Charging customers for failed deliveries - can they do this?

[Dymo King]

Hi,
I've just seen this in the terms and conditions of a major (£50m/yr turnover) internet retailer, and am just wondering if they're are allowed to do this? I assume because of their size they can afford to check the legality of things like this.

... If the delivery address refuse delivery of the goods or if you do not respond to the "sorry we missed you" card left by your driver, your order will be returned to the sender ([company].com) we will then wait for you to contact us before we refund you your money minus the return postage cost.

Please note [companies courier] returns charges are £29.25.

ie. if you don't accept delivery we'll charge you £30 to cover the couriers return fees.

Very occasionally we get problems with people not facilitating the delivery of their items, so it would be great if we could legally add something like this to our terms to use on people that are really being un-cooperative. But previously we thought this was disallowed by the Distance Selling Regulations?

 

[kulture]

If it says it in your terms and conditions THEN you can do this. You cannot charge a premium. The £29 cost seems excessive. Personally I would not order from them.

 

[arcon5]

Depends on the size/weight/delivery method of the item I guess.

A TV for example on a special service may well cost £30 for delivery in which case its fine. I know parcelforce for example return to sender on the slowest & therefore cheapest service, others probably do this.

From what I understand under the DSR the retailer is not allowed to charge a 're-stocking' fee or 'admin' fee for returned items. But if stated in their T&Cs they can request the customer pay return costs - this is different for damaged items or items that have been mis-described.

- since this isn't a case of 'I have changed my mind & would like to return the item' then maybe this is a loophole?

Thats my understanding of it atleast.

 

[scm5436]

Depends on the size/weight/delivery method of the item I guess.

A TV for example on a special service may well cost £30 for delivery in which case its fine.

Not necessarily. We used to use citylink, and for a returned item they charged us the standard delivery rate for sending it, they then charged us the same standard delivery rate for sending it back, and they then charged us an admin fee for messing them about - in total a returned (failed) delivery cost us about £18, even for a small item.

But if stated in their T&Cs they can request the customer pay return costs - this is different for damaged items or items that have been mis-described.

That is correct, but the problem here is that although the item is being returned the customer has never actually received it. So technically it's not really a return but a failure to deliver. I thought that there was no way to charge for this, but this company certainly seems to be trying and I would love to hear that it is possible...

 

[arcon5]

If only they thought:

"wicked, money for the return journey & we don't even have to send a driver to collect it as we already have it in storage"

Yet they think:

"$$$$$ look here, we have your valuable parcel, you will have to refund your customer and if you don't pay us 2x the original cost of delivery we will do as we wish with it as per our terms of service $$$$$"

What reasons would there be for a failed delivery & who would be liable:

- damaged item. If they are careless & damage the parcel, should they be charging for it to be returned to sender?

- wrong address. If the sender dispatches to the wrong address then they should absorb the costs without question. If the buyer gave wrong address they should have to pay to rectify it.

- away on vacation. The buyer needs to make sure they would be available to take receipt - or atleast be able to collect.

Can't think of any other reason..

 

[streetslocal]

Plenty of other reasons for failed deliviries such as customer being out shopping or out at work and despite calling to tell people of a set day they often nip down the shop thinking ive waiting in for a few hours so far and it aint going to come until later today so ill be alright.

 

[Dymo King]

"$$$$$ look here, we have your valuable parcel, you will have to refund your customer and if you don't pay us 2x the original cost of delivery we will do as we wish with it as per our terms of service $$$$$"

To be honest I don't really care about the couriers and whether they're ripping me off or not, that's not the point here.

What reasons would there be for a failed delivery & who would be liable:

Again, I only really care about the reason mentioned in the OP - the delivery is refused, or the customer fails to facilitate delivery (ie. they weren't there on any of the occasions the courier tried to deliver, didn't respond to the 'we tried to deliver, please call us to rearrange' cards, and didn't respond to our emails, and generally made no effort whatsoever to do anything)

If that happens can we charge them or not (from a legal point of view, not opinions or what people think should happen)?

ie. is this company just trying it on and hoping the customer doesn't know their rights, or have they found a loophole, or is there just no law that specifically prohibits this?

 

[kulture]

I think it is legal. Barely. As you say, the customer has not made any effort to get the goods and is in effect cancelling the order. Hence the legal ability to charge the return postage.

 

[mconridge]

I can understand why they have this clause but I'd be suprised if they actually used it.

We get items come back to us undelivered from our couriers for a variety of different reasons, but mostly because the customer hasn't responded in time. We don't charge the customer for this to be honest, as it's poor customer service. Our couriers contact us before a parcel comes back so it gives us time to contact the customer and alert them to the issue. That normally does the trick.

 

[Dymo King]

I think it is legal. Barely. As you say, the customer has not made any effort to get the goods and is in effect cancelling the order. Hence the legal ability to charge the return postage.

