UPS (United Parcel Service) UPS have not paid for destroying an insured shipment of Fine Art since June 2008 Toronto Ontario Canada

My statement likely will be like beating a dead horse. Why you continue to ask, "Why...", even after common sense was illustrated in simple black and white. Perhaps the monetary loss aspect is blinding the true source of responsibility which, unfortunately for you, is yourself.

The owner of that shipping facility told you it was not packaged properly. Regardless of this fact, assuming the packaging was actually merely in the cardboard sheets seen in the attached photo, average intelligence should tell you that there was little protection for the artwork. Obviously you didn't use what should be common sense when packaging and still refused rational thinking when it was clearly explained to you that the artwork packing was inadequate. Readers may assume that you didn't want to pay the fee for professional packing. That's your prerogative but what's even more baffling is that you didn't even bother to take the artwork home and pack it correctly after being told you likely would have damage. Minimum proper packaging would be having the artwork wrapped to a stiff media such as DW cardboard and this assembly would be placed into a 275 mnimum ECT double walled box which allowed 2" of clearance around all edged and surface of the artwork. This proper packing dictates a minimum outside package width of 5" to prevent bending of this box with such large surface area.

It seems apparent, even to this day, that you have not even gone to the UPS or Fedex websites to refer to industry packaging guidelines. Isn't it obvious that there must be packaging criteria to assist both with safe shipments and any damage claims? What you are demanding is an insurance free-for-all. No matter how poor the packaging is done, the insurance company must pay, pay, pay.

Let's use an analogy: You buy a new car. You pay $2000 for a bumper to bumper warranty. You are both verbally told that you must follow proper procedures and it is described in the writing. Now, to save a couple of dollars, you use the incorrect/inferior grade of motor oil or skip some oil changes. Your engine is internally damaged. Then you choose to argue that you paid the warrant insurance and question whom pocketed the money when your claim is denied?? Frankly, this is EXACTLY what you expect and are trying to do. And it's odd this needs to be explained: Your insurance payment was collected by the insurance company and used for payouts of legitimate loss and properly packaged clams. Or try this one: You want to save money on a new fireplace for your home. You don't want to pay a professional so you do it yourself. You also never read the city code guidelines. Your house burns down. Your insurance claim is denied because it was due to the inproper fireplace construction. Should you then argue why you pay homeowners insurance and whom got the money??

The insurance paid was clearly for the event of LOSS ONLY. If it was lost, you would have been reimbursed. If it was packaged by the shipping facility, you would have been reimbursed. If you re-packaged the artwork yourself to industry guidelines, you would have been reimbursed. You, however, chose to ship it in a terrible package even after being warned. You made your choice yet refuse to stand behind it. By your own expectations, anybody should be able to sandwich any piece or artwork of any value in cardboard - knowing it will be damaged, insure it for a bazillion dollars, then simply get a check for that bazillion dollars after it's damaged due to intentionally inadequate packing. If that was the case, persons of certain mentalities would be lined up out the door with cheap prints packed like yours hoping to get an easy fraud claim approved.

In which case somebody is lying to me and I have been further defrauded by UPS/The UPS Store. If I paid $22 for the shipping, then another forty odd dollars for insurance, what did the insurance payment go towards insuring the lining of your pocket?!

I don't think it really matters how many times you claim you explained it to me. I'm of reasonable intelligence and this was not only not clear to me when I paid you, but only an idiot would pay an additional $40 to insure something then understand that he paid the premium for nothing at all. Please explain!

To make matters worse you tried to bill both the client and I additional brokerage fees!

Here is a copy of a response I sent to Mr. Arch: January 28, 2009
Dear Mr. Arch,

This email is in regards to the shipment sent June 2nd, 2008.
Tracking number 1Z 298 Y94 68 6914 0759, Parcel Shipping Order 771818.

As this package originated in my store, I will attempt, one last time, to clear this up by recalling the events of that day and re-stating my position.

When you brought in the pre-packed item to be shipped, you inquired about insurance on the package. At that time, you were told by my sales associate, Boris, that if we did not pack the item it could only be insured for loss, not damage. He also mentioned that he felt the packaging was inadequate. He then proceeded to give you a quote on what it would cost to pack the item so that it would meet the requirements for Shipment Protection for both loss and damage. Believing the price to be too high and that your packaging*, in your words, was good enough, you declined his offer to pack the item. He then reminded you that the item could only be covered for loss, not damage.

As Boris was entering the shipping information into the UPS Connect system, I came out of my office and was walking past the counter. Seeing the packaging, I commented on how poorly packed it was and I wanted to double check with Boris that we were not offering Shipment Protection for damages. A short conversation ensued between the 3 of us, and again, it was said to you, by both Boris and myself, that the item would not be covered for damage, just loss.

As we thought, the package was damaged and you asked to have it returned, which I did. The package was returned to the store and was later picked up by you after sitting in the store for an extended period of time.

In conclusion, you declined to have us pack the item, you were then limited to loss, as we told you at the time. Thus, there is no chance for a claim to be paid on your behalf. I have explained this to you numerous times. My contacts at UPS Canada and The UPS Store Corporate Office have agreed that, in this case, there is nothing additional that can be done. If you had simply let us package the item at a cost of $60 this could have all been avoided.

