1
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Speeding and other criminal offences / MOVED: England/London – Need solicitor for police stop, car seizure, refused blood test
« on: June 08, 2026, 12:14:01 pm »3
The Flame Pit / MOVED: HMCTS Warrant of Control with wrong address
« on: March 12, 2026, 12:25:09 pm »4
The Flame Pit / Porch pirates - potentially live case
« on: February 07, 2026, 09:14:40 am »
Variously both have and have not exhausted customer services route, so might or might not being a potential legal case, but it occurred to me that there is much that I don't know and much that I think I probably know, but could be wrong, and also much that I would be interested to know, and might also be of use to others.
N.B. If this meaningfully becomes a "live case", I can move this thread to the appropriate forum. If anyone has any relevant knowledge, it would be greatly appreciated. If anyone wishes to share any completely unqualified opinions, not so much.
Much tat ordered from AliExpress - 30+ separate low value orders, the orders in question being consolidated into 2 parcels, due to be delivered by Evri. Paid though Google Pay (not using a credit card).
On 2nd Feb, Evri allegedly delivered both parcels by leaving them securely in my porch. "Proof of delivery" photos showed that they were simply dumped on my doorstep (which is clearly visible from both the main road and pavement) and that I do not have a porch. Got home 18 minutes later - no parcels. I have not received them, and nobody else has received them on my behalf. They were stolen.
Having immense fun trying to get any joy out of AliExpress' customer services (finding the link to contact them is just the start of this rollercoaster of dopamine). First 7 online refund requests went through instantly, then flood control kicked in, and the rest were batted back requiring further evidence from me from the courier that the parcels were missing. Having complained to Evri and got an email acknowledging that the parcels were unaccounted for, I uploaded this, most of the refund requests were rejected with no reason given, and 2 accepted. Have had great fun getting customer services to go off script to escalate the rejected requests (and no joy getting an accurate or meaningful answer as to why the rejected requests were rejected), and that is currently in limbo.
Obviously, plan A is always to escalate through AliExpress' customer services for a full refund for the missing items. However, if, as seems likely, that fails, or if someone else finds themselves in a similar situation, my initial thoughts are as follows (not necessarily in a coherent order) -
In general, the first party to look at is the party you have a contract with. This is because contractual liability is strict and does not require negligence. Have they failed to comply with their contractual obligations? Do they have a presence within the UK that I can potentially sue and recover my losses from?
If they are essentially a straw man, then trawling through the small print of their terms and then trying to determine whether any applicable exclusions would survive the CRA would be pointless. However, on the assumption that the contract is for the goods to be delivered, does the courier dumping the parcels on the doorstep and then running away constitute delivery if the goods are stolen and not received by the addressee (or by anyone else on his behalf)?
Obviously, the real issue is that the courier left the parcels insecurely (and fraudulently claimed to have left them in my porch) - assuming that the courier was not the porch pirate himself. I do not have a contract with Evri, but it seems pretty clear that they were negligent. Morally, there is little to choose between the company and the individual couriers, but that is neither here nor there - they were the bailee of my goods and left them where any passing ne'er-do-well could see and take them, breaching their legal duty of care. Unlike a gift, where transfer of ownership requires receipt (or deed), unless the contract of sale provides otherwise, when goods are purchased, ownership transfers to the purchaser when the seller objectively allocates those goods to the individual purchaser,
It is my understanding that when sending goods, if you decline to pay extra for insurance (against the courier's negligence), you are deemed to have accepted the risk yourself) - or more specifically, there will be a term in the courier's contract which provides this. However, in much the same way that Evri's "race to the bottom" business model relies heavily on customer not being the addressee (and vice versa), it is not immediately obvious how any agreement between the seller and Evri could enable Evri to avoid liability for their negligence to the addressee/owner of the goods.
Am I missing anything?
N.B. If this meaningfully becomes a "live case", I can move this thread to the appropriate forum. If anyone has any relevant knowledge, it would be greatly appreciated. If anyone wishes to share any completely unqualified opinions, not so much.
Much tat ordered from AliExpress - 30+ separate low value orders, the orders in question being consolidated into 2 parcels, due to be delivered by Evri. Paid though Google Pay (not using a credit card).
