UPS/Packlink Parcel Lost - Claimed Raised on MCOL

[jbradbu1]

Hi all,

 

I've experienced a very similar problem to many others on this forum and have been following many topics very closely to gain as much knowledge, advice and insight as is possible. As very much a layperson in this field, this forum has been a great resource. 

 

I am now sharing my experience so far as requested by BankFodder within this topic  from Falcon123.

 

Summary:

- 14/12/22 Playstation 5 sold on Ebay mid December

- 15/12/22 Shipped using UPS via Ebay's postal partner Packlink, no insurance purchased

- 30/12/22 Claim for lost parcel submitted

- 17/02/23 Investigation complete, parcel confirmed lost and standard £60 compensation processed

- 28/02/23 Letter of complaint submitted to UPS

- 03/03/23 Letter of claim submitted to UPS

- 17/03/23 Claim submitted via MCOL

- 24/04/23 Defence received from UPS

- 02/05/23 DQ N180 received from UPS legal representatives choosing to avoid mediation 

 

One stupid mistake of mine was, as the defence states, using "UPS (UK) Limited" as the defendant rather than "UPS Limited". These are part of the same group, but the UK company handles head office admin, rather than parcel delivery. I've submitted a request to the court to update this and I am aware this could slow things up and result in fees. I'd recommend reading the MoneyClaim Online (MCOL) – User Guide for Claimants to potentially avoid being as much of a fool as me as it does state the importance of using the correct name.

 

Various documents attached including:

- Letter of complaint

- Letter of claim

- Particulars of claim for MCOL

- UPS Defence

- DQ N180 completed by claimant

- DQ N180 completed by defendant 

Defence (Redacted).pdf MCOL UPS - Particulars of Claim (Redacted).pdf N180 Directions Questionnaire - Defendant (Redacted).pdf N180_Final_Form - Claimant (Redacted).pdf UPS - Letter of Claim (Redacted).pdf UPS-Packlink Email Claim (Redacted).pdf

[BankFodder]

Have UPS actually raised the issue of the incorrect name on the claim form?

 

In fact looking at the defence very briefly, I can see that they refer to it but they don't make an issue of it. Frankly it wouldn't have been necessary to trouble the court to make this change.
UPS have put in a defence and they seem to be prepared to go ahead. The name is a mere technicality and they know about the claim against them.

Before you I wouldn't worry too much about it and see what the judge says

[BankFodder]

I can see that you have already visited a thread relating to UPS.

UPS have tended to rely on exactly the same defence and refer frequently to their own contract with the brokers.

In that thread I suggested that the OP write a letter requiring sight of the contract. I suggest that you do exactly the same thing and use the same letter but suitably modified

 

Quote

 

Dear [REDACTED],

 

I see that in your defence (Section 4.1), you have stated that "The claimant has not pleaded the following in relation to such: The parties to the agreement to ship the subject consignment". I would like to inform you that i had identified Packlink and the UPS as parties in my letter of claim received by the UPS on 07/03/2023.

In your defence you have referred frequently to the contract between packlink and your client and I would be grateful if you can supply me with a copy of the contract between Packlink and the UPS . If you do not agree to provide a copy then I will be declining mediation. I will go to the trial and you will be required to provide a copy of the contract as part of the court bundle before trial.

Furthermore, I will draw the attention of the court to the fact that you refused to supply me with the contract before trial and even before mediation even though I asked you to do so, even though you referred to the contract specifically in the defence and even though to fail to do so would effectively and potentially waste the time of the parties and of the court. If you refuse to supply a copy and if you fail to include a copy in your court bundle then I will invite the court to come to its own conclusions as to my position as a beneficially entitled third party.

 

Kind regards,

[REDACTED]

 

 

[jbradbu1]

Thanks for the quick reply BankFodder.

 

My thinking was that due to the legal separation of entities (whether within the same group or not), this would result in the claim being struck out. Having already made the request to the courts, I will see what the outcome is.

