"It breaks my heart to share that I was scammed by a deceitful company, losing all my hard-earned money to their fraudulent tactics. for months, I fought tirelessly, sending countless emails with no response from their so-called customer service. The frustration and helplessness were overwhelming. but then, a beacon of hope appeared! Contacting MONE IORE CLAIM COM was the best decision I ever made. They stood by me and helped reclaim my stolen investment from those scammers. to anyone facing the same nightmare, don't give up! Reach out to MONE IORE CLAIM COM and take back what's rightfully yours."
"I've been using Transglobal Express for over a decade, I have never needed to make a claim, but I thought that I would be in good hands if I ever needed to. This assumption was VERY wrong, and Transglobal Express have caused me to be thousands out of pocket. Let me explain.\r\n\r\nI sent a package with five items valued at over \u00a36500 with Transglobal Express. They did not offer insurance to this value, only to \u00a32500, which I took out and paid handsomely for. The parcel arrived with a huge hole in the side taped up with \u2018Repackaged by DHL\u2019 tape, unfortunately two of the smaller boxes inside the main box were missing, a retail value of \u00a34100.\r\n\r\nAt this stage I felt it would be a fairly easy process considering the box was photographed by the driver with the hole and tape covering it and photographs were taken on collection showing the box was in perfect condition and I was insured to \u00a32500 so it covers a large portion of loss.\r\n\r\nTransglobal initiated their \u2018investigation\u2019 process, and around three weeks later they declared that DHL won\u2019t \u2018accept liability\u2019 and therefore this makes them \u2018not liable\u2019 either. The first instance of Transglobal not understanding consumer law and how the concept liability works. They offered a \u2018goodwill gesture\u2019 of a \u2018proportional compensation\u2019, declaring that because only 2 of the 5 items were missing, they would only offer a percentage of the total insurance value \u2013 basically what they unethically do is split your items into percentages, and therefore this allows them to reduce the compensatory amounts to suit them.\r\n\r\nHere is a hypothetical example that was put to them to form an analogy\r\n\r\nA person wants to send a \u00a32000 Gold Watch and a packet of pencils (\u00a310).\r\n\r\nThe watch for his dad, his birthday and the pencils for his mum, a budding artist.\r\n\r\nThe value comes to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSo he insures the parcel to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSadly, during transit, the box is broken and the watch is lost. The pencils arrive fine.\r\n\r\nThe claim will be fit the missing item, which is valued at \u00a32000.\r\n\r\nTheir response was, and I quote,\r\n\r\n\u201cit is 38% of the total. In this case they would have been offered \u00a3769 as \u00a32,000 is 99.5% of the full insured amount of \u00a32,010 and they would be offered the same 99.5% of the insured amount of \u00a3773.\u201d\r\n\r\nThis is the unethical bit. They are dismissing the value of the missing item, \u00a32000 watch, by stating that because the \u00a310 pencils arrived they are going to reduce the value of the missing item to \u00a3773, less than 50%, because 1 out of 2 of the items arrived!\r\n\r\nSo, tread carefully when you choose to use this company.\r\n\r\nThe claims manager has a very egotistical, argumentative and robotic tone and shows little compassion and empathy. I am not sure if it is the company that demands this of her, or it his own persona. She has very little understanding of Consumer Law, yet quotes her ideology like fact - it would be comical if it wasn't so frustrating. Just wait till you enter into dialogue with her, and watch her squirm into defensive mode when you highlight elements of her statements being completely untrue. You will inevitably come up against her and her militant rhetoric if you need to claim \u2013 essentially it's a punitive abuse of power as if you do not agree with her and take the lesser offer, Transglobal will give you nothing and I quote another of her lines \u2018 we will fully defend the case\u2019\r\n\r\nProbably the most unethical company I have come across in this particular industry. Their business practices are questionable in legal terms, and they will try to whitewash you by referring to their terms and conditions like it is law \u2013 it isn\u2019t. They fail to understand Consumer Law, therefore it's one of those 'you can't argue with....' moments.\r\n\r\nOther real classic moments in this debacle include\r\n\r\n1. Yes you paid insurance to \u00a32500 but even though we aren't going to compensate you to the amount of insurance you paid for, we arent going to give you a refund of your insurance payment either. (I purchased something they did not provide in full - consumer law 101).\r\n\r\n2. You can complain but I have already spoke to who you will be complaining to and we are in agreement. (no impartial complaints procedure, and told like a threat to ensure that I would be 'wasting my time' complaining\r\n\r\n3. Refusal to offer the general managers\/owners\/directors email address - (fyi the Directors home address is listed on Companies House, just pop him a letter in the post)\r\n\r\nBe warned! Transglobal are all fine and dandy when they take your money, but when they fail to provide the service you pay them for and they lose your insured property, they will ensure you are left out of pocket because of their failure.\r\n\r\nUnethical is a polite term for this company."
