Courier "lost" high value parcels

Civic2056

Ok just also seen that businesses can make civil claims for theft just to get the money back. This sounds like a good route potentially if they won't accept negligence 

born_again

Good luck. 👍

It's all about the contract.

pinkshoes

Civic2056 said:

pinkshoes said:

I'm not sure why all the posts and confusion. It seems relatively straight forward.

Courier A has taken something that did not belong to them, albeit by accident.
Courier A has been negligent and lost the item that they took that did not belong to them, so cannot return it.

The OP has taken Courier A to court for the value of the item that they lost, but Courier A is claiming that they are suing the wrong entity.

The comparison site thing is a red herring. This has nothing to do with the actual contracts of courier A and courier B. It is a case of a mistake made by someone working for courier A turning into negligence. 

This is my point. The contents of the contract is irrelevant. It is irrelevant as to whether my brother entered into a contract with courier a directly or the website and the website entered the contract. 

If I went to pursue the website I can almost guarantee they would tell me to pursue courier a. 

Yes, this is correct.

It is nothing to do with either contract. Just a mistake made by a person working for Courier A. 

Your ONLY claim is against Courier A for being negligent and losing something belonging to you that had nothing to do with them.

Couriers are paid so little per parcel that they do collections as quickly as possible so probably didn't take any notice of the label.

To answer your original questions - yes they usually move it to the local court of the defendant. I think they are in person and not online. I believe you can claim reasonable travel expenses if you win. It might be worth ringing the court for advice on this. 

It's probably not worth speaking to the police as it was taken in error, then lost due to negligence, so is a civil case. 

As they have already admitted to taking the parcel then losing the parcel, I'm not sure how they can defend this or blame it on anyone else. They're probably hoping you'll drop it by asking for it to be transferred to their local court. 

powerful_Rogue

Civic2056 said:

jon81uk said:

pinkshoes said:

I'm not sure why all the posts and confusion. It seems relatively straight forward.

Courier A has taken something that did not belong to them, albeit by accident.
Courier A has been negligent and lost the item that they took that did not belong to them, so cannot return it.

The OP has taken Courier A to court for the value of the item that they lost, but Courier A is claiming that they are suing the wrong entity.

The comparison site thing is a red herring. This has nothing to do with the actual contracts of courier A and courier B. It is a case of a mistake made by someone working for courier A turning into negligence. 

So effectively a civil claim for theft. 

Well surely by nature theft is criminal? This is why I said we are probably going to report it to police even if they can do very little. But then it comes back to the point you have to prove intent. I think now I now from the footage the driver actually checks the label of the package so knows it isn't meant for his company adds value to that but then surely you'd be looking at taking action against the individual as a criminal case ? 

Obviously DPD aren't going to disclose who the driver is, at this point anyway, if we go to court in a civil case and it's concluded that it is theft etc would it be the driver being charged and then company paying out etc?

This is NOT criminal theft! The police won't even entertain this. You might get a CAD reference, as the contact will be logged, but it will mean absolutely nothing.

If you go along the lines of a civil tort, then no-one will be charged, as it's civil, not criminal. That's indeed if you win.

Alderbank

There are quite a few legal firms with proven track record in recovering business losses resulting from theft or negligence. The OP's brother's company could approach a firm such as DrydensFairfax for advice.
A criminal conviction for theft is obviously useful but not necessary and of course the burden of proof is lower for a civil claim.
In view of the strength of the video evidence apparently held, I think a demand on behalf of the OP's brother's company from Drydens to company A for compensation plus costs would be simpler than a breach of contract claim and would have a very good chance of success.

turnitround

I understand that you are frustrated but neither side has done due diligence, your brother or the courier.  You seen very reluctant to listen to any opinion you dont agree with and most of it is posted with the best intentions. 
You say you have started proceedings but without the knowing you are suing the correct party you are running the risk of finding yourself liable for substantial court charges. Its not enough to throw around words like theft and negligence. You need proof.

For instance- The courier took the wrong parcel either by carelessness or deliberately, put it on his van and then it disappears. How are you going to prove 'intent' and that he did not just deliver it to the depot then forget about it and it was then lost/taken/misdelivered by someone else.  

turnitround

Alderbank said:

There are quite a few legal firms with proven track record in recovering business losses resulting from theft or negligence. The OP's brother's company could approach a firm such as DrydensFairfax for advice.
A criminal conviction for theft is obviously useful but not necessary and of course the burden of proof is lower for a civil claim.
In view of the strength of the video evidence apparently held, I think a demand on behalf of the OP's brother's company from Drydens to company A for compensation plus costs would be simpler than a breach of contract claim and would have a very good chance of success.

I think the op has enough on his hands without dealing with those cowboys. Have you read the reviews.

Alderbank

Their rottweiler reputation is disgraceful and is exactly why I would use them.
Evri are cowboys too.

user1977

Picking up a parcel by mistake and then losing it (either temporarily or permanently) still isn't "theft" by any definition.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

I think the OP is saying the driver may have noticed the second parcel wasn't for them to take but took it anyway, that may well be true but it's going to probably be impossible to prove beyond all reasonable doubt with the resources the police are likely to put in to it (which will be zero). 

OP as a couple of posters have picked up on, look at involuntary bailee, they'd have a legal duty of care to the goods and need to make efforts to restore them to you.

I don't think it matters the brother is a business as I think the actions regarding the incorrect parcel aren't anything to do with the contract.