Skip to content

Reused Box led to Uncompensated Damage of £500 Synthesizer: Investigation into Parcel Compare's Handling

Package insurance nullified due to reused packaging, despite £22.50 payment for loss or damage coverage.

Parcel Insurance Canceled Due to Previously Used Packaging, Despite £22.50 Payment Against Loss or...
Parcel Insurance Canceled Due to Previously Used Packaging, Despite £22.50 Payment Against Loss or Damage

Reused Box led to Uncompensated Damage of £500 Synthesizer: Investigation into Parcel Compare's Handling

Vintage Synthesizer Seller Furious Over Parcel Compare's Insurance Claim Denial

A music industry worker, identified as B.B from Nottingham, has expressed frustration after his insurance claim for a damaged vintage synthesizer was rejected by Parcel Compare, a parcel shipping service.

The synthesizer, sold for £500 on eBay in March, was shipped using the 24-hour Parcelforce delivery service, for which B.B paid £39.70. This price included a £22.50 insurance covering potential damages up to £500. However, upon arrival at the buyer's home, the synthesizer was found to be damaged beyond repair, with the plastic casing broken, electronics exposed, and some keys missing, deeming it unusable.

As the item did not arrive in the promised condition, eBay refunded the buyer in accordance with its policy. Unfortunately, Parcel Compare denied B.B's insurance claim, citing potential packaging issues. The rejection was partially based on the fact that B.B had used a reused box.

In B.B's view, the packaging was secure. He had reused a box previously received with a keyboard, adding bubble wrap, folded cardboard, and brown paper to safeguard the synthesizer. He provided Parcel Compare with pictures of the packaging, yet his claim was still rejected.

Helen Crane, This is Money's consumer champion, highlights the issue of packaging cost and recycling concerns, pointing out that many regular parcel senders reuse cardboard boxes due to cost and environmental reasons. She questions the wisdom of Parcel Compare's strict packaging policies, wondering if they could be too obscure for many users.

Related Articles- Previous: Can our insurer refuse to pay for £3,295 of stolen tools...

  • 1: I'm an expat and mail service is slow - why does my pension...
  • Next: ...to a face serum

Would YOU post something in a reused box?

When contacted, Parcel Compare stated that senders must comply with their 'labelling and packaging criteria'. The company believes that failing to adhere to these criteria could result in an insurance claim for damage being denied[1][4]. The criteria mention that the box must be new, rigid, and have flaps attached. However, the company's 'packaging guidelines' suggest that a new box is ideal but not mandatory, which creates confusion[2].

B.B's package was also rejected because the item wasn't fully suspended inside the box using moulded polystyrene. Given that the vintage synthesizer is nearly half a century old, it would have been challenging to find or manufacture the custom-made foam moulding required.

Parcel Compare's guidelines state that senders must also remove all previous labels, make sure items do not touch box walls, include a duplicate address label inside the package, and use a 'documents enclosed pouch' label[1][4]. In addition, the company warns against encasing boxes with paper or plastic or using string.

Parcelforce, B.B's carrier, declined to investigate the matter fully or consider any reimbursement, as the contract was with Parcel Compare. Parcelforce did provide some insight into their packaging rules but did not clarify whether it is actually banned to use reused boxes[3].

Notes:1. https://www.parcelcompare.co.uk/agreement-terms-conditions/#Shipment2. https://www.parcelcompare.co.uk/help-centre/parcel-shipping/packaging-guidelines/3. https://www.parcelforce.com/help-and-resources/customer-advice/packing-and-shipping-guide/4. This is Money, Personal finance news and advice, accessed on [date].

  1. Despite the damage to his vintage synthesizer, B.B's insurance claim was denied by Parcel Compare due to the use of a reused box, contradicting their packaging guidelines which suggest that while new boxes are ideal, they are not mandatory.
  2. In his ongoing dispute with Parcel Compare, B.B finds it confusing that their strict packaging policies, which include the use of a new box and the absence of previous labels, may result in an insurance claim denial for damage, potentially making it challenging for those with a lifestyle that includes home-and-garden recycling and shopping for secondhand items.

Read also:

    Latest