've had damaged items, delivery to the wrong address as well as repeated failed deliveries due to 'service pressures' (so far my record is 3 failed delivery dates for the same parcel). 

The problem is that unless the item can be proven to have been damaged or lost by the delivery company they cannot be held accountable. So if we pay for an express service and the parcel arrives a week late, or if the item is sent to the wrong address, they cannot be held accountable. I had a number of parcels delivered to a neighbour by accident and it's only because he's a good guy that they made their way to me. According to 'the system' the items had been delivered to the correct address.

Surely if we pay for a particular service we should expect this service? Currently they take our money for a premium service and then respond with excuses. And how many sellers are then going to pursue a refund claim for a parcel that arrived intact but far later than was promised by what we paid for? The buyer certainly can't force them to make the complaint, so the companies will nearly always get away with providing a poor service.

user1977

moshop said:

The buyer certainly can't force them to make the complaint, so the companies will nearly always get away with providing a poor service.

They won't "get away with it" if the poor service irks enough of the retailer's customers and they vote with their feet.

RogerBareford

moshop said:

Over the past 2 years I've had damaged items, delivery to the wrong address as well as repeated failed deliveries due to 'service pressures' (so far my record is 3 failed delivery dates for the same parcel). 

The problem is that unless the item can be proven to have been damaged or lost by the delivery company they cannot be held accountable. So if we pay for an express service and the parcel arrives a week late, or if the item is sent to the wrong address, they cannot be held accountable. I had a number of parcels delivered to a neighbour by accident and it's only because he's a good guy that they made their way to me. According to 'the system' the items had been delivered to the correct address.

Surely if we pay for a particular service we should expect this service? Currently they take our money for a premium service and then respond with excuses. And how many sellers are then going to pursue a refund claim for a parcel that arrived intact but far later than was promised by what we paid for? The buyer certainly can't force them to make the complaint, so the companies will nearly always get away with providing a poor service.

I think your missing the first reply by user1977 where they explained your rights are with the retailer you purchased the product from.

So if you bought something from Argos for example and their was an issue with delivery you then complain to Argos because they are the one's you paid for the service. If enough people complain to Argos then they will push back harder to the delivery company and will eventually change to another one if there are enough issues. You don't need to and it wouldn't make sense to complain to the delivery company when your not the one who paid them for their services.

This isn't unique to deliveries this is how many consumer business transactions work. Some other examples are if you stay in a hotel and it's dirty you complain to the hotel and you don't complain to the cleaning company they sub-contract to that clean the rooms. If you get broadband through TalkTalk you complain to them for any issues and not openreach who they get the services from. If you go to a restaurant and get bad food you complain to the restaurant and not the butcher they buy the food from.

In your case and all those examples (plus many more) you complain to the company you purchased the goods/services from and then it's up to them to pass on you complaint. Which in most cases they will because no company wants to have constant complaints about poor services due to their sub contractors.

moshop

Thanks. I'm not sure that this 'voting with your feet' works with small retailers or eBay sellers. Couldn't they simply refuse to lodge the complaint since the buyer got the item they paid for? Why would the seller bother pursuing this when most buyers simply accept and pay for a poor service? The seller gets nothing out of it.

The analogy of a hotel cleaning company or Openreach is a little misleading, as the parcel delivery company deals directly with us once the parcel gets to them, the seller is pretty much out of the equation at that point. Hence why the parcel delivery companies very much get away with it, they deal directly with us via their tracking website/email/phone, and when they fail to deliver the service they ask us to get the seller to lodge the complaint. Most buyers won't do this simply out of politeness and even if they do I can't see why most sellers would bother going through the hassle of the complaints process when they have no stake in the outcome.

jon81uk

moshop said:

Thanks. I'm not sure that this 'voting with your feet' works with small retailers or eBay sellers. Couldn't they simply refuse to lodge the complaint since the buyer got the item they paid for? Why would the seller bother pursuing this when most buyers simply accept and pay for a poor service? The seller gets nothing out of it.

The analogy of a hotel cleaning company or Openreach is a little misleading, as the parcel delivery company deals directly with us once the parcel gets to them, the seller is pretty much out of the equation at that point. Hence why the parcel delivery companies very much get away with it, they deal directly with us via their tracking website/email/phone, and when they fail to deliver the service they ask us to get the seller to lodge the complaint. Most buyers won't do this simply out of politeness and even if they do I can't see why most sellers would bother going through the hassle of the complaints process when they have no stake in the outcome.

The sellers are the ones who you have the contract with, so they absolutely have a stake in the outcome.

If you buy something from an online retailer they are responsible for getting the item to you. If they don't, or if a service you pay them extra for (such as next day delivery) doesn't take place it is up to the retailer to put things right. They may pass details to the courier company so you can track delivery but that doesn't mean the courier is dealing with you, just the retailer has subcontracted the delivery and is giving options if you want to divert or provide more information on the delivery.

People need to stop thinking like you are of "the courier is awful" and instead think "the retailer is awful".

RogerBareford

moshop said:

Thanks. I'm not sure that this 'voting with your feet' works with small retailers or eBay sellers. Couldn't they simply refuse to lodge the complaint since the buyer got the item they paid for? Why would the seller bother pursuing this when most buyers simply accept and pay for a poor service? The seller gets nothing out of it.

The analogy of a hotel cleaning company or Openreach is a little misleading, as the parcel delivery company deals directly with us once the parcel gets to them, the seller is pretty much out of the equation at that point. Hence why the parcel delivery companies very much get away with it, they deal directly with us via their tracking website/email/phone, and when they fail to deliver the service they ask us to get the seller to lodge the complaint. Most buyers won't do this simply out of politeness and even if they do I can't see why most sellers would bother going through the hassle of the complaints process when they have no stake in the outcome.

I wouldn't say it's much of a hassle to send off an email to express disatisfaction in the delivery service they have contracted too.

Most sellers would be interested if they are using a poor delivery service and it is making their customers unhappy which in turn makes the company looks bad.