 

Regarding the request for the contract, I have just submitted the request for the UPS-Packlink contract. I will feedback when when/if I hear back.

[BankFodder]

I don't think that at this level the courts are too bothered if the defendant hasn't raised a really serious objection and they don't appear to have done here.

 

Did you pay a fee to have the name changed?

[BankFodder]

Open 

[jbradbu1]

Hi,

It's been a while... I decided not to request a change of company name due to your advice and the associated cost. Also, I never heard back from from the defendants regarding the request for contract. Since then, on 29/06/23 the case has been "transferred to the below County Court Hearing Centre for allocation", the full contents of the letter are given below:

"To all parties

This claim has been transferred to the below County Court Hearing Centre for allocation. On receipt, the file will be referred to a procedural judge who will allocate the claim to track and give case management directions.

Details of the judge's directions will be sent to you in a notice of allocation.

If you would like any further information you can contact the local County Court Hearing Centre directly but please await the Judge's directions"

I have therefore been awaiting further communication from the court but it has not come, however the defendant's legal representatives emailed me last night with the following:

"We note that we have not heard from you in relation to directions in the matter.  Please could you confirm when you anticipate issuing directions? "

Please can you advise what it is that is being requested of me?

[dx100uk]

the court should have sent an N157?

ask them ....p'haps its not been allocated yet? many county courts have months of delays still

 

dx

 

[jbradbu1]

Hello again,

 

Thanks for your latest piece of advice, I contacted the court to try to progress the claim to the allocation stage and eventually received the paperwork this week.

 

A summary of what's been included within the N157 notice:

- Trial date: 27/11/23 (1.5 hours)

- By 4pm on 19/09/23 I must send the court a reply to the defence in which I set out the basis upon which I allege that I have legal rights against the defendant given that the Defendant contracted not with the Claimant but the supplier of the relevant parcel.

- The court deems the case as suitable for mediation.

- By 4pm on 19/09/23, the Claimant must send the court and the Defendant copies of all the documents that the Claimant intends to rely upon at the final hearing (in a bundle).

- by 4pm on 03/10/23, the Claimant and the Defendant must send to each other and to the court copies of witness statements of all witnesses which they intend to rely upon at the final hearing.

- Not less than 7 days before the hearing each party must file at court and serve the other party a skeleton argument (limited to no more than 4 pages of A4 paper) setting down the basis upon which the party alleges, or denies, that there is a legal liability between the two parties.

 

Next Steps:

I will begin by drafting my response to the defence using the arguments surrounding the Rights of Third Parties Act which are frequently referred to on this forum. I'll also add that I never received a reply to my request to view a copy of the contract between UPS and Packlink which the Defendant relies upon with their defence, therefore with no sight of this contract, their statements which refer to this contract provides absolutely no support to their defence. As BankFodder stated within Falcon123's thread, I'll invite the court to come to its own conclusions as to my position as a beneficially entitled third party if a copy of this contract is never shared. 

Should my reply to their defence and the court bundle be separate documents or should I simply just include the reply with the court bundle?

[BankFodder]

Please can you post a link to the thread of falcon to which you have referred.

Yes please. Prepare and then post the draft document that you are proposing to prepare and then we can have a look.

Well spaced and numbered Paragraphs please

[BankFodder]

Please will you visit the thread relating to a claim against DPD in respect of the contract which was made through Packlink.

In particular visit this post

and download and read the attached document.

To post down from there, there is another attachment which I think is called "query.pdf". Download that and read that.

Visit the Packlink site and also the DPD site – and try to find the equivalent documents which relate to your contract with Packlink. They will probably be identical and I suppose they on the Packlink site. If you find them then save the link and also download them and put them on your thread.
These are essential.

Also, as I have said above, please produce your own draft document with well spaced and numbered paragraphs.

