Jump to content

Dealing with camera damage during shipping.


pgk

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So here's the scenario. I sold and shipped (insured via the carrier) a camera which subsequently arrived with the buyer quickly enough, but had obviously been dropped and now has a dent to show for it. The buyer destroyed the packaging (it was very well packed and taped up so the taped up card box had to be ripped apart to get into it) and had disposed of it all before realising that there was damage to the camera. Nothing else was damaged in the box and it looks like an 'unfortunate' drop or impact which had caused the problem by impacting the camera and a meter together, although the meter remained undamaged. The courier now say that they must have photos of the packaging and I have told them that their contract was with me and the recipient did not know that they may require photos (as he had obviously not read their extensive conditions and it would be unreasonable to expect a recipient of a package to do so as a matter of course) so their request is quite unreasonable. I hand delivered the package to their depot and have a hand completed receipt indicating that they were happy to take it as a result.

 

Has anyone had a similar experience? Has anyone got any suggestions as to how I convince them that damage to a parcel, which had fragile stickers on all sides and was deemed acceptable by their depot, is entirely their responsibility (I can also add that whilst it arrived, their tracking system failed utterly despite them giving me two entirely different tracking references from two different websites (and an independent courier whom they obviously sub-contracted). I will not be using them again and may 'name and shame' if they insist on being difficult over what was in my opinion a problem which was entirely their fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say that the package was "insured", do you mean you paid for actual insurance or just paid extra to specify a "declared value"? The latter, favoured by Fedex and UPS, isn't the same as insurance, it just means that the carrier is prepared to accept greater liability than under the standards T&C's if it deems itself negligent.

 

That aside, are you certain that it is the carrier that is at fault here? Impossible to prove of course, but is the damage sustained the kind of damage that would be possible in transit? If packaged well (as you state), I'm not sure how a camera can be dented by the carrier without the packaging being severely damaged and obvious to the person in receipt of the goods. Sounds fishy to me and I don't envy you having to ensure you are not left out of pocket and/or inconvenienced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I paid for additional value compensation in case of loss or damage.

 

The camera (an M3) was in a leather case with the meter fitted on top (a layer of foam between them to avoid scratches). The dent is from the meter front hitting the camera top plate. And the packaging apparently showed no damage but then it was parcel taped virtually all over so it may well not have done. When the recipient unpacked everything all was in order and it wasn't until the meter was removed that the dent (light but distinct) was seen - by which time the packaging had been apparently binned.

 

I do have before and after photos (as soon as the damage was seen it was photographed and I received the shots straight away by email) AND my local dealer had also examined the camera and can confirm that the dent is new. I conjecture that the parcel was dropped and impacted so the only the camera suffered but exactly how I cannot say. I am certain that my packing was more than adequate (I've shipped stuff for years without problem) and would have expected a light drop to have caused no damage so assume it was an impact on the specific part of the box which cause this damage.

 

The thing is that having paid for additional compensation I can't see how 'proof' can be provided to the nth degree - its not practical to video the package being made up nor supply a recipient with all the small print and get them to video the unpacking, etc., etc. My query really is about what is reasonable.

 

Edit - Interesting: The courier has just refunded the shipping cost - odd as the package arrived on time albeit without tracking and damaged....

Edited by pgk
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can well imagine how an M3 and meter can react to hitting the top of the leather case. It is only held securely at one end in the case, and with a dropped parcel the camera and meter will react to the inertia of the case just as if it had been directly dropped on the floor. Really you should have bubble wrapped everything separately. So tell a fib.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really you should have bubble wrapped everything separately.

I did and it was! And in the case too! Surely the bottom line though, is that a package marked fragile should not be subjected to impacts at all? And even if I had not wrapped well (which as I have said, I did) a camera and meter in a leather case should not suffer damage if handled reasonably and carefully and not impacted?

 

And here lies the problem because no amount of evidence will illustrate that I had taken great care to pack everything or that it was sufficiently well packed. It should however be evident that as nothing else suffered, the camera/meter/case must have received a specific and direct impact which caused this damage. Difficult to do this I know, but inevitably things that are difficult do happen because they quite simply can (ie the Law of Awkwardness).

 

I'm starting to wonder whether any form of 'insurance' on shipping is actually of any relevance given that there will always be wriggle room about packing and so on.

Edited by pgk
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're being a little premature in throwing your hands up in expectation of the insurer rejecting a claim. Submit a claim with your supporting evidence and if necessary ask the buyer to corroborate your story that you had adequately packaged the goods.

 

ETA: No amount of Fragile tape is going to guarantee any deference to the contents. Couriers are often hand-picked for their prowess in crass stupidity, and I'm never one to generalise.

Edited by honcho
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think you're being a little premature in throwing your hands up in expectation of the insurer rejecting a claim. Submit a claim with your supporting evidence and if necessary ask the buyer to corroborate your story that you had adequately packaged the goods.

 

ETA: No amount of Fragile tape is going to guarantee any deference to the contents. Couriers are often hand-picked for their prowess in crass stupidity, and I'm never one to generalise.

Submitted already as you state. The courier has already indicated that without supporting photos of the packaging then a reduced payout is as much as they are looking at currently. We'll see. I wondered if anyone has been in a similar position because I am sure its a far from unique one.

 

As generalisations go that's pretty succinct I'd say ;) ......

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to wonder whether any form of 'insurance' on shipping is actually of any relevance given that there will always be wriggle room about packing and so on.

