advertisement
Forums

The Forum is sponsored by 
 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the Tips and Deals forum
Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Onamuji
Date: December 20, 2014 10:34AM
They've nailed several of my packages with forklifts.

What is it with this odd habit of UPS forklift drivers?

Do they have a "drive your forklift through it" quota?

[www.nytimes.com]

In transit, someone drove a forklift through the box and severely damaged the piece. U.P.S. rejected our claim for the roughly $11,000 that a professional said it would take to repair the sculpture. More amazingly, the company won’t return the money I paid for insurance...

What reason did U.P.S. give Mr. Mouat for rejecting his insurance claim? He failed to properly fill out the bill of lading. Specifically, he didn’t enter the value of the artwork on a part of that form that read “Shipper requests Excess Declared Value Coverage in the amount of $ ___.” This happened at a freight yard near the Detroit airport, where he was instructed to bring the sculpture the day it was shipped.

As reps from the company later explained, that bill of lading is effectively the contract between customer and shipper.

Leaving the “declared value” section blank was a crucial error, but it raises a question: If Mr. Mouat was spending $1,869 for insurance — or what the company prefers to call “excess liability” — why didn’t anyone explain that he would get nothing of the sort unless he filled in that part of the bill of lading?




Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: space-time
Date: December 20, 2014 10:38AM
UPS, FedEx are not to be trusted. I think you have better luck with USPS these days.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Acer
Date: December 20, 2014 10:40AM
I see your point, but to leave the value of the item undeclared in the paperwork was not a good idea. Contracts are funny that way.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: December 20, 2014 10:43AM
UPS DOESN'T USE FORKLIFTS.

The article states that the plaintiff was instructed to bring his item to a freight yard. That is most likely where the damage occurred.



It is what it is.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2014 10:45AM by N-OS X-tasy!.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: pRICE cUBE
Date: December 20, 2014 10:45AM
This is precisely why they offer forklift impalement insurance separately.



Ways to improve web conference image and sound quality. [forums.macresource.com]


Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Onamuji
Date: December 20, 2014 10:49AM
Quote
space-time
UPS, FedEx are not to be trusted. I think you have better luck with USPS these days.

USPS has lost two of my packages this year. But they do cop to it when it's clearly their fault and they pay insurance promptly.

Ultimately, anything is better than FedEx Ground.

(Regular FedEx is okay. FedEx Ground is a steaming pile of poo.)



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: silvarios
Date: December 20, 2014 10:53AM
Quote
Acer
I see your point, but to leave the value of the item undeclared in the paperwork was not a good idea. Contracts are funny that way.

Why not refund the paid insurance?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Onamuji
Date: December 20, 2014 10:55AM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
UPS DOESN'T USE FORKLIFTS.

We've covered this before.

UPS freight uses forklifts, other UPS services use 3rd party contractors that employ forklifts and often packages get directed through freight or other channels as dictated by economics.

Ultimately, you cannot trust that your package will be exempt from their "drive a forklift through it" quotas.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2014 10:57AM by Onamuji.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: zeppo2
Date: December 20, 2014 11:08AM
I don't trust USPS either. I mailed a package to my son, with a signature required. He never got it, though somebody signed for it. The insurance was rejected because there was a signature, though the signature wasn't from anyone who lived at my son's apartment. Of course this was in Jersey City, and I read online multiple complaints of similar things happening. I think Newman must have moved just west.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: OWC Larry
Date: December 20, 2014 11:10AM
The whole situation reeks of poor customer service. At the end of the day he isn't in the business of shipping and should have been walked through the forms, etc. That being said - it is his responsibility, we all have a personal responsibility stake in such matters - but that's where customer service and support come in to see the best success for all aspects.

Not refunding the insurance is odd unless the argument is that it was for the product in transit and the bill of lading was part of a separate handling action. Still - it's insult to injury to have paid for insurance and then not actually have it where and when it mattered. If he didn't declare the insurance on the bill of lading - wonder where he did declare it to the effect of being billed for it. Also - for something that valuable, surprised he didn't get a rider on his standard insurance to cover it vs. paying the high cost via the carrier (and still not being covered).

Seems like some more details to the story would shed light.

Quote
Onamuji
They've nailed several of my packages with forklifts.

What is it with this odd habit of UPS forklift drivers?

Do they have a "drive your forklift through it" quota?

[www.nytimes.com]

In transit, someone drove a forklift through the box and severely damaged the piece. U.P.S. rejected our claim for the roughly $11,000 that a professional said it would take to repair the sculpture. More amazingly, the company won’t return the money I paid for insurance...

What reason did U.P.S. give Mr. Mouat for rejecting his insurance claim? He failed to properly fill out the bill of lading. Specifically, he didn’t enter the value of the artwork on a part of that form that read “Shipper requests Excess Declared Value Coverage in the amount of $ ___.” This happened at a freight yard near the Detroit airport, where he was instructed to bring the sculpture the day it was shipped.

As reps from the company later explained, that bill of lading is effectively the contract between customer and shipper.

Leaving the “declared value” section blank was a crucial error, but it raises a question: If Mr. Mouat was spending $1,869 for insurance — or what the company prefers to call “excess liability” — why didn’t anyone explain that he would get nothing of the sort unless he filled in that part of the bill of lading?



