At post 85 Australiapoststore wrote
“As a parcel is considered the property of the sender until such time as it is delivered, it is the sender who will be compensated in the event of loss’.
“All this information can be found in our general Terms and Conditions here”
So I take it, Australia Posts’ position is, the Sales of Goods Act and/or the 150 or so years of authorities dealing with contract law, all of which say otherwise, don’t apply to items sent by Australia post. That is i think you’ll find that the goods purchased were specific goods and as such become the property of the buyer immediately on payment.
I think you will also find who lodges the claim has absolutely nothing to do with who owns the goods and everything to do who is best placed to make the claim. That is, though Coops owns them, as the seller has all the relevant documents they are best place to lodge it. I also think you will find that though the compensation is paid to the seller, it is done so with the express expectation that that compensation will be passed on to the person who incurred the loss and therefore is entitled to the compensation.
That is the process has absolutely nothing to do with who is the owner, and everything to do with administrative expediency.
At post 86 Australiapoststore wrote
“As I previously advised, compensation for items deemed "lost" is payable only to the sender, not the addressee. If our investigations conclude that Australia Post is at fault, we will pay compensation to the sender, in line with our Terms and Conditions”.
The goods sold were specific goods and therefore they belonged to Coops and any compensation payable belongs to Coop.
Now let’s take your logic to its ultimate conclusion. Coops is the legal owner but under the terms and Conditions is precluded from making a claim. The seller, who has already been paid for the goods and therefore has lost nothing lodges the claim and is compensated for what Coops has lost.
Again, the process has absolutely nothing to do with who is the owner, and everything to do with administrative expediency.
But there is a simple solution. The same Terms and Conditions you speak of include assignment rights. So why don’t you get the seller to assign any rights they have in the context of the Terms and Conditions to Coops. Coops can then pursue the claim and apportion any compensation to whoever is entitled to receive it. Problem solved.
And
“Investigations, particularly international investigations, take some time to conclude as there are many people that need to be consulted to ensure a thorough investigation is conducted. For investigations involving EMS articles as this one is, the charter time for investigation is 30 days”
What’s to investigate. The facts are, it was posted, it was delivered to the address it which it was sent. Someone signed for it. That someone wasn’t Coops.
So the evidence points to one of only two possibilities. It was signed off and safe dropped by the contractor or it was handed by the contractor to someone not authorised to receive it.
Now it matters not which of the two it was, because either provides the same outcome. It was lost due to the negligence of Australia Post or one of its officers and as such Coops who owned the lost goods is entitled to be compensated for that loss.
As to other matters to be investigated, ie did contractor fail to comply with directions etc, these are internal Australia Post matters and have nothing to do with Coops, and most certainly don’t justify delaying a decision.
At post 86 Australiapoststore wrote
“I'm sorry to hear about your delivery issues. I'm glad some of these were reported, however it is important to report every instance to allow us to have a complete view of delivery issues which allows us to escalate the matter and deal with it effectively; particularly in the case of ongoing issues”.
Oh I will be reporting it. But the next time I report it, someone will be responding to a Ministerial.
Finally all of the above overlooks the fact that that your own Terms and Conditions and claims process transfers ownership to the buyer once delivered, and the core of Coops claim is it went missing after it was delivered. Therefore as your Terms and Conditions require the owner lodge the claim, and as your Terms and Conditions says Coops was the owner at the time they were lost, why are you saying the seller, who for the purposes of the your Terms and Conditions is no longer the owner, still must lodge the claim and be compensated for the loss of goods which your Terms and Conditions say they no longer own.