 

Proper "insurance" (as opposed to declared value) tends to be worth it because it is more about redressing an outcome rather than apportioning liability and blame. However, Honcho is probably right that it is a little early to assume the carrier will not compensate you in this case.

 

My own packaging approach when sending something like a camera body is to assume that the package will be dropkicked into the back of a van from about 20 feet and pack the camera accordingly (box within a box, etc.)

Edited by wattsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Proper "insurance" (as opposed to declared value) tends to be worth it because it is more about redressing an outcome rather than apportioning liability and blame.

Whilst you may well be right, in most circumstances the only easily available option is to take out extended liability cover. My point, which I will continue to make, is that if a courier offers a service such as extended cover, it must be a viable service and attaching conditions which are outside of the control of the person with whom they have the contract is unreasonable (I am not knowledgeable about the law in the UK, but I am pretty sure that you cannot offer a service which operates in this way, because quite simply it is unreasonable).

 

I'll wait and see what happens - I've supplied a quote which is just for the repair and a good deal less than the total value of the equipment, and both I and the recipient would probably be quite satisfied if they paid this direct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never mark anything delicate as 'Fragile', it's like throwing down a gauntlet, somebody will take it as a challenge. Pack delicate things in an inner box so they have a fraction of leeway to keep moving when the outer box stops moving (so don't pack them really tight), use an outer box at least twice the size that you think the item needs, and pack separately as many items as possible within the same parcel. That said I've received a bubble wrapped body in nothing more than a Jiffy bag from a well known second hand dealer and it survived the normal post!

 

Good luck.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience Paul, the damage is a write off, as unfortunate and unpleasing it is.

 

I feel with you, having my last issue with a damage in parcel still well remembered (a shattered mirror in a digital medium format camera, absolutely over the top packed in triple cartoons around it's OEM packaging). In my case, not even the shipping fee has been refunded!

 

When shipping with ANY courier service, be advised always to anticipate your parcel being crushed, squashed, kicked, thrown, crunched and impacted heavily.

There is unfortunately no tape, signs, writing or contract protecting your valuable goods from careless people. It is generally the rule that parcel is mistreated, so pack accordingly.

 

In such circumstances I always make it a rule to carefully document packaging and unpacking of valuable items.

 

I am sorry for your financial loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry for your financial loss.

Thanks Dirk but I'm hopeful that UK consumer law (which is pretty robust and doesn't like us paying for things which are too vague to be acceptable) will operate in my favour as the courier is UK based and subject to UK consumer law, and that some recompense will be made - they have refunded the shipping fee so far (probably because I paid for tracking which simply hasn't existed!). And thanks for everyone's input, I'll update when I hear something.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The courier's shipping terms and conditions should be documented somewhere and any compensation claims would be considered as per same. Is there a clause relating to sight of packaging or photo of packaging being required for damage claims? All shipments are subject to contract and the small print therein. A package can be accepted for shipment even though the packaging might be inadequate.

 

I know of a case where a damage in transit claim was initially refused by the courier on the grounds of inadequate packaging. The sender then wrote a letter to one of the directors of the shipping company whence the claim was eventually allowed.

 

Thus might be worth escalating your claim beyond the claims dept.

 

Good luck.

 

dunk

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a clause relating to sight of packaging or photo of packaging being required for damage claims?

Yes there is BUT the recipient threw the packaging away before discovering the damage. And he did not realise that it might be needed (why should he as he was unaware of the requirement and it would be quite unreasonable for me to forward terms and conditions as a matter of course, and even then the contact was with me, not the recipient anyway?). This will no doubt come down to 'reasonableness' and I've already checked UK consumer law (trading standards advice) which says that conditions must be 'reasonable'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is obviously not yours. The buyer has no prove that the damage was not done by him. Actually I would assume that. In case The damage occurred during the transportation the package should had shown some damage as well which should trigger him to either reject the package or document it's damage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is obviously not yours. The buyer has no prove that the damage was not done by him. Actually I would assume that. In case The damage occurred during the transportation the package should had shown some damage as well which should trigger him to either reject the package or document it's damage.

 

The package would not necessarily show signs of damage if the contents were damaged by impact in transit.

 

But did impact damage actually occur during transit?

 

To ascertain if the consignee acted reasonably and to rule out the possibility that the consignee damaged the camera himself, any claims manager would probably want to compare:

 

a) The POD (proof of delivery) which would show the time of delivery.

 

B) The date/time of the Email from the consignee to the sender

 

If there was a long delay then there might suspicions that the consignee caused the damage himself.

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

Link to post
Share on other sites

To ascertain if the consignee acted reasonably and to rule out the possibility that the consignee damaged the camera himself, any claims manager would probably want to compare:

 

a) The POD (proof of delivery) which would show the time of delivery.

 

B) The date/time of the Email from the consignee to the sender

 

If there was a long delay then there might suspicions that the consignee caused the damage himself.

I have all emails and am pretty certain that this should not be a problem. As far as I can see, there is not, and almost certainly cannot be, absolute proof of damage occurring during delivery. That said, in this specific case I know that the shipping was sub-contracted from the supplied tracking numbers and websites although tracking did fail utterly. We (myself and the purchaser) would be happy for any repair charges to be paid direct to the repairer - we are not looking for a payout as such, so whilst from a courier's point of view this could just about be a 'fraudulent' claim, its certainly wouldn't be a particularly profitable one and given the hassle of dealing with courier and repairer it seems to me that it must appear as legitimate as anything really could. If they won't accept responsibility then I will wonder if it is worth shipping abroad in future and will do so only at the recipient's risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...