To think the delivery company should leave me alone?

[AnchorDownDeepBreath]

Over a month ago, I was expecting a parcel. There was building work being done on the front of the building I live in, but I was in. The parcel didn't make it to me, so I reported it to the retailer who investigated and sent another one.

Three days later, the delivery driver and a friend of his let themselves into the building and came to my house. It was Sunday evening and they weren't very friendly. They explained that the parcel had been given to one of the men outside the building and asked me to find it and call off the claim. I live on my own and I found this quite scary, especially as they hadn't warned me they'd be coming.

For four days after that, the delivery driver came back every day. I didn't let him in, but he started ranting through the intercom system. I reported all of this to the delivery company and after a while, they promised me it'd stop and he wouldn't contact me again. He did continue to try for a few days and then it died down. I didn't accept the replacement parcel because I didn't want to see him again and I've avoided ordering anything that might be delivered by one of their drivers again, incase it's him.

Last week the building company visited the property management company and have billed him £80 for dealing with calls and meetings with the delivery driver, who they claim has hassled them a lot and keeps saying they either stole the parcel or I did, and they need to sort it out. The property management company have paid and are passing the bill to me, because it's my issue. I explained that it wasn't, and I asked for no more contact from the driver, but they have said I should pay them and recover the costs from the delivery company.

AIBU to think they should be able to stop this behaviour?! Or am I being oversensitive? I feel for him if they did dock his wages but equally, I didn't want to pay for something that never got delivered to me...

The CEO's office has replied again today and to ask again why I believe they should cover losses and who told me this.

Answer very briefly: "Because, self-evidently, this was the direct consequence of the actions of your employee or representative". Or maybe turn the question back on them and ask them to state why you and not they should be responsible for something that was within their control and caused by their driver. and no-one else.

For the moment I would advise telling any of this bunch of incompetents/crooks who contact you that it is now a police matter, and hanging up the phone. This is, on several levels, extortion/fraud/harassment. You do not owe anyone £80. It's possible the management company are asking for it because some clueless little jobsworth has gone, oh, all disputes are an £80 fee without actually looking at the circumstances, but the courier company are taking the piss and that driver should certainly be sacked.

That is awful behaviour. DPD should be disciplining their employee for his poor choices which resulted in this mess.

AugustFinkNottle
Answer very briefly: "Because, self-evidently, this was the direct consequence of the actions of your employee or representative". Or maybe turn the question back on them and ask them to state why you and not they should be responsible for something that was within their control and caused by their driver. and no-one else.

The (fabricated) charge should not be paid by anybody. The delivery company won't be liable for it (but should take responsibility for their employee/agent's behaviour).

I think DPD should take full responsibility for this but home visits should never be part of the procedure for missing parcels, unless prearranged and agreed.

I'm glad you have the police involved.

I'm still mighty chin-scratchingly suspicious about this coincidental £80 fee...

This is all very odd. He gave the parcel to some random bloke in passing no has persistently harassed you. I'm appalled the company say this is ok and haven't sacked him. Bonkers. I hope the police sort it for you.

the management contract specified that the admin fee for "involvement in third party disputes" was 80 quid. That's what they're trying to charge her- the contractual amount. It's not suggested that the "management time" equates to 80 at an hourly rate or something.

However the clause they are trying to rely upon is not relevant to OP's situation, so it's all irrelevant anyway. Once again OP, do NOT pay it!

AnchorDownDeepBreath Thinking of you (((((((((Hugs))))))))))

Get on Twitter - harassment in your own home by delivery drivers is totally unacceptable.

DID absolutely can do something to protect you from this driver. They can suspend him pending investigation for gross mis-conduct and tell him that any further contact will result in instant dismissal. He is putting a customer in fear of their safety while on a work capacity they are vicariously liable for his actions and for harm caused by him. They are by their inaction condoning his behaviour at the highest level (the CEO) and as such could end up liable for civil damages and potentially guilty of criminal charges if his behaviour escalates.

I would make the CEO aware of this and tell him that the police are aware not just of the driver's action but his own personal involvement.

JessieMcJessie
the management contract specified that the admin fee for "involvement in third party disputes" was 80 quid. That's what they're trying to charge her- the contractual amount. It's not suggested that the "management time" equates to 80 at an hourly rate or something.

But the OP has also been led to believe that the builders charged the managing agent £80 for their time. So is the managing agent passing on an £80 bill he settled with the builders, or is he asking OP to pay £80 for his time, under the guise of dispute management?

I agree it's irrelevant, and shouldn't be paid by anybody, but it is odd. If you buy into the bonkers logic, there should be two lots of £80 to be settled, not one, unless the managing agent isn't really charging a dispute fee, but is categorising the £80 builders' invoice as his dispute fee. Or maybe the builders presented a lower invoice, and the managing agent has upped it to £80, in keeping with his dispute fee clause.

I had similar with Yodel. Received damaged parcel, replacement ordered, retailer instructed me to check replacement for breakage on arrival before accepting (very fragile item). When I tried to do this the delivery driver went mental, barged into my house, grabbed parcel out of my hands sending me flying backwards - although he did not physically touch me. Yodel customer services were useless. Same driver returned delivering parcel from different retailer, gave me a load of abuse and threatened me for complaining about him. Spoke to Yodel again who said the driver was allocated to my area and that I had no choice to see him again unless I was blacklisted. I was simultaneously complaining via both retailers and had to phone 101 because I was constantly terrified that he was going to come back and carry out his threat. The retailers were quite good and one gave me a free gift and took me seriously, although I didn't want the free gift I just wanted him to go away. The police tried to get hold of the manager at Yodel for month's but they just ignored the police officers calls/emails. In the end I told the police to drop it as I didn't want them to spend their precious time on it. I stopped placing online orders for a long time and now add a note to the retailer not to deliver with Yodel as their driver harasses me. I haven't seen him since. I appreciate that this is more complicated for you with the fine, but I agree that you need to get the retailer to sort this out. They are the people you have the contract with and they will need to complain separately to DPD. DPD are more likely to listen to the retailer as they will want to keep their courier contract! I really sympathise and hope this is sorted out soon.

Wow. Driver assaults customer and Yodel not only don't fire him but essentially defend his actions by saying he will continue to deliver to that customer. That is truly shocking.
lizzywig did the police explain why they didn't just simply arrest the driver for assault? An assault does not require touching of the victim, simply for the victim to be caused to fear for their personal safety.

I think it might be part of a wider problem - the tendency of company directors to consider other people less than human and unimportant. So these courier firms treat their drivers like shit, underpay them, overwork them etc. A lot of drivers therefore don't stay in the job long, which means that the ones who do are regarded, rather grudgingly, as a useful resource. The company directors don't give a toss about individual customers, either, because other people are not important, so they will ignore complaints about a driver's abusive, dishonest, aggressive or otherwise criminal behaviour if he gets his rounds done on time.

JessieMcJessie, no the police officer didn't explain why they didn't just arrest him. Tbh I had no idea that it would be considered assault and she didn't indicate that it was. However, because I didn't know it was assault I was really mindful that I didn't want to accuse him of something he didn't do because I didn't want to make a false accusation. I kept repeating to the officer that he didn't touch me but that his actions resulted in me falling back/loosing my balance. Mainly she just listened to me and said she would follow up with Yodel. I was also clear that all I wanted was not to see him again.

I just think that going through the retailer is more successful. They are the people who customers have the contract with. The retailer then has a contract with the courier.

Any developments OP?