Hi John
Thank you for your swift response. I understand your position but I still feel that you have not answers certain questions and it leaves me with no alternative but to seek legal action.
The fact is I was given the option to leave the goods there and that it would be 'handed over' to Halfords. It was not mentioned 'at anyone's risk', therefore it was fair to assume that the safekeeping of my bike equipment would continue.
If the Evans staff (Adrian and Alistair) had said “leave it at your own risk but we don't know what will happen when we hand over the keys” then that's a different matter. But that was not conveyed to me.
Secondly, what steps were taken when keys were returned to ensure that the contents of the store would remain safe and secure? According to the various statements the goods were lost in between the handover of the keys and the fitting of the store.
If this could not have been assured, then Evans should not have offered the service, but your staff did. You have not offered to show me the inventory for the handover. Can I please be given a copy of this?
Yours sincerely
Sam Hall
From: Customer Relations [mailto:
Sent: 12 August 2013 14:41
To: Hall, Sam
Cc: Garling, Sue; Smith, Abigail
Subject: RE: FAO Rachel Hope
Dear Mr Hall,
Thank you for your email to my colleague which has been escalated to myself due to the nature of the issue.
Please be assured that providing a high-level of customer service is Evans Cycles’ primary concern and I am very sorry that you have been disappointed in this regard, specifically that after placing your bike parts in storage with my colleagues at our, now closed, Sky store, your parts have gone missing during the change of ownership to Halfords and you feel that responsibility for this lies with Evans Cycles.
Having consulted Mr Sean Byrne, the regional manager with responsibility for the Sky store, he has personally confirmed that your parts were present on the premises at the time of the key handover and that they were in a box with your details clearly attached.
Although we would entirely agree with you that, while we were occupying the premises, we would assume responsibility for your parts, it is the case that we could not reasonably be expected to continue to assume responsibility for your parts after we left the premises.
Given this, we feel very strongly that Evans Cycles have entirely complied with our legal responsibilities to safeguard your property, while it was in our care and therefore, although I am naturally very sorry to hear about the loss of your property, this is not something that Evans Cycles would accept responsibility for in any way; I also feel that we applied due diligence, in providing for the safe handover of your property to the succeeding occupier.
At this point, as hopefully you will appreciate, I would not be able to comment on what may have happened to your property after Evans Cycles left the premises, but this is a matter that you would need raise with Sue Garling, as suggested by Abigail Smith in her previous email.
In relation to your point regarding the value of the items allegedly affecting whether Evans Cycles would offer compensation, this point is made in an email from Abigail Smith to yourself and does not reflect the views of Evans Cycles; as previously indicated, Evans Cycles feel very strongly that we have no legal or moral responsibility for your property, after our employees left the Sky premises and the value of your property in this regard is immaterial.
Once again, I am very sorry to hear of your disappointment but, as hopefully you will appreciate, at this point we would not be able to assist you further with this issue.
Yours sincerely,
John Ford-Smith
Customer Relations Manager
From: Hall, Sam [mailto:
Sent: 09 August 2013 14:04
To: Customer Relations
Subject: FAO Rachel Hope
Hi Rachel,
Please find at the foot the full itinerary of what went missing as also the estimated value of the goods (I reached this value from searching the internet). Below my signature is the most recent response and chain from Abigail Smith.
Evans, and have received legal advice which has said the same thing, had a duty of care for the transition of the goods that they said they would hand over to Halfords. I was never informed that there would be a third party coming in and gutting the store or verbally/written the risk that the goods maybe lost or stolen. Had I have been I would have removed them from the store. Yes the parts were in the store for a matter of months, but I used to give the guys weekly payment (sweets) so it was not like it was an inconvenience for them. I constantly asked if it was alright to do this. It was also the Evans staff, Adrian and Alistair that said that leaving them in-store to handover to Evans was an option, I didn’t request or push for this. It was given to me as an option.
I was not informed verbally or in writing that I was leaving the goods there at my own risk. For Evans to say this in hindsight is not a sufficient excuse, this caveat was not explained either in writing or verbally. I assumed that there would be an adequate and orderly procedure for handover and that there would be the same level of security for the equipment as was the case when the goods were kept in the shop.
What were the arrangements for the handover? Can Evans show me the inventory which was part of the handover? Were checks done? When were the keys were handed in? I would like to see the inventory and handover details that Evans had. If my equipment is not included then Evans are responsible for the loss.
The loss of the goods was a failure of the handover, not me ‘knowing the risks’. If there was nothing in place to handle the request of handing over my equipment to Halfords (a written and detailed procedure and inventory check) then that should never have been an option that was offered to me.
I still haven’t been told of the people/party that handled the refitting and gutting of the store. This is potentially a case of theft I need to pursue this. Who were the contractors on site who potentially threw the equipment away. They also can bare testament as to whether or not the equipment was adequately boxed and labelled for handover? No, the fitting company have no recollection of seeing a box of bike parts.
Lastly, the point Evans make that suggests they won’t give me compensation because the equipment was expensive (see email chain). Is this to say they would compensate me if it was £20? That’s I ridiculous stance to take.