Sincerely,

Peter Holt
Owner
The UPS Store #311

* The 2 prints were slipped in between 2 large pieces of cardboard, measuring 28 x 40 x . There was no padding or bubble wrap of any kind.


Also:
There is a PARCEL SHIPPING ORDER form that every customer shipping any item fills out and signs when shipping. It clearly states, under the title "Pre-Pack Waiver: I have declined packing service offered by The UPS Store and acknowledge that the coverage for the Parcel is limited to loss as provided herein."

I don't know how much clearer one can make this.

So, as you can see, Michael, the person complaining is avoiding the fact that he packaged 2 prints, worth $1,500 between 2 pieces of used cardboard, which measured 28" x 40" x 1/2".

It appears as though the required information needed to evaluate this complaint is intentionally being withheld. All that was added was some third party "Solicitor for Arch & Company" whom has no bearing on the resolve of this dispute. The dispute is purely between UPS (with The UPS Store as an interface) and the complaintant. The 'Solicitor' is merely wasting everyones time, as they would be with any dispute between a person shipping a package and all carriers. This third party also has no bearing in any legal proceedings.

The poster seems to be avoiding whether he packaged the items himself or had the artwork packed to verifiable industry standards. We have to assume the starving artist packaged the artwork himself. If it were packaged by The UPS Store, the the claim is automatically approved. All that was needed was proof of value to fax in with the paperwork. If the poster packed the artwork himself, all carriers would need to set up an inspection to verify that the packaging met industry guidelines. These guidelines are similar with all carriers and are available for review online. Some people make assumptions by putting very little thought into packaging or even violate common sense, then expect insurance to automatically pay for their ignorance. With all insurance policies, conditions must be met or it would be a free-for-all and insurance could not exist.

My company is similar to that The UPS Store. We have 'fine print' on the contract that the poster signed. It obviously wasn't read by the complainer, but will hold up in court. It was part of the receipt document that was signed by the sender of the artwork, and The UPS Store has the signed original. Amongst other things, it advises, "Items packed by You are covered for loss but may not be covered for damage." (Some people just don't get that you can pack china dishes in sheets of newspaper and an old box, then expect insurance to cover the breakage.)

The UPS Stores are independently owned outlets that simply make your shipment label ready and get it into the system for you. They obviously can't be liable for the many customer shipments that don't meet industry packaging guidelines. To help avoid that confusion, the contract the person shipping the artwork signed clearly states, "You expressly agree that We (The UPS Store) have no liability if any claim is denied or paid only in part by the carrier or declared value provider."

Without the required details, readers of this post will have to assume that UPS is not stalling, but has simply declined the claim due to improper packaging. The results of this shipment would be the same if it had been shipped via any carrier.

What this complainer should do is simply ask for a copy of the statement that was faxed or emailed by UPS to that The UPS Store. They should already have it, and another is easily acquired immediately by fax. The statement will clearly indicate that either the claim was approved and the documents needed for processing, or specifics as to why the claim is denied, ie: inferior or worn corrogate, item against shipping container wall, insufficient or non-existent internal packing, etc. Theses issues can be learned of BEFORE shipping in the websites, but some persons like this complainer find it easier to be irresponsible, lazy or cheap, and blame others.

Too bad it would take a judge to tell him that.

HOWARD N. SHUSTER

Barrister and Solicitor and Notary Public

Suite 807 94 Cumberland Street

TORONTO, ONTARIO

M5R 1A3

Tel: 416-925-5218 Fax: 647-435-4666

April 14, 2009

The UPS Store 311 DELIVERED

110 Cumberland Street

Toronto, Ontario M5R 3V5

Dear Sirs

RE: Parcel Shipping Order 771818

Arch & Company

Date of Order: June 2, 2008


I am Solicitor for Arch & Company.

On June 2, 2008, my client dropped off two High Quality Photographs for shipment to Barker and Associates Public Art located in San Marino California. The declared value was $1500.00.

My client paid for the shipping costs including insurance. Unfortunately the items were destroyed during the shipping process.

Despite efforts to claim for his loss, my client was treated with contempt by your store. He was given such excuses as: The shipment was not insured and: It was your fault. The Order form very clearly stated that he paid $ 45.00 for Shipping Protection Charges.

One would expect that a reputable company would stand behind its contractual obligations and compensate my client or at least deal with my client in good faith. However this does not appear to be the case.

I have been instructed to prepare a claim for the amount of the loss. If we do not hear from you by Tuesday the 21st of April 2009, the claim will be issued and you will become liable for not only the amount of the claim but interest and any costs that The Court may award. We will also consider an additional claim for punitive damages given the manner in which my client was treated.

If the Claim is settled by next Tuesday then we will simply close our file with no further cost to you.

We hope that you will decide to do the right thing and avoid the unpleasantries that arise from litigation.

Yours very truly

Howard Shuster

:slf

What reason did they give you for denying the claim? Did they package the art? Tell us more about what happened!