"I've been using Transglobal Express for over a decade, I have never needed to make a claim, but I thought that I would be in good hands if I ever needed to. This assumption was VERY wrong, and Transglobal Express have caused me to be thousands out of pocket. Let me explain.\r\n\r\nI sent a package with five items valued at over \u00a36500 with Transglobal Express. They did not offer insurance to this value, only to \u00a32500, which I took out and paid handsomely for. The parcel arrived with a huge hole in the side taped up with \u2018Repackaged by DHL\u2019 tape, unfortunately two of the smaller boxes inside the main box were missing, a retail value of \u00a34100.\r\n\r\nAt this stage I felt it would be a fairly easy process considering the box was photographed by the driver with the hole and tape covering it and photographs were taken on collection showing the box was in perfect condition and I was insured to \u00a32500 so it covers a large portion of loss.\r\n\r\nTransglobal initiated their \u2018investigation\u2019 process, and around three weeks later they declared that DHL won\u2019t \u2018accept liability\u2019 and therefore this makes them \u2018not liable\u2019 either. The first instance of Transglobal not understanding consumer law and how the concept liability works. They offered a \u2018goodwill gesture\u2019 of a \u2018proportional compensation\u2019, declaring that because only 2 of the 5 items were missing, they would only offer a percentage of the total insurance value \u2013 basically what they unethically do is split your items into percentages, and therefore this allows them to reduce the compensatory amounts to suit them.\r\n\r\nHere is a hypothetical example that was put to them to form an analogy\r\n\r\nA person wants to send a \u00a32000 Gold Watch and a packet of pencils (\u00a310).\r\n\r\nThe watch for his dad, his birthday and the pencils for his mum, a budding artist.\r\n\r\nThe value comes to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSo he insures the parcel to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSadly, during transit, the box is broken and the watch is lost. The pencils arrive fine.\r\n\r\nThe claim will be fit the missing item, which is valued at \u00a32000.\r\n\r\nTheir response was, and I quote,\r\n\r\n\u201cit is 38% of the total. In this case they would have been offered \u00a3769 as \u00a32,000 is 99.5% of the full insured amount of \u00a32,010 and they would be offered the same 99.5% of the insured amount of \u00a3773.\u201d\r\n\r\nThis is the unethical bit. They are dismissing the value of the missing item, \u00a32000 watch, by stating that because the \u00a310 pencils arrived they are going to reduce the value of the missing item to \u00a3773, less than 50%, because 1 out of 2 of the items arrived!\r\n\r\nSo, tread carefully when you choose to use this company.\r\n\r\nThe claims manager has a very egotistical, argumentative and robotic tone and shows little compassion and empathy. I am not sure if it is the company that demands this of her, or it his own persona. She has very little understanding of Consumer Law, yet quotes her ideology like fact - it would be comical if it wasn't so frustrating. Just wait till you enter into dialogue with her, and watch her squirm into defensive mode when you highlight elements of her statements being completely untrue. You will inevitably come up against her and her militant rhetoric if you need to claim \u2013 essentially it's a punitive abuse of power as if you do not agree with her and take the lesser offer, Transglobal will give you nothing and I quote another of her lines \u2018 we will fully defend the case\u2019\r\n\r\nProbably the most unethical company I have come across in this particular industry. Their business practices are questionable in legal terms, and they will try to whitewash you by referring to their terms and conditions like it is law \u2013 it isn\u2019t. They fail to understand Consumer Law, therefore it's one of those 'you can't argue with....' moments.\r\n\r\nOther real classic moments in this debacle include\r\n\r\n1. Yes you paid insurance to \u00a32500 but even though we aren't going to compensate you to the amount of insurance you paid for, we arent going to give you a refund of your insurance payment either. (I purchased something they did not provide in full - consumer law 101).\r\n\r\n2. You can complain but I have already spoke to who you will be complaining to and we are in agreement. (no impartial complaints procedure, and told like a threat to ensure that I would be 'wasting my time' complaining\r\n\r\n3. Refusal to offer the general managers\/owners\/directors email address - (fyi the Directors home address is listed on Companies House, just pop him a letter in the post)\r\n\r\nBe warned! Transglobal are all fine and dandy when they take your money, but when they fail to provide the service you pay them for and they lose your insured property, they will ensure you are left out of pocket because of their failure.\r\n\r\nUnethical is a polite term for this company."