Although it is not yet September, I think that there is a certain urgency about this because it might be a large job to get it perfect.

I'm going to post a message to the owner of the thread to which I referred you to and ask them if they can help us find the Packlink document if it is on the Packlink site.

[jbradbu1]

Hello again,

 

I have finally got around to pulling together the court bundle, please see attached.

 

Despite using StoneCross' bundle and arguments as a template (this was enormously helpful, so thank you StoneCross for your hard work which I have benefitted from), I don't doubt that I have made some errors in how I have substantiated my arguments and how I have worded things in a way that would be acceptable to the courts. Also, I wasn't confident with the type of information to include within the "Reply to Defence" as opposed to the "Witness Statement", I was afraid of repeating myself, so please may you advise if I need to shuffle things around. 

 

As always, thanks for your patience and advice, I wouldn't have pursued this with the help of this forum. 

 

As requested above - Falcon123 thread below for info:

 

Jamie Bradbury v UPS LTD K3QZ061X.pdf

[BankFodder]

A quick note on the format:
when you do a reply to the defence, you should refer to each paragraph I number

So: "of paragraph 1 of the defence… The claimant admits that the Defendants name should have been UPS Ltd. Not UPS (UK) Ltd.… Blah blah blah"

"Of paragraph 2 of the defence… Et cetera blah blah blah et cetera"

Of paragraph 3…

Et cetera et cetera

If you wouldn't mind doing that and reposting the document. I won't be able to read all 25 pages but I shall make some comments on the relevant parts – your statements

[BankFodder]

As far as I can see – paragraph 2 you are disclosing far too much evidence.
You should really restrict yourself to saying that you reject the defendant's assertion that you do not enjoy third-party rights. The text of the 1999 act is clear. You are discernible beneficiary and therefore you enjoy rights.
You put the defendant to proof and to explain why they think that this statutory provision does not apply in the circumstances.

Something like that.

As soon as you start giving detailed reasons – then you are providing them with hints as to how to counter what you have to say.
Keep your powder dry.

Try to restrict your responses to their defence to the bare minimum. Enough to give the court pause for thought but no more. The suggested text that I have given above simply challenges them to put their money where their mouth is.

In fact they have played the trick on you by giving you minimal information and drawing you out in your arguments. Don't fall for it.

[jbradbu1]

Thanks again BankFodder,

Please see the attached file with some slight amendments. You may suggest I need to further cut it down or keep some arguments in my back pocket, so of course I will go with whatever you believe is optimal.

Apologies for the length, I wouldn't expect you to read it all. Pages 5-10 of the file are taken up by the Defendant's T&Cs which contributes to the length. 

Jamie Bradbury v UPS LTD K3QZ061X v2.pdf

[BankFodder]

Sorry but this is a bit all over the place.

You start off by making your comment on paragraph 2 of the defence – that's fair enough but then you dart over to paragraph 10 and comment on that and it is only several paragraphs later of your reply – at paragraph 8 – that you then get on to referring once again to the defence but this time your addressing paragraph 16 of their defence.

You need to deal with each paragraph of their defence point by point – in the correct order – one point at a time.

We can't move on until you do this

[jbradbu1]

Okay, understood.

So you'd suggest, in some capacity, to reply to each of the 20 paragraphs of the defence?

[BankFodder]

Yes. That's what I tried to explain you yesterday morning. I'm not sure that I suggested anything else.

If you have a comment to make about a particular paragraph then you comment on it – but in the order that the paragraphs are presented to you and you don't start jumping around skipping paragraphs and then going back again.

It has to be in an ordered and structured way so that it makes sense to – a judge, for instance, reading it.

[jbradbu1]

Please see the latest version of the court bundle which has been revised following your most recent piece of advice.

 

Thank you.

Jamie Bradbury v UPS LTD K3QZ061X v3.pdf

[BankFodder]

Can you please just clarify one thing – was the lost item sent by you or intended to be received by you?