ParcelMonkey Woes! Lost £400 Monitor

The Halk said:
Dear Navin Ramiah,

On the xxx of xxxx I arranged through the Parcel Monkey website for you to collect and deliver an item for me. I paid for insurance and instructed you exactly what the items were. You agreed this contract, accepted payment and it is now presumed lost.

On contacting your customer services department by email you've informed me that you cannot be held responsible for your negligence in this case, as you have written in to your terms and conditions that you won't be held responsible for monitors.

The exclusions made in the terms and conditions were not made clear to me when arranging for the package to be sent, even after I arranged and paid for an enhanced level of insurance to cover the cost of the goods through yourselves.

Were you to refuse the insurance I would certainly not have sent the item, as a result of you accepting the contract for delivering what was clearly stated to be a Dell Monitor, and your subsequent loss of the item I am considerably out of pocket. It would make things simpler for both Parcel Monkey and myself if you were to refund me at this stage, before I take further legal advice.

On my initial findings I believe your terms and conditions would constitute an unfair contract term, which would be looked upon favourably for me if any proceedings were to be inititated.

I would greatly appreciate if your reply could reach me within two weeks of the date of the letter, as otherwise I will assume you wish me to pursue this through a solicitor.

Yours sincerely,

Crater Loads.
Click to expand...

I'd at least change it to something like that. Not sure I agree as you should have confirmed you read the terms and conditions but hey ho. I would also stick to being factual and concise.

Also one week is too short a time span, it could well end up in the postal system for that amount of time! I believe civil proceedings would be disadvantaged if you hadn't made reasonable attempts to settle outside.
 
gambitt said:
It's pleasing to see a few people who know what they are talking about to counter the sheep-like "it's in the T&C's so tough" responses.

I wonder if those people would accept a shop's T&Cs as gospel if it said they had to hop on one leg in order to qualify for a refund...
Click to expand...

The more I think about it the more I think that the insurance may be a red herring. Why should you need to pay additional money to insure that they're not incompetent. It seems almost like extortion to me. I can understand if the items are very fragile or very valuable indeed, but paying extra for them to do their job properly sounds unfair.

Anyway, all he can do is try and see if they'll refund, short of going to court he can't force them to do anything.
 
Now had a quick look through the web page linked to in their email and the actual T&C page. An important question leaps to mind - what did you tell them was being sent? Did you say it was a monitor when booking the service? If you did then their position is far from watertight.

You will note that the page to which they link mentions the "carried on a no-compensation basis" bit. However, it also says right at the top "IMPORTANT: This list is not exhaustive, it exists as a rough guide only. Please check our terms and conditions for more accuracy." The result of that is that you can completely ignore the contents of that page since they clearly indicate that it cannot be a part of the contract!

Looking at the full T&C, a monitor is an excluded item but will be carried by agreement. There does not appear to be any reference to a limit in liability in relation to an excluded item that has been carried by agreement. Therefore, if you told them in advance that the item was a monitor, there is no basis for them to avoid liability.
 
A scummy worker (most of them are that work at these places) has stolen it 100% it happens all the time.
 
Pudney said:
Some of the wording changes are just because I don't like your style, other parts are because it comes across as a petulant child stamping their feet.
Click to expand...

Style is subjective.

One week was for a reply, all they need to do is acknowledge.

A petulant child stamping their feet? I disagree, now it reads like a muddling fool admitting fault crossing their fingers and hoping.
 
Good luck is all I can say.

Personally I think it's an absolute joke that any courier or postal service can deny compensation when losing or damaging an item when in their care. Refusing to carry certain items in one thing, but failing to carry out the contracted service is not something they should ever be able to get away with.

Had this debate with Royal Mail many a time. It's madness that you have to pay extra for insurance. These people have a simple job I don't see how they can hope to avoid repercussions when they don't fulfil it.
 
They can refuse to deliver whatever they want, they can ask extra for more fragile items... however losing something is basic negligence.
 
DanielMMS said:
Now had a quick look through the web page linked to in their email and the actual T&C page. An important question leaps to mind - what did you tell them was being sent? Did you say it was a monitor when booking the service? If you did then their position is far from watertight.

You will note that the page to which they link mentions the "carried on a no-compensation basis" bit. However, it also says right at the top "IMPORTANT: This list is not exhaustive, it exists as a rough guide only. Please check our terms and conditions for more accuracy." The result of that is that you can completely ignore the contents of that page since they clearly indicate that it cannot be a part of the contract!

Looking at the full T&C, a monitor is an excluded item but will be carried by agreement. There does not appear to be any reference to a limit in liability in relation to an excluded item that has been carried by agreement. Therefore, if you told them in advance that the item was a monitor, there is no basis for them to avoid liability.
Click to expand...

Here is the area where you enter details.

As you can see i did clearly mention it was a monitor but also there is a tick box on the right!

 
The Halk said:
Style is subjective.

One week was for a reply, all they need to do is acknowledge.

A petulant child stamping their feet? I disagree, now it reads like a muddling fool admitting fault crossing their fingers and hoping.
Click to expand...

Style is indeed subjective, which is why that part isn't that important. in fact, I'd even say don't copy the letter out word for word, write it in your own words then you will at least have consistency of style.

One week from the date of your letter is what you gave. That would include postal time from you sending it, which is why I'd say two weeks.

As for muddling fool, if that's your opinion! Your a petulant child, I'm a muddling fool, perhaps the OP should go halfway :p At the very least emotive and unsubstantiated claims are unlikely to useful.
 
Tyron said:
I thought "fragile" on the box would prevent this?
Click to expand...

A delivery driver told me this is the worst thing you can write on a box. It would be like telling someone who's making your food to wash their hands first. You can probably guess what they will do...
 
gambitt said:
A delivery driver told me this is the worst thing you can write on a box. It would be like telling someone who's making your food to wash their hands first. You can probably guess what they will do...
Click to expand...

i did on three separate locations write "fragile handle with care" in large red writing!
 
gambitt said:
A delivery driver told me this is the worst thing you can write on a box. It would be like telling someone who's making your food to wash their hands first. You can probably guess what they will do...
Click to expand...

I guess the company name really does signify the company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom