Credit card claim re: bed requiring me to incur large additional expense

[AF62]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

[mc2fool]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

Indeed you can, it happened to me a while back. As the company responded to my letter I knew it had got through, so I filed a claim and got the signed-for fee reimbursed ... which they do in stamps.

[stevensfo]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

Indeed you can, it happened to me a while back. As the company responded to my letter I knew it had got through, so I filed a claim and got the signed-for fee reimbursed ... which they do in stamps.

Thanks. That's good to know.

I guess that even if the company doesn't respond, being reimbursed is proof that you sent or tried to send a letter to them.

Steve

[Mike4]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

Indeed you can, it happened to me a while back. As the company responded to my letter I knew it had got through, so I filed a claim and got the signed-for fee reimbursed ... which they do in stamps.

Thanks. That's good to know.

I guess that even if the company doesn't respond, being reimbursed is proof that you sent or tried to send a letter to them.

Steve

Why not just get a Receipt of Posting", which is free at any PO counter?

Saves all the mucking about using "Signed For" then claiming a refund.

[mc2fool]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

Indeed you can, it happened to me a while back. As the company responded to my letter I knew it had got through, so I filed a claim and got the signed-for fee reimbursed ... which they do in stamps.

Thanks. That's good to know.

I guess that even if the company doesn't respond, being reimbursed is proof that you sent or tried to send a letter to them.

Steve

Why not just get a Receipt of Posting", which is free at any PO counter?

Saves all the mucking about using "Signed For" then claiming a refund.

FWIW, in my (admittedly limited) experience, solicitors send out important letters twice, one signed for and the other not....

[stevensfo]

PS If the "Signed For" Royal Mail service really is not working, isn't that the same as paying for a product that doesn't work? Consumer rights apply?

You can claim the fee back if it isn't signed for - https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... ims-centre

Indeed you can, it happened to me a while back. As the company responded to my letter I knew it had got through, so I filed a claim and got the signed-for fee reimbursed ... which they do in stamps.

Thanks. That's good to know.

I guess that even if the company doesn't respond, being reimbursed is proof that you sent or tried to send a letter to them.

Steve

Why not just get a Receipt of Posting", which is free at any PO counter?

Saves all the mucking about using "Signed For" then claiming a refund.

Mike, I haven't used that service for many years. Out of interest, what info does Receipt of Posting contain? Both To/From addresses and date, or just the destination address and date? I agree that if it contains all that info, then there's no reason for it to be signed for.

Steve

[AF62]

Out of interest, what info does Receipt of Posting contain? Both To/From addresses and date, or just the destination address and date? I agree that if it contains all that info, then there's no reason for it to be signed for.

It includes the address you posted the item to, plus when and where you posted it from, but it doesn't include the detail of who sent it.

[stevensfo]

Out of interest, what info does Receipt of Posting contain? Both To/From addresses and date, or just the destination address and date? I agree that if it contains all that info, then there's no reason for it to be signed for.

It includes the address you posted the item to, plus when and where you posted it from, but it doesn't include the detail of who sent it.

Brilliant. Thanks!

Steve

[DiamondEcho]

When I've sent letters to large companies by "Signed For", today's equivalent of "Recorded Delivery",

But at least you will have proof of posting. From what I remember years ago, refusing to accept and sign for a letter was not considered a defence for 'not having received it' in court. --- Though of course, how do you prove that they 'did' have the chance to accept it? Steve

You can ask for a Certificate of Posting and it's free of charge. The counter staff complete a form with send and recipient details, then frank it with a post-mark and hand it to you. That's your proof and I understand it's accepted in legal evidence of posting an item.
https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app ... posting%3F

'What is a certificate of posting?
A Certificate of Posting is your proof that you have posted the item declared on the certificate into the Royal Mail network. The Certificate of Posting needs to be date stamped and signed at a Post Office® window as having been accepted into the network. In the rare instance of your item being lost in Royal Mail's network, you will have to present a stamped and signed Certificate of Posting with your claim for loss. '

[Clitheroekid]

FWIW, in my (admittedly limited) experience, solicitors send out important letters twice, one signed for and the other not....

In my (admittedly extensive!) experience I have never heard of this practice.

There is absolutely no need to use signed for / special delivery when writing claim letters. In fact, they can be counter-productive, as a debtor may well be expecting a solicitror's letter, and may refuse to sign for it, so that it's returned undelivered. Especially in the small claims court, if a defendant can actually prove that he never received the letter it may not go well for the claimant.

Although this wouldn't apply in the case of a large company, it's still a waste of time and money.

First class post alone should always be used. Section 7 Interpretation Act 1978 says:

References to service by post.

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression “give” or “send” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

In practical terms this means that a letter is deemed to be delivered on the second business day after it was posted.

[mc2fool]

FWIW, in my (admittedly limited) experience, solicitors send out important letters twice, one signed for and the other not....

In my (admittedly extensive!) experience I have never heard of this practice.

Hmm, just the solicitor I used then.

[Lootman]

FWIW, in my (admittedly limited) experience, solicitors send out important letters twice, one signed for and the other not....

In my (admittedly extensive!) experience I have never heard of this practice.

Hmm, just the solicitor I used then.

That is more the American practice, I thought, AKA "nail and mail".

In the UK, valid service is assumed for a single letter sent through the post, which I always think is weird.

In the US valid service has to be proven, if not by signature then by the testimony of a licensed process server, or at least a signed "proof of service" attachment.

[Clitheroekid]

FWIW, in my (admittedly limited) experience, solicitors send out important letters twice, one signed for and the other not....

In my (admittedly extensive!) experience I have never heard of this practice.

Hmm, just the solicitor I used then.

That is more the American practice, I thought, AKA "nail and mail".

In the UK, valid service is assumed for a single letter sent through the post, which I always think is weird.

In the US valid service has to be proven, if not by signature then by the testimony of a licensed process server, or at least a signed "proof of service" attachment.

I think you're probably confusing `service' as in the formal service of legal documents, which in both the UK and the US is governed by very precise legal rules, and `delivery' as in the delivery of an ordinary letter.

[DiamondEcho]

Thanks all for the informative discussion and assistance (CK, you really went beyond the call of duty for me there, It's much appreciated).

I just wanted to update the topic. My reply to the card issuer was posted today. I requested a Proof of Posting which is now simply printed out and resembles a Till receipt. Free of charge (still). So now the waiting resumes.

I'm in two minds. a) I hope the card issuer reads it, gives up fighting and refunds me. b) I get to call the local press and tell them I'm taking a mattress to court as evidence in a claim. That will involve me 'inviting the judge to lie in court!. Imagine, the head-line has just written itself there for you eh! So will you cover the case?'

[DiamondEcho]

Another update on this: Re: not being able to get the card issuer's required furniture inspection report for anything close to the £100 budget they said they'd fund. The cheapest I could find was quoted as £350+vat.

The card issuer called me, and then wrote to me confirming details; they have now upped the budget to £300. That's about 1/3rd of what the mattress cost us new. They also suggested I contact Homeserve Repairs to seek a quote, which I have just done. They said that in their experience they should be able to commission the required report within the increased budget. I'm unsure if they're testing my will to continue investing time in this, or whether they're honestly surprised at the quotes I previously received. Each of their letters includes [very roughly] 'If we haven't heard from you within 30 days we'll assume you've given up on your claim and close your case'.

For reference: The previous quote I received, last year, from the only inspectors I contacted who were sufficiently interested to reply to me was £420 (incl vat)

I remind myself that this is not me in a dispute with the card issuer, but as the manufacturer/supplier is insolvent it's me providing evidence for the card issuer to back up a claim on their own insurance. She said as much on the phone to me, though I'm sure they defend their 'No claims' record as keenly as motorists do.

My current thinking is that if Homeserve don't reply in negotiable range of the new £300 budget then I'll update the card issuer, and tell them that if they won't fund the quoted fee, from the source they themselves suggested, that we'll have 'our day in court'. I'll continue to update any developments.

Thx all for the help to date!