Courier "lost" high value parcels

jon81uk

Undervalued said:

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])

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.

Having read others posts on this, I think the contract doesn't actually matter, they are just going after the company that "stole" the package. Yes its not really theft but the fact the company was their on the instruction of Parcels2Go doesn't really change the fact they took the other package without permission, they could have done that with no contract in place.

However I personally still think leaving them unattended is negligence and they should have expected to be there to facilitate the pick up, particularly for a higher value business transaction.

turnitround

Possibly a bit late in the day to ask this but is your brother certain that the item never reached its intended destination? Has the end customer been refunded?
How much have you claimed as I believe you can only claim your losses which is what the item cost you and not the price it sold for. I stand to be corrected on this if I am wrong but I also think there can be additional charges if you have a court hearing which you cannot claim back so depending on what your brother has actually lost you need to be sure a claim is worth doing.

Undervalued

jon81uk said:

Undervalued said:

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])

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.

Having read others posts on this, I think the contract doesn't actually matter, they are just going after the company that "stole" the package. Yes its not really theft but the fact the company was their on the instruction of Parcels2Go doesn't really change the fact they took the other package without permission, they could have done that with no contract in place.

However I personally still think leaving them unattended is negligence and they should have expected to be there to facilitate the pick up, particularly for a higher value business transaction.

You may be right.

Whilst it is possible that the courier did deliberately steal the parcel, I totally fail to see how the OP's brother is going to prove this even to the civil level of proof (balance of probabilities). As you say they were left out in a negligent way which was quite unsuitable for this type of courier collection. What does the terms and conditions say about collections?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Manxman_in_exile said:

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?

AFAIK it would be  

I don't see this as any different to someone posting that they ordered a button but was delivered a PS5 and now the company want it back. They'd be quickly and overwhelmingly told it's not theirs and the company has 6 years to come after them. 

Undervalued said:

You may be right.

Whilst it is possible that the courier did deliberately steal the parcel, I totally fail to see how the OP's brother is going to prove this even to the civil level of proof (balance of probabilities). As you say they were left out in a negligent way which was quite unsuitable for this type of courier collection. What does the terms and conditions say about collections?

I don't sees that the T&Cs come into play, if OP's brother didn't meet them the courier company would have had the right not to collect the parcel that was intended for them and probably keep their fee (or some of it). 

The issue is the courier took something they shouldn't have, they came into possession of goods which they had no right to acquire and, my understanding is, this made them an involuntary bailee which places legal obligations upon them

I also think the whole "driveway" comment may be taken out of context, I could leave a large parcel on my driveway all day, nobody would see it other than someone who comes through the garden gate into the property as it could be tucked to one side hidden by the hedge, not everyone has a driveway in plain view on a busy street with hustle and bustle going by.

I don't trust couriers to label parcels correctly so would never leave 2 for collection if labels were needed and certainly wouldn't leave 2 for 2 different couriers. I do leave parcels in a safe place for Royal Mail and it does cross my mind from time to time what would happen if another courier delivers before the pick up but the RM workers are good here and only regular courier drivers know the safe place, the rest just dump it on the doorstep.

I agree it was a foolish thing for OP's brother to do and perhaps the court would "punish" him in someway for leaving 2 parcels unattended for 2 different couriers (not awarding costs, denying or reducing the claim?), perhaps the company will say it entered their network and without tracking it was going to go missing and the court would accept this. I don't really know but I don't think anyone else does either, it seems like it's all guess work  

OP's brother has a choice of risking the costs of court, writing the matter off or seeking professional advice. Given they've already filed the claim, if they've done so without presenting the correct legal argument for their position they may have already lost whatever fees they've paid if the courts only accept what is put forward from the beginning (again I have no idea if the OP can turn up on the day and say actually this is my position rather than what I put in the papers?)

tightauldgit

The chat about Parcel2Go and the 'contract' is a complete red herring here. 

The contract with P2G was to provide two delivery services: 

1. One with Courier A to Pick Up Parcel A - presumably executed - no claim necessary
2. One with Courier B to Pick Up Parcel B - presumably placed but unable to be executed because Parcel B was gone - no claim possible

There was no contract with any entity for Parcel B to be collected by Courier A - this is not a contractual dispute. P2G have fulfilled their contract. 

The claim here is that Courier A wrongfully collected Parcel B and then promptly lost it causing a £500 loss to the claimant. The claim is against Courier A. Now the specific legal nature of that claim I can't tell you and it will be important - but surely you should already have specified that when you made the application for a court hearing?

