Citibox Secure Mailboxes and International Courier

The fated inverter

Citibox send over 1,000 courier parcels a week from Spain, 90% through FedEx because they are the most reliable of the four international couriers and offer the best value. Our business is growing really fast as people in Spain understand that they can send a door-to-door courier parcel cheaper than through the post. 

However, every month we come across something that we haven´t seen before.  Last time I wrote about UK Customs, I had informed them about what I suspected was illegal cigarette smuggling and they didn´t seem to be very interested.  This time, it´s hurt me personally really badly and I need to explain to all people shipping parcels by post or courier what might happen to their parcels when they are “outside the control of the carrier” and therefore subject to the exclusion clauses that limit the carrier´s liability.

I sold the inverter pictured above on eBay.  It was bought by someone in North Wales. An inverter converts battery power (from wind or solar energy) to mains power for use in the house.

The inverter arrived having been destroyed, we assume by Customs in the search for drugs.  Here is my letter to UK Customs.  I have not yet had a response (other than acknowledgement of receipt of the complaint) but I will publish it here when I receive it.  The moral of the story so far is that government bodies are able to do exactly what they like with private citizens´property, whether they remain responsible for the cost remains to be seen.  Following this is from my letter:-

HMC stands for Her Majesty´s Customs?

I was paid by PayPal.  The item was sent through FedEx on tracking number 7933 5296 4041 from Nueva Andalucia in Spain to Gwynedd in the UK.  When it arrived (see photos) the box had been opened and resealed with tape saying HMC and the packaging broken.  On further inspection, the yellow paper seal at the side of the inverter had been broken, a rivet had been removed and a screw was missing where the case had been taken apart.  Inside, there was damage to the copper wire cables surrounding the core which had also been removed and incorrectly replaced.   I sent the photos to the manufacturer, Solener, asking how this damage might have occurred.  In their unequivocal opinion

Seal presumed broken by Customs

 the damage was caused by mechanical means.  What they say is that the cable has been cut with an axe.  I then asked if there was any chance that the buyer could have caused the damage by, for instance, incorrectly connecting the unit and was told that by connecting it to a 3 phase supply it was possible but that there would be massive scorching and this cut is clean and shiny. 

Following receipt of this evidence from the manufacturer I made a claim against FedEx for damage suffered in transit.  After an enquiry, they have concluded that the damage occurred during the Customs inspection between 12.10hrs and 17.35hrs on 17 March 2010 and have replied.  

“Please refer to the backside of the Air Waybill on point 19. LIABILITIES NOT ASSUMED. Just above point 19.5 you will find the last paragraph that says:

 FedEx will not be liable for events we cannot control, including but not limited to acts of God, perils of the air, weather conditions, mechanical delays, acts of public enemies, war, strikes, civil commotions, or acts or omissions of public authorities (including customs and health officials) with actual or apparent authority.”

The cruellest cut

 Whereas I fully understand the need for vigilance at Customs and support all their efforts, I do think that there is a duty of care when examining items.  To have physically cut the very thick copper cable thus damaging the item beyond repair is virtually an act of vandalism when I am sure that there are non-invasive methods of investigation available such as x-ray machines.  To then send the damaged item on to the recipient with the cover replaced, no note of apology or particularly of caution, in the knowledge that the item was going to be connected to a powerful electricity supply, seems to me to be an act of negligence that is remarkable from HMRC.  The inverter is capable of an output of over 5kw and it is therefore normal to connect it to a supply capable of at least 5kw, easily enough to kill somebody, so I think that we can all be very grateful that no injury or death was caused by leaving bare, uninsulated wiring exposed.

 The recipient is claiming back the £373.33 as he has received an item that does not work.  In return, please accept this email as a claim from me against HMRC for the same amount for damage caused to my property through deliberate destruction during a Customs inspection on 17th March 2010 between 12.10hrs and 17.35hrs at Stanstead Airport.