OWC Larry
Other World Computing
[www.macsales.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: deckeda
Date: December 20, 2014 11:48AM
Had a well-packaged box arrive at its destination crushed and UPS disputed my proof it was indeed packaged properly. Zero payout, zero recourse. It's a racket, and the implication -- contract details or no --- that a shipper takes reasonable care means absolutely zero. You put cargo on a plane or in a truck; this isn't a huge challenge of accomplishment.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: December 20, 2014 12:20PM
Quote
Onamuji
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
UPS DOESN'T USE FORKLIFTS.

We've covered this before.

UPS freight uses forklifts, other UPS services use 3rd party contractors that employ forklifts and often packages get directed through freight or other channels as dictated by economics.

Ultimately, you cannot trust that your package will be exempt from their "drive a forklift through it" quotas.

If you were referring to UPS Freight, you should have specified as much.

EDIT: I see now that that the article does specify UPS Freight. Your excerpt, however, did not. I had only read your excerpt and not the entire article, hence my confusion.

That is a terrible shame about their sculpture.



It is what it is.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2014 12:29PM by N-OS X-tasy!.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Acer
Date: December 20, 2014 12:28PM
Quote
silvarios
Quote
Acer
I see your point, but to leave the value of the item undeclared in the paperwork was not a good idea. Contracts are funny that way.

Why not refund the paid insurance?

No argument here. Incomplete paperwork is incomplete paperwork. It goes both ways. The shipping company is arguing the insurance was technically never in effect, so they should refund the payment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2014 12:28PM by Acer.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: December 20, 2014 12:29PM
Quote
Acer
Quote
silvarios
Quote
Acer
I see your point, but to leave the value of the item undeclared in the paperwork was not a good idea. Contracts are funny that way.

Why not refund the paid insurance?

No argument here. Incomplete paperwork is incomplete paperwork. It goes both ways. The shipping company is arguing the insurance was technically never in effect, so they should refund the payment.

They eventually did, as stated in the article.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: space-time
Date: December 20, 2014 02:05PM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
Quote
Acer
Quote
silvarios
Quote
Acer
I see your point, but to leave the value of the item undeclared in the paperwork was not a good idea. Contracts are funny that way.

Why not refund the paid insurance?

No argument here. Incomplete paperwork is incomplete paperwork. It goes both ways. The shipping company is arguing the insurance was technically never in effect, so they should refund the payment.

They eventually did, as stated in the article.

I wonder if the shippement arrived OK, then the person who shipped this discovered he didn't enter the amount in the form and thus he never had coverage and asked UPS for a refund on the insurance fee, do you think UPS would issue a refund? I bet not, they would say we delivered your item without damange, move on. now when they make a mistake, they use every possible excuse to deny coverage.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: max
Date: December 20, 2014 02:48PM
UPS Freight is a totally different animal than most of the posts here.
It is an LTL common carrier and totally different laws apply, most based on the old rules when interstate carriers were a federally regulated industry.
Having said that, UPS is one of the worse outfit when it comes to handling claims. They just do not.
"Insufficient packaging" is the standard reply. Years ago we stopped using UPS when our loss ratio reached 50% for anything being handled by their Dallas hub. We get pretty good service with USPS, especially on international shipments, Fedex Ground on national.

The OP story is a perfect example of ignorance carrying a price.

If I was shipping a sculpture, or something irreplaceable I would use Fedex Specialized freight service, or something in that category....
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: N-OS X-tasy!
Date: December 20, 2014 04:01PM
Quote
max
UPS Freight is a totally different animal than most of the posts here.
...
Having said that, UPS is one of the worse outfit when it comes to handling claims. They just do not.

Correct on both counts.



It is what it is.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Racer X
Date: December 20, 2014 05:54PM
Why don't people take the carriers to small claims court? (for these larger, but below $5k amounts)

I'd love to sit in on a session where UPS has to explain to a judge why the package was beat to a pulp, but UPS isn't financially liable. Every small claims court judge I have sat before would tear the carrier apart.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Onamuji
Date: December 20, 2014 07:07PM
Quote
Racer X
Why don't people take the carriers to small claims court? (for these larger, but below $5k amounts)

I'd love to sit in on a session where UPS has to explain to a judge why the package was beat to a pulp, but UPS isn't financially liable. Every small claims court judge I have sat before would tear the carrier apart.

That'd be nice, but it's not so. The law is seriously f-ed up on that score.

UPS insists that they aren't common carriers. They use contracts of carriage filled with fine print to exclude them from every sort of liability imaginable. One of the things that this lets them get away with is a notice that any defect in the description of the item being shipped excludes them from all liability. They also limit the time in which a potential plaintiff can file a claim and where notice of claims can be filed (hint: nowhere convenient to you). They can even make the claimant file a bond for any costs that THEY have defending themselves.

These terms have been upheld by courts over and over again.

In most states, there have been dramatic reforms in regulations governing auto sales. For example, in New York a dealer has to keep text above a certain font size and keep contracts limited to one or two pages of a standard size. This drastically reduces the number of things that they can hide in the contracts - you can only fit so much in a 12-point font at 11x14.

We need similar reforms across a number of industries.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: Speedy
Date: December 20, 2014 10:05PM
Quote
Onamuji
We need similar reforms across a number of industries.

Did you notice the results of the last election...



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Shipping PSA: Paying for shipping-insurance doesn't get you shipping-insurance
Posted by: silvarios
Date: December 21, 2014 03:02AM
Quote
N-OS X-tasy!
They eventually did, as stated in the article.

Yes, but why the rigmarole?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 212
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020