Evri /P2G pack lost. Value not declared.

Exodi

cyberScammed said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

What did you put in the contents value field OP?

Unfortunately I left as the set amount of £20 (but or I put £20 based on the setup amount for the delivery option I selected)

I use P2G very often and in their defence, they make the value limits covered by their services clear and prominent throughout (e.g. when you select the service, the actual button you click says "Book with £X protection") and then as @the_lunatic_is_in_my_head mentions, you are then forced to manually enter the value for the parcel alongside the contents details.

If you enter more than the covered value, it (often significantly) increases the price of the service in consideration of the additional coverage.

Of course someone a bit more nefarious than you may decide to deliberately under-declare the value of the goods to reduce the shipping cost.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

cyberScammed said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

What did you put in the contents value field OP?

Unfortunately I left as the set amount of £20 (but or I put £20 based on the setup amount for the delivery option I selected)

Nothing to lose from sending a letter before action OP, other than the cost of a stamp.

I'd post over on the other forum linked above as they'll probably guide you better with exactly what legal position to take when sending the letter  

savergrant

Exodi said:

cyberScammed said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

What did you put in the contents value field OP?

Unfortunately I left as the set amount of £20 (but or I put £20 based on the setup amount for the delivery option I selected)

I use P2G very often and in their defence, they make the value limits covered by their services clear and prominent throughout (e.g. when you select the service, the actual button you click says "Book with £X protection") and then as @the_lunatic_is_in_my_head mentions, you are then forced to manually enter the value for the parcel alongside the contents details.

If you enter more than the covered value, it (often significantly) increases the price of the service in consideration of the additional coverage.

Of course someone a bit more nefarious than you may decide to deliberately under-declare the value of the goods to reduce the shipping cost.

Years ago I was working in photography and we had a customer ask about special insurance. My colleague asked how much the film was worth and the customer said "a million pounds". My colleague said special insurance is 5% of the value so asked for £50k premium. Suddenly the film wasn't worth one million pounds.

TELLIT01

Even if the OP had changed the value of the item that wouldn't automatically increase the amount of 'insurance' provided.  I can't comment directly about EVRI but other couriers do warn to make certain the package has the correct insurance on it.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Exodi said:

If you enter more than the covered value, it (often significantly) increases the price of the service in consideration of the additional coverage.

Indeed but it also lets you continue without paying the extra



One of the points touched on by the judge in court claims in the courier thread previously linked is that the full cost of the service is really that of the service with full cover by the couriers (and brokers) allow you to continue without paying the extra.

TELLIT01 said:

Even if the OP had changed the value of the item that wouldn't automatically increase the amount of 'insurance' provided. 

It does affect the price to include the parcel cover (commonly misreferred to as insurance) but allows yuo to deselect it as above. 

From the linked courier thread, the judge puts it better than I can:

3. In these circumstances I find for Mr Penchev. It seems to me that it is impossible for it to be fair for the Defendant company to limit liability for something it is obliged to do. It is a matter of law that as the bailee of the product, it is not entitled to restrict its responsibility in the way that it has sought to do. I understand what has happened here commercially. The product in transit had to be insured.

 4. The delivery company is in effect attempting to pass on the cost of that insurance to the consumer, and when the consumer declines to pay what is essentially a necessary cost by way of an additional charge the Defendant company seeks not to be responsible for the full value. I find when considering whether that is fair or unfair between a consumer and a company here that it is unfair. It causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights to the detriment of the consumer. 

One thing to bear in mind here is that the cost of this cover is excessive, £1.20 per £20 to cover you if the courier doesn't perform their job with reasonable care and skill for your loss to be covered, I must be in the wrong job... 

Given that is 6% and couriers can't be losing 6% of parcels sent (forget about damage, most often that is due to insufficient packaging) it's a blooming good earner and if the couriers were forced to charge the true full price based on the value you can bet that charge will suddenly drop a lot low than the £1.20 per £20. 

born_again

TELLIT01 said:

Even if the OP had changed the value of the item that wouldn't automatically increase the amount of 'insurance' provided.  I can't comment directly about EVRI but other couriers do warn to make certain the package has the correct insurance on it.

Except it is not insurance (regulated product) It is parcel protection 🤷‍♀️

savergrant

What does 'lost in transit' actually boil down to?
I'd guess there is delivery to the wrong address, theft by an employee, theft by someone else due to lax security, simply being mislaid. The courier takes responsibility for the item however it seems reasonable for the value/penalty to be agreed at or before the time of handover. How many of us would feel differently about taking responsibility for someone's coffee mug as opposed to a diamond necklace?