It also sounds like Courier A are either fobbing you off or need to get some proper legal advice themselves. I don't see that they have a leg to stand on if they've admitted that they picked up the parcel and lost it. Even if they say that the driver was confused they would still surely have a duty of care on the parcel and should return it to you. They've lost it while in their possession. 

What you need to be careful of is that you don't lose the case on a technicality by making a claim for the wrong thing which the court can dismiss. I think you should proceed by giving the courier the maximum benefit of the doubt and assuming that it was a mistake, and then see what law can apply. 

Civic2056

turnitround said:

Possibly a bit late in the day to ask this but is your brother certain that the item never reached its intended destination? Has the end customer been refunded?
How much have you claimed as I believe you can only claim your losses which is what the item cost you and not the price it sold for. I stand to be corrected on this if I am wrong but I also think there can be additional charges if you have a court hearing which you cannot claim back so depending on what your brother has actually lost you need to be sure a claim is worth doing.

Claiming for the value of the parcel - £510. Though if successful and if we have to travel to the court, we may try and add travel expenses onto the cost.

The parcel never reached its destination. The customer had to be refunded. Courier A never managed to find the parcel

turnitround

Civic2056 said:

turnitround said:

Possibly a bit late in the day to ask this but is your brother certain that the item never reached its intended destination? Has the end customer been refunded?
How much have you claimed as I believe you can only claim your losses which is what the item cost you and not the price it sold for. I stand to be corrected on this if I am wrong but I also think there can be additional charges if you have a court hearing which you cannot claim back so depending on what your brother has actually lost you need to be sure a claim is worth doing.

Claiming for the value of the parcel - £510. Though if successful and if we have to travel to the court, we may try and add travel expenses onto the cost.

The parcel never reached its destination. The customer had to be refunded. Courier A never managed to find the parcel

But you can only claim for your losses.  Your loss is the price the item cost your brother, not the price he sold it for.

If I buy an item for £10 and sell it for £150 I have not lost £150, my loss is the £10 it cost me to buy.


 As others have said, unless you do this claim properly it will be thrown out and you may even end up paying the other sides costs.  You are running the risk of ending up being worse off.

tightauldgit

turnitround said:

Civic2056 said:

turnitround said:

Possibly a bit late in the day to ask this but is your brother certain that the item never reached its intended destination? Has the end customer been refunded?
How much have you claimed as I believe you can only claim your losses which is what the item cost you and not the price it sold for. I stand to be corrected on this if I am wrong but I also think there can be additional charges if you have a court hearing which you cannot claim back so depending on what your brother has actually lost you need to be sure a claim is worth doing.

Claiming for the value of the parcel - £510. Though if successful and if we have to travel to the court, we may try and add travel expenses onto the cost.

The parcel never reached its destination. The customer had to be refunded. Courier A never managed to find the parcel

But you can only claim for your losses.  Your loss is the price the item cost your brother, not the price he sold it for.

If I buy an item for £10 and sell it for £150 I have not lost £150, my loss is the £10 it cost me to buy.


 As others have said, unless you do this claim properly it will be thrown out and you may even end up paying the other sides costs.  You are running the risk of ending up being worse off.

Not necessarily true. Generally the idea is to put you back in the same position that you would have been - so if they can source another item at £10 and sell it at £150 to the buyer then yes you've only lost £10. But if it would cost £140 to buy one now, or you can't find another one the same or your buyer has withdrawn from the deal then you can argue that your actual loss is greater.

But yes you have to be careful of what you are actually claiming for and that it's not betterment.   

Alderbank

OP says they are claiming £510, 'the value of the parcel'.
The quantum of loss has to be evidenced, normally included with statement of claim.
The business will have evidence that they sold the 'item of furniture' to their customer for £510, and also evidence that they subsequently have had to refund £510 to that customer.
The sale was completed and just awaiting delivery, £510 puts them back in the position they would have been in if the package had been properly ignored by courier A

powerful_Rogue

Alderbank said:

OP says they are claiming £510, 'the value of the parcel'.
The quantum of loss has to be evidenced, normally included with statement of claim.
The business will have evidence that they sold the 'item of furniture' to their customer for £510, and also evidence that they subsequently have had to refund £510 to that customer.
The sale was completed and just awaiting delivery, £510 puts them back in the position they would have been in if the package had been properly ignored by courier A

I would envisage that if the item cost £310 and was then sold for £510, then as long as a replacement can still be purchased for £310 then that is what would be claimed.

Similar to if you are in a shop and accidentally break an item, you should be charged the price the shop bought it in for, not the retail price.