But under the DSR the customer cancellation period starts 7 days from the point they receive it. So if they never take delivery technically they can't cancel and the order is in limbo. Or from a legal perspective it more likely counts as the supplier having taken the money but not having supplied the goods.

But, on the other hand, I seem to remember the DSR saying that you must refund the customer in full if they cancel the order (most of the restrictions in the DSR revolve around what we can and can't do if the customer cancels the order) - but in this case they can't cancel the order because they haven't received it...

So maybe that's how they're playing it?

 

[Dymo King]

I can understand why they have this clause but I'd be suprised if they actually used it.

We get items come back to us undelivered from our couriers for a variety of different reasons, but mostly because the customer hasn't responded in time. We don't charge the customer for this to be honest, as it's poor customer service. Our couriers contact us before a parcel comes back so it gives us time to contact the customer and alert them to the issue. That normally does the trick.

Well, you say it's poor customer service - but do you really want customers who order stuff and then don't accept delivery landing you with a big bill for a cancelled order?

Sure, sometimes there are genuine reasons - but other times you, and the courier, bend over backwards to try and get it delivered and they just don't co-operate. It would be good to land people like that with the bill sometimes... After all, you have provided a service even if they didn't receive the goods.

 

[kulture]

Don't even THINK about doing this if you sold through Amazon.

 

[lesliedocherty]

We do it,

Had 1 last week, 3 attempted deliveries by courier, 3 texts by courier to say delivery would be next day, when we got the non delivery report we called and left voicemail then emailed (3 times).

We refunded, minus initial £5 and a £12 non delivery charge.

We have lost a customer, but i don't want this kind of customer anyway.

 

[Dymo King]

and did they complain about it? What do your terms and conditions say?

 

[lesliedocherty]

yes, in our terms, she wasn't happy and said it was unacceptable.

we told her what was unacceptable was her lack of communication for a month.

 

[Dymo King]

So there's no legal people here that are prepared to give a definitive yes or no on this?

 

[Dymo King]

Really? No legal bods here are prepared to say if this is legal or not?

That's somewhat disappointing. Maybe I'll have more luck the ecommerce forum, how can I move the thread? or does it require a moderator to do that?

 

[MH1]

If the client claimed they had not received the delivery card, I doubt these terms would hold water in a court. The company is relying on the customers accepting the charges, personally I wouldn't.

 

[lesliedocherty]

If the client claimed they had not received the delivery card, I doubt these terms would hold water in a court. The company is relying on the customers accepting the charges, personally I wouldn't.

No, we emailed the customer 3 times, we phoned the customer 3 times, you wouldn't accept it as i'm sure your bright enough to have dealt with it and not let the situation arise.

 

[APC Nexday Overnite Ltd]

Not necessarily. We used to use citylink, and for a returned item they charged us the standard delivery rate for sending it, they then charged us the same standard delivery rate for sending it back, and they then charged us an admin fee for messing them about - in total a returned (failed) delivery cost us about £18, even for a small item.

That is correct, but the problem here is that although the item is being returned the customer has never actually received it. So technically it's not really a return but a failure to deliver. I thought that there was no way to charge for this, but this company certainly seems to be trying and I would love to hear that it is possible...

I'm part owner of the Bolton & Wigan depot of APC Overnight Ltd
We specialise in similar services. I can't speak for your local depot but us at the Bolton and Wigan branch do not charge at all for returns!
If you were one of our customers and you send to your customer and they refuse at the doorstep, refuse due to damage or if simply they're never in so we're returning it back to yourself its done free of charge.
Might be worthwhile contacting your local depot see www.apc-overnight.com to find your local depot

 

[Dymo King]

yes, but I'm guessing you can't touch couriers like citylink on price for the deliveries...

 

[MH1]

No, we emailed the customer 3 times, we phoned the customer 3 times, you wouldn't accept it as i'm sure your bright enough to have dealt with it and not let the situation arise.

I agree with the sentiments, but the DSR state it is the retaillers duty to deliver too the client, if they fail to respond for any reason it is classed a failed delivery, annoying but yet another cost you have to factor in.

I have no end of people claim they are never left cards by the couriers, so it is one word against another. Unresponded to emails and calls can be for various reasons, if they are in hospital for an operation they are unlikely to answer a mobile call etc.

I still think this clause relies on the customer accepting the terms rather than them being legally enforceable.

 

[Dymo King]

I agree with the sentiments, but the DSR state it is the retaillers duty to deliver too the client, if they fail to respond for any reason it is classed a failed delivery, annoying but yet another cost you have to factor in.

Do you have a reference to the bit of the DSR that says that?

Also, couldn't you argue that the delivery is a service and the service has been provided - and therefore as a minimum you should be able to charge for that service...?

 

[APC Nexday Overnite Ltd]

yes, but I'm guessing you can't touch couriers like citylink on price for the deliveries...

Can we not? According to Triangle Management services Ltd who carried out a research report we came above City Link in terms of pricing so yes check with your local APC Overnight depot our prices and more importantly the service we offer for that price it may suprise you!


