Courier "lost" high value parcels

Manxman_in_exile

I'm inclined to agree with @pinkshoes

It's not theft.  It's not a breach of contract.  It would be a tort claim against the courier who wrongly took* and lost the item.  But whether it's straightforward negligence at common law, or interference with goods, or something to do with bailment I wouldn't like to say.

If it is common law negligence I'd have thought a court would also hold that the OP's brother had been contributorily negligent in leaving something worth £500 unattended on the family driveway.  He may only be 17 but I think a court might say that if he's old enough to be running a business then he's also old enough to be running it in a business-like manner and that he'd acted unreasonably (if not recklessly).


*When I say that I'm assuming a court would find that the courier actually was at fault in taking the item.  The OP obviously thinks they were at fault.  I'm not necessarily convinced it's as straightforward as that...

Manxman_in_exile

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

...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...

The courier might be liable for the loss, but that wouldn't be as an involuntary bailee would it?

turnitround

Op, who have you actually gone after at the small claims court?

Civic2056

Courier A.

sheramber

Civic2056 said:

Courier A.

So the case is heard in the court local to that company's headquarters not the local court you have submitted the claim to.

You seem to think that the company are taking you to court.Why?  What would they be taking you to court for?

Do the papers you have received not designate who is the claimant and who is the defending entity?

Civic2056

sheramber said:

Civic2056 said:

Courier A.

So the case is heard in the court local to that company's headquarters not the local court you have submitted the claim to.

You seem to think that the company are taking you to court.Why?  What would they be taking you to court for?

Do the papers you have received not designate who is the claimant and who is the defending entity?

Claimant is us defendant is courier a

Its because it sets it's preferred method of settlement is via court hearing and it is not going to mediate 

Alderbank

You say the claimant is 'us'. Is that your brother's company?
The claimant should be the entity which has suffered the loss.

It's going to court so the respondent Courier A has not just rolled over and agreed to pay.
Have you received a copy of their defence to your claim yet? 

Civic2056

Alderbank said:

You say the claimant is 'us'. Is that your brother's company?
The claimant should be the entity which has suffered the loss.

It's going to court so the respondent Courier A has not just rolled over and agreed to pay.
Have you received a copy of their defence to your claim yet? 

Yes that's what this is about. This was all in the response. Like I said I don't want to share it to jeopardise court proceedings. The claimant is my brother's company but because of his age his father will be representing him. I'm also trying to research into this further to find the best way of defence. I don't think we will be hiring a solicitor of any kind, if it is winnable it will be winnable without one, I think anyway. Their response didn't deny or admit responsibility to the incident, no mention of it, just them telling they are the wrong defendant and it's the website who we should be suing. Which doesn't seem true as it was a courier driver (the courier we are suing) who  took the parcel that was not meant for them 

Manxman_in_exile

But what is the legal basis of the claim that has already been filed? 

It seems to be the consensus here that your brother and/or his company didn't have a contract with the defendant, so they can't be sued for a breach of contract.  At some stage in the proceedings the claimant will have to show "a cause of action" or legal basis forming the foundation of the claim.  Do you know what the Particulars of Claim identify as the legal basis?

(Who is the claimant named on the claim?  Is it your brother or is it his "company"?  Does your brother's father have formal authority from whoever the claimant is to represent them?  What I'm getting at is that if the company is the claimant he may need formal authority from the company.  Depends on the legal status of the company  [Edit:  I honestly don't know what authorisation his father may or may not need.  I simply flag it up as somehing to bear in mind])

Undervalued

Manxman_in_exile said:

But what is the legal basis of the claim that has already been filed? 

It seems to be the consensus here that your brother and/or his company didn't have a contract with the defendant, so they can't be sued for a breach of contract.  At some stage in the proceedings the claimant will have to show "a cause of action" or legal basis forming the foundation of the claim.  Do you know what the Particulars of Claim identify as the legal basis?

(Who is the claimant named on the claim?  Is it your brother or is it his "company"?  Does your brother's father have formal authority from whoever the claimant is to represent them?  What I'm getting at is that if the company is the claimant he may need formal authority from the company.  Depends on the legal status of the company  [Edit:  I honestly don't know what authorisation his father may or may not need.  I simply flag it up as somehing to bear in mind])

Plus, does he have a right of audience in the county court?

As I understand it he may be able to act as a "litigation friend" for the OP's brother as he is a minor but that is not the same thing.

Unlike an employment tribunal, where you can be represented by anybody you like, normally in the county court your only options are to represent yourself or be represented by a solicitor or barrister. They will need to check this carefully.

Anyway, it may be a moot point as I still believe they are suing the wrong entity! As has been said repeatedly, your claim is against the company you had a contract with. They in turn may have a claim against the actual courier if they chose to pursue it to recoup their losses.