Parcelforce damaged goods and refuse responsibility (senders perspective)

[casual_observer]

Hello everyone, I was hoping for some advice.

 

I have read a number of threads on this forum relating to the damage of goods/packages by couriers - who universally seem to want to wriggle and writhe out of any responsibility with pretty flimsy excuses. On this occasion, my issue lies squarely with Parcelforce.

 

Let me set the context:

 

About 4 weeks ago I sold a pair of Bose speakers for £80 on ebay. When the buyer received the speakers, there was a big-ish dent on the corner of the box and sure enough after opening the package part of the wooden speaker housing had been cracked and broken. I refunded the buyer and lodged a damaged goods claim with Parcelforce, which they have since denied on the basis that i hadn't packaged the speakers with enough protection - this is where I feel they are looking for an easy way out.

 

To send the speakers I wrapped them individually in 3 layers of bubble wrap and put them both into a single corrugated cardboard box. Additionally, i put in a few extra layers of corrugated cardboard along the edges. They fit really snugly and could not move around at all. I sealed the box with duck tape, and also taped up the corners and all the joins on the cardboard box for extra strength. Finally I wrote "FRAGILE" on the box in big letters with a highlighter. All in all, I was confident that the package was sturdy and well protected from the normal bumps that happen in transit.

 

I was told by parcelforce that bubblewrap was not an adequate protection, although according to their own packaging guidelines, bubblewarp is actually recommended.

 

They also give the following as an excuse:

 

"Parcelforce Worldwide is a bulk carrier shipping over 1 million items per week, much of the sorting process is handled by automated machinery. As such, while ‘Fragile’, ‘Handle With Care’ or ‘This Way Up’ labels will be adhered to by drivers and manual handlers, this will not be of assistance in relation to the machinated sorting processes."

Surely whatever way they choose to handle parcels is nothing to do with the customer - a fundamental requirement of the sorting process that it should not cause damage to the parcels.

 

I guess my main question is has anyone else encountered this defence from Parcelforce, and if so - how did you respond to them?

 

Thanks for your time.

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

Somewhere on the forum is a thread where a guy sued royal mail and won. They try to get out of paying compensation by any means they can.

 

have you escalated this all the way yet?

[casual_observer]

Hi, thanks for the welcome.

 

I haven't escalated it yet, I'm still putting together an email response outlining my argument. I think its probably a standard approach on their part - refuse a claim out of hand and then start a war of attrition to see who gives in first - all for the sake of an £80 claim. Its almost not worth it, but I can't stomach the idea of letting them get away with it!

[citizenB]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?392591&p=4328599#post4328599

 

Here you go, the thread silverfox was referring to.

[silverfox1961]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?392591&p=4328599#post4328599

 

Here you go, the thread silverfox was referring to.

 

 

Thanks for that. For the life of me, I couldn't remember what the thread was called nor which forum it was in.