Stolen Limelight Precision...

[Kev]

I don't know what else to say or how else to say it Jonny.  You have two people very experienced in the industry giving advice, it's up to you if you choose not to take it  

[fretmeister]

 

Just now, Kev said:

 

So in the case you are talking about, you are effectively talking about the Post Office, and the salesperson there who has taken your money as an agent for the insurer, correct?  On this basis, the insurers/parcelforce will 100% decline the claim and you would stand zero change of overturning that, so I guess what you're actually left with is taking the post office to court, with any legal assistance you have have with your home insurance or similar.  The prospect of success there would be so low I doubt any no win no fee would take it on for you.  What would you be relying on, CCTV, audio recordings at the desk? You'll have nothing to prove you were told the wrong thing.  And the terms and condition explicitly state the guitar contents of your parcel are not covered for enhance protection.  Of course, there could be things in the package that are covered, the guitar case perhaps, string packs in the case etc so you have still been sold insurance for the right reasons, complicating it further.

 

Don't get confused with PPI and all that business, entirely different kettle of fish.  Here we're just talking about straightforward exclusions in an insurance product that you're choosing to buy, and are only able to buy after you have confirmed you have read the prohibited list.

 

Best advise; don't use Parcelforce if you want you're guitars covered, and definitely don't on the basis that you can challenge them if something happens.  You'll lose, sadly.

 

Lawyers don't really do "no-win no-fee" for Small Claims stuff because in the Small Claims process there is no ability to reclaim legal fees from the other side if you win. Each side pays their own legal fees irrespective of the outcome, so a person suing over something with a value of under £10,000 either has to pay their own lawyer win or lose, or do it themselves - or with help from Cit Advice or the FRU and so on. On the other hand RM/PF will walk in with a 20 year experience barrister and they won't care about the expense as long as they do win.

 

[Kev]

Just now, fretmeister said:

 

 

Lawyers don't really do "no-win no-fee" for Small Claims stuff because in the Small Claims process there is no ability to reclaim legal fees from the other side if you win. Each side pays their own legal fees irrespective of the outcome, so a person suing over something with a value of under £10,000 either has to pay their own lawyer win or lose, or do it themselves - or with help from Cit Advice or the FRU and so on. On the other hand RM/PF will walk in with a 20 year experience barrister and they won't care about the expense as long as they do win.

 

 

Sorry I didn't use the best term, what I was alluding to more was the legal protection insurance you have bundled with your home insurer that can assist sometimes in cases like this.  They usually have a 50:50 threshold of success that needs to be met before they take a case on, which is at no cost to the policyholder either way.  Hence, they don't want to lose, so they'll almost certainly never take on something like this.

[fretmeister]

4 minutes ago, Kev said:

I don't know what else to say or how else to say it Jonny.  You have two people very experienced in the industry giving advice, it's up to you if you choose not to take it  

 

It's my experience that means I never use PF for anything worth more than £200 even if it isn't the subject of a limit or exclusion!

 

RM Special Delivery is fine for amps so I use that. For guitars I'd go with Overland Express or buy a separate policy - but mostly if I want to buy an instrument that much, I'll go and get it!

[jonnybass]

@Kev and @fretmeister interestingly after a bit of reading it appears that this is not regulated insurance, and so is to technically covered by FSMA in the same way house insurance etc is covered.....just goes to show.

 

Probably why its referred to as protection and compensation..

 

jonny

[fretmeister]

2 minutes ago, Kev said:

 

Sorry I didn't use the best term, what I was alluding to more was the legal protection insurance you have bundled with your home insurer that can assist sometimes in cases like this.  They usually have a 50:50 threshold of success that needs to be met before they take a case on, which is at no cost to the policyholder either way.  Hence, they don't want to lose, so they'll almost certainly never take on something like this.

 

Absolutely!

 

TOP TIP for home insurance - some insurance policies even give cover for damages won at court from others who then go bust! So you sue someone and win (the usual type - shoddy small builder type) and they go bankrupt once you get your official Judgment. So you can't get the money anymore.

 

Some Home Contents Insurance will actually pay out the same sum as the Court awarded! It's not in every policy but certainly worth a look if anyone needs to go after someone likely to go bankrupt in response. If it is there, it's usually called something like "Unsatisfied Judgment Cover" or words to that effect.

[ped]

Mmm I like the colour of that bass! If I find it, I'm keeping it! 🤣

[jonnybass]

8 minutes ago, Kev said:

I don't know what else to say or how else to say it Jonny.  You have two people very experienced in the industry giving advice, it's up to you if you choose not to take it  

Does this mean i am due you a massive fee??

 

 

Jonny

[fretmeister]

9 minutes ago, jonnybass said:

@Kev and @fretmeister interestingly after a bit of reading it appears that this is not regulated insurance, and so is to technically covered by FSMA in the same way house insurance etc is covered.....just goes to show.