On 2nd Feb, Evri allegedly delivered both parcels by leaving them securely in my porch. "Proof of delivery" photos showed that they were simply dumped on my doorstep (which is clearly visible from both the main road and pavement) and that I do not have a porch. Got home 18 minutes later - no parcels. I have not received them, and nobody else has received them on my behalf. They were stolen.
Having immense fun trying to get any joy out of AliExpress' customer services (finding the link to contact them is just the start of this rollercoaster of dopamine). First 7 online refund requests went through instantly, then flood control kicked in, and the rest were batted back requiring further evidence from me from the courier that the parcels were missing. Having complained to Evri and got an email acknowledging that the parcels were unaccounted for, I uploaded this, most of the refund requests were rejected with no reason given, and 2 accepted. Have had great fun getting customer services to go off script to escalate the rejected requests (and no joy getting an accurate or meaningful answer as to why the rejected requests were rejected), and that is currently in limbo.
Obviously, plan A is always to escalate through AliExpress' customer services for a full refund for the missing items. However, if, as seems likely, that fails, or if someone else finds themselves in a similar situation, my initial thoughts are as follows (not necessarily in a coherent order) -
In general, the first party to look at is the party you have a contract with. This is because contractual liability is strict and does not require negligence. Have they failed to comply with their contractual obligations? Do they have a presence within the UK that I can potentially sue and recover my losses from?
If they are essentially a straw man, then trawling through the small print of their terms and then trying to determine whether any applicable exclusions would survive the CRA would be pointless. However, on the assumption that the contract is for the goods to be delivered, does the courier dumping the parcels on the doorstep and then running away constitute delivery if the goods are stolen and not received by the addressee (or by anyone else on his behalf)?
Obviously, the real issue is that the courier left the parcels insecurely (and fraudulently claimed to have left them in my porch) - assuming that the courier was not the porch pirate himself. I do not have a contract with Evri, but it seems pretty clear that they were negligent. Morally, there is little to choose between the company and the individual couriers, but that is neither here nor there - they were the bailee of my goods and left them where any passing ne'er-do-well could see and take them, breaching their legal duty of care. Unlike a gift, where transfer of ownership requires receipt (or deed), unless the contract of sale provides otherwise, when goods are purchased, ownership transfers to the purchaser when the seller objectively allocates those goods to the individual purchaser,
It is my understanding that when sending goods, if you decline to pay extra for insurance (against the courier's negligence), you are deemed to have accepted the risk yourself) - or more specifically, there will be a term in the courier's contract which provides this. However, in much the same way that Evri's "race to the bottom" business model relies heavily on customer not being the addressee (and vice versa), it is not immediately obvious how any agreement between the seller and Evri could enable Evri to avoid liability for their negligence to the addressee/owner of the goods.
Am I missing anything?
5
Non-motoring legal advice / MOVED: Do normal road laws apply on a closed road
« on: January 12, 2026, 07:35:16 pm »6
Non-motoring legal advice / MOVED: Another vehicle collided into me, turns out my insurance had expired, how to proceed?
« on: January 10, 2026, 04:40:13 pm »8
Private parking tickets / MOVED: Parking Ticket
« on: December 31, 2025, 09:52:50 am »
This topic has been moved to Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on).
https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?topic=9318.0
https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?topic=9318.0
10
Non-motoring legal advice / MOVED: Advice on collision with Virgin Media/O2 van in private car park
« on: November 28, 2025, 08:00:10 pm »11
Speeding and other criminal offences / MOVED: Received speeding ticket in reduced speed/road works zone - when does average speed limit apply?
« on: November 26, 2025, 11:25:45 pm »12
Private parking tickets / MOVED: Rochdale Borough Council - Notice To Keeper
« on: November 23, 2025, 04:42:34 pm »
This topic has been moved to Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on).
https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?topic=8889.0
https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?topic=8889.0
13
Speeding and other criminal offences / MOVED: Police evidence is my defence and they still insist to prosecute. Process is the punishment?