......My other username is "ianfox" I thought I'd get a more business looking one with this one

 

[KateCB]

On the APC front, I can vouch for them - city lin can't come anywhere near their prices or service - been using them for 7 years now, and they will negotiate better rates annually if your volume remains the same or increases.

On the failed delivery front, we do state that our courier will attempt to delivery 3 times, leaving cards. APC give us a description of the front of the hosue, so we know they have been. We state in our T&C's that a second delivery charge will be charged if we have to re-delivery once the goods have been returned to us; APC call us if they cannot deliver after 3 attempts and give us time to attempt to contact the customer - if we can't then the goods are returned to us free of charge, and we continue to try and contact the customer. We don't have many of these, however no-one has ever objected to paying a second delivery charge to re-send the goods.

The solicitor that put our T&C's together said that it was perfectly legal as we had performed the service paid for - i.e. signed for delivery, and as long as the customer is made aware of the delivery date (which they are by email and text where they give us a mobile number) then it is up to them to ensure that someone is there to sign for the delivery. If the delivery fails three times, then although we are not charged to received the parcel back, we are charged to send it out a second time, therefore providing the service twice to the customer, for which they must pay the additional cost.

As I say, never had a problem, doesn't happen that often, and when it has, the customers have not only not objected, but have remained customers.

 

[Jeff FV]

Can we not? According to Triangle Management services Ltd who carried out a research report we came above City Link in terms of pricing so yes check with your local APC Overnight depot our prices and more importantly the service we offer for that price it may suprise you!


......My other username is "ianfox" I thought I'd get a more business looking one with this one

Going off on a bit of a tangent, but thanks for that - I might have a look at APC Overnight. I'm currently a bit pee-ed of with my current courier company quibling over a lost parcel (which they've admited is lost). I've spent over £1000 with them in the last 3 months. Seems silly that'd they'd be prepared to loose between £5K and £10K business next year for the sake of less than a tenner, but I'm now locked in their bureaucratic machinery ...

Jeff

 

[APC Nexday Overnite Ltd]

I've spent over £1000 with them in the last 3 months. Seems silly that'd they'd be prepared to loose between £5K and £10K business next year for the sake of less than a tenner,
Jeff

Hi Jeff,
It may be worthwhile you reading through their Terms & Conditions. As a standard for items we are insured on,this not including porcelain, glass etc, it's £13 per kilo with a £50 excess.
If your current carrier has similar T & C's that may be why the process of getting paid is taking so long especially if your goods are worth less than £10.
One thing which we have done as a company and I can only speak for my depot is in cases like yours we've given free delivery for the delivery of that item again as something that is worth £10 but has a £50 insurance excess charge obviously isn't worthwhile claiming for as it will cost yourself more to get the £10 back.
It might be worthwhile you asking your present carrier if they can offer you something similar.

 

[Jeff FV]

One thing which we have done as a company and I can only speak for my depot is in cases like yours we've given free delivery for the delivery of that item again as something that is worth £10 but has a £50 insurance excess charge obviously isn't worthwhile claiming for as it will cost yourself more to get the £10 back.
It might be worthwhile you asking your present carrier if they can offer you something similar.

That's my big gripe - the item is worth (to us) about £60. We've had to resend the order - I appreciate that I might have to wait for the £60 insurance to come back to me, but I asked if they'd pay for me to re-send the order. Regardless of the loss of the physical goods, the company has failed to provide the service that I paid them for, so I feel that I'm entitled to either a replacemnet service or my money back.

Jeff

 

[internetspaceships]

We used APC for over three years.

Frankly I wouldn't go near sh*ttylink for anything, and APC prices are just as good to boot!

Service is first rate, deliveries always happen (yes I said always, we didn't lose one parcel in all our time there) and they didn't ask for a minimum monthly spend.

We get deliveries to our Harrogate warehouse from suppliers using sh*ttylink, and the amount of lies we have been told by them, and the amount of times we haven't had our goods till the day after they were due is becoming legend in our company.

We even once had a driver turn up and say that he couldn't deliver it the previous day because (and I quote) "I had too many parcels on my van."

We only moved from APC because they couldn't collect after 4pm at our new premises, we could never fault anything else about them.

Our new courier leaves a van outside our warehouse till 6pm every night. The service isn't as good, the prices are no better but unfortunately we ship late so it's the best compromise.

 

[Dymo King]

The solicitor that put our T&C's together said that it was perfectly legal as we had performed the service paid for - i.e. signed for delivery, and as long as the customer is made aware of the delivery date (which they are by email and text where they give us a mobile number) then it is up to them to ensure that someone is there to sign for the delivery.

That certainly seems logical, and is an argument I'd certainly try and make, but as I'm sure we all know the DSR is not exactly logical (or fair) so it still seems a bit ambiguous.

But I think we'll update our terms appropriately and just argue our case if it ever comes to that.