 

Probably why its referred to as protection and compensation..

 

jonny

 

Even when insurance is regulated if the insurance is provided by a third party but merely arranged by the one in between (EG if the PF cover was actually an insurance product from an insurance company like AXA or something) then a disclaimer stating "you agree we have not advised you as to the suitability of the insurance product you have asked us to arrange and you have made your own determination as to whether it meets your needs: we do not offer advice on this or any other financial products and we do not offer to arrange any alternatives" is usually enough to avoid liability - or at least make it such a ballache to pursue it that 99% of customers don't bother.

 

This is also why I refuse to accept any offers of "Free Financial Advice" even if it comes from my own bank. If it's free then the advisor doesn't owe me as much care as whoever it is that is paying him. I always pay for professional services so they owe me the duty of care and not someone else.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by fretmeister

[jonnybass]

1 minute ago, fretmeister said:

 

Even when insurance is regulated if the insurance is provided by a third party but merely arranged by the one in between (EG if the PF cover was actually an insurance product from an insurance company like AXA or something) then a disclaimer stating "you agree we have not advised you as to the suitability of the insurance product you have asked us to arrange and you have made your own determination as to whether it meets your needs: we do not offer advice on this or any other financial products and we do not offer to arrange any alternatives" is usually enough to avoid liability.

 

This is also why I refuse to accept any offers of "Free Financial Advice" even if it comes from my own bank. If it's free then the advisor doesn't owe me as much care as whoever it is that is paying him. I always pay for professional services so they owe me the duty of care and not someone else.

 

 

Yeah i am the same, having worked in regulated financial services for a looooong time i know exactly what you mean.  

 

Jonny

[fretmeister]

Anyway - back on topic... what is the colour of that bass? It's lovely. I don't usually do blue but that looks like sheet ice, especially with the relic job, and it's just so....

 

Cool.

 

[/not even sorry]

[dmccombe7]

I've always wondered how any item can be lost especially larger items. 

Every package is scanned at every stage of its journey. Every destination or van/truck it gets scanned when arrives and scanned when despatched. 

It should be easy to find out what part of its journey it went "missing".

Hopefully insurance covers it but better still it turns up in undamaged condition.

Dave

[Kev]

They don't basically, which is what Mark is alluding to.  I feel its likely someone in a Parcelforce uniform has a very good idea of where this ended up  

[fretmeister]

In the past I've found that couriers manage to find things once they've been provided with a crime reference number after it's been reported to plod as theft.

[dmccombe7]

10 minutes ago, Kev said:

They don't basically, which is what Mark is alluding to.  I feel its likely someone in a Parcelforce uniform has a very good idea of where this ended up  

Do they not. ?

Any tracking i've followed i could see every step of its journey. I've found parcelforce / Royal Mail to be pretty good in recent years too. 

Does make you worry a bit. I'd never send a bass or amp by post. I always go for collection only or meet up somewhere. 

If its a bass i'd prefer the buyer to try it at my house before parting with any money.

Dave

[tauzero]

50 minutes ago, dmccombe7 said:

I've always wondered how any item can be lost especially larger items. 

 

DPD managed to lose a Warwick that was heading for me. Got as far as their depot over the other side of Birmingham to me, then it was supposed to be loaded on a van, then it wasn't delivered, then it was supposed to be loaded on a van but wasn't. This continued for a few days until I contacted them, they managed to track it down somewhere in the warehouse, and I went in and picked it up myself because they were obviously too incompetent to manage to get it 30 miles along the M5/M6/M42 after it had got there from (IIRC) Italy.

[warwickhunt]

1 hour ago, jonnybass said:

I dont work in general insurance but I'd say thats apples and pears, an insurance policy that covers mulitple options with exclusions is different to a one off contract for a specific purpose. 

 

The point i made is that when the agent is presented with information on the item being transported, the exclusion shouldnt apply if they have accepted the insurance premium.  Contracts are two way, if the insurer doesnt know whats in the box the exclusion can apply but i still fail to see how if the insurer knows whats being insured, that the item cannot be insured that they can accept the premium.  that act in itself would fail to meet FCA principles surely?

 

 

Jonny

 

I can assure you I have gone through this very process INCLUDING going to the Ombudsman... when you agree to terms and conditions the onus is on YOU to identify if any relevant clause(s) apply to you purchasing basic or enhanced insurance.  In my instance the Ombudsman investigated the loss of my instrument and concluded that as PF's T&Cs excluded instruments it was my fault for still going ahead and paying for enhanced insurance (through them), I wasn't even entitled to their basic £20 cover as it was an item specifically included.  Oh and I couldn't even get back my delivery fee!    

[jonnybass]

That’s outrageous, and can I think only be explained by it not being “regulated” insurance. 
 

sorry you had this experience.

 

Jonny