"I've been using Transglobal Express for over a decade, I have never needed to make a claim, but I thought that I would be in good hands if I ever needed to. This assumption was VERY wrong, and Transglobal Express have caused me to be thousands out of pocket. Let me explain.\r\n\r\nI sent a package with five items valued at over \u00a36500 with Transglobal Express. They did not offer insurance to this value, only to \u00a32500, which I took out and paid handsomely for. The parcel arrived with a huge hole in the side taped up with \u2018Repackaged by DHL\u2019 tape, unfortunately two of the smaller boxes inside the main box were missing, a retail value of \u00a34100.\r\n\r\nAt this stage I felt it would be a fairly easy process considering the box was photographed by the driver with the hole and tape covering it and photographs were taken on collection showing the box was in perfect condition and I was insured to \u00a32500 so it covers a large portion of loss.\r\n\r\nTransglobal initiated their \u2018investigation\u2019 process, and around three weeks later they declared that DHL won\u2019t \u2018accept liability\u2019 and therefore this makes them \u2018not liable\u2019 either. The first instance of Transglobal not understanding consumer law and how the concept liability works. They offered a \u2018goodwill gesture\u2019 of a \u2018proportional compensation\u2019, declaring that because only 2 of the 5 items were missing, they would only offer a percentage of the total insurance value \u2013 basically what they unethically do is split your items into percentages, and therefore this allows them to reduce the compensatory amounts to suit them.\r\n\r\nHere is a hypothetical example that was put to them to form an analogy\r\n\r\nA person wants to send a \u00a32000 Gold Watch and a packet of pencils (\u00a310).\r\n\r\nThe watch for his dad, his birthday and the pencils for his mum, a budding artist.\r\n\r\nThe value comes to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSo he insures the parcel to \u00a32010.\r\n\r\nSadly, during transit, the box is broken and the watch is lost. The pencils arrive fine.\r\n\r\nThe claim will be fit the missing item, which is valued at \u00a32000.\r\n\r\nTheir response was, and I quote,\r\n\r\n\u201cit is 38% of the total. In this case they would have been offered \u00a3769 as \u00a32,000 is 99.5% of the full insured amount of \u00a32,010 and they would be offered the same 99.5% of the insured amount of \u00a3773.\u201d\r\n\r\nThis is the unethical bit. They are dismissing the value of the missing item, \u00a32000 watch, by stating that because the \u00a310 pencils arrived they are going to reduce the value of the missing item to \u00a3773, less than 50%, because 1 out of 2 of the items arrived!\r\n\r\nSo, tread carefully when you choose to use this company.\r\n\r\nThe claims manager has a very egotistical, argumentative and robotic tone and shows little compassion and empathy. I am not sure if it is the company that demands this of her, or it his own persona. She has very little understanding of Consumer Law, yet quotes her ideology like fact - it would be comical if it wasn't so frustrating. Just wait till you enter into dialogue with her, and watch her squirm into defensive mode when you highlight elements of her statements being completely untrue. You will inevitably come up against her and her militant rhetoric if you need to claim \u2013 essentially it's a punitive abuse of power as if you do not agree with her and take the lesser offer, Transglobal will give you nothing and I quote another of her lines \u2018 we will fully defend the case\u2019\r\n\r\nProbably the most unethical company I have come across in this particular industry. Their business practices are questionable in legal terms, and they will try to whitewash you by referring to their terms and conditions like it is law \u2013 it isn\u2019t. They fail to understand Consumer Law, therefore it's one of those 'you can't argue with....' moments.\r\n\r\nOther real classic moments in this debacle include\r\n\r\n1. Yes you paid insurance to \u00a32500 but even though we aren't going to compensate you to the amount of insurance you paid for, we arent going to give you a refund of your insurance payment either. (I purchased something they did not provide in full - consumer law 101).\r\n\r\n2. You can complain but I have already spoke to who you will be complaining to and we are in agreement. (no impartial complaints procedure, and told like a threat to ensure that I would be