« on: November 20, 2025, 05:58:11 pm »14
Speeding and other criminal offences / MOVED: Expecting a ban on Totting Up - How to find a good solicitor?
« on: November 19, 2025, 02:09:00 pm »15
The Flame Pit / One in one out
« on: August 06, 2025, 07:35:58 pm »
This thread is not for "discussing" the merits or otherwise of illegal immigration (or else!), but for trying to get my head around the apparent legal issues as the law currently stands.
This is also most definitely not a thread for seeking or giving legal advice on any specific live immigration cases.
The legal basis of the situation we are currently in with illegal immigration in small boats from Calais is apparently that anyone entering a country illegally is to be treated as an asylum seeker if it is reasonably suspected that they will seek to claim asylum, and that until their claim has been determined, their status remains. Unless anyone here is in a position to change this situation, that is our starting point, unless someone is able to clarify or correct my understanding (once again, "or else!").
A side question concerns the legality of "assisting" these illegal immigrants. Apparently lorry drivers are still being fined regardless of culpability if illegals stow away on their lorries, but the RLNI and Border Force are apparently doing absolutely nothing wrong when they pick up illegal immigrants from the channel - whether in UK waters or just off the beach in Calais.
Once again, this thread is not for arguing the merits or otherwise of illegal immigration, for this part, to try to understand what distinction if any there is in law between hapless lorry drivers and those that set out to "rescue" the illegal immigrants and bring them here.
The core of my question however, concerns the legal issues surrounding the "one in one out" scheme. This thread is not for a political debate regarding the efficacy of the scheme, but to understand and clarify the legal issues. Or else!
TL;DR - the crux of the question is the premise that we cannot deport illegal immigrants who came over from France back to France unless France agrees to accept them. Seemingly this would apply regardless of whether their claim had been determined, and whether the illegal immigrant was happy to be deported (let's assume that they won't be).
The first question is that of acceptance. If we can't simply send them back to France without France's agreement, how can they send themselves here without our agreement? If France can simply refuse to take them back, why can't we simply refuse to take them.
The second question is one of the "rights" of the "asylum seeker" assuming that their claim has not yet been determined. If we can deport them against their wishes if France agrees to take them, can we either just simply deport them anyway, or alternatively deport them to somewhere else that can be considered safe (such as the Chagos Islands)?
This is also most definitely not a thread for seeking or giving legal advice on any specific live immigration cases.
The legal basis of the situation we are currently in with illegal immigration in small boats from Calais is apparently that anyone entering a country illegally is to be treated as an asylum seeker if it is reasonably suspected that they will seek to claim asylum, and that until their claim has been determined, their status remains. Unless anyone here is in a position to change this situation, that is our starting point, unless someone is able to clarify or correct my understanding (once again, "or else!").
A side question concerns the legality of "assisting" these illegal immigrants. Apparently lorry drivers are still being fined regardless of culpability if illegals stow away on their lorries, but the RLNI and Border Force are apparently doing absolutely nothing wrong when they pick up illegal immigrants from the channel - whether in UK waters or just off the beach in Calais.
Once again, this thread is not for arguing the merits or otherwise of illegal immigration, for this part, to try to understand what distinction if any there is in law between hapless lorry drivers and those that set out to "rescue" the illegal immigrants and bring them here.
The core of my question however, concerns the legal issues surrounding the "one in one out" scheme. This thread is not for a political debate regarding the efficacy of the scheme, but to understand and clarify the legal issues. Or else!
TL;DR - the crux of the question is the premise that we cannot deport illegal immigrants who came over from France back to France unless France agrees to accept them. Seemingly this would apply regardless of whether their claim had been determined, and whether the illegal immigrant was happy to be deported (let's assume that they won't be).
The first question is that of acceptance. If we can't simply send them back to France without France's agreement, how can they send themselves here without our agreement? If France can simply refuse to take them back, why can't we simply refuse to take them.
The second question is one of the "rights" of the "asylum seeker" assuming that their claim has not yet been determined. If we can deport them against their wishes if France agrees to take them, can we either just simply deport them anyway, or alternatively deport them to somewhere else that can be considered safe (such as the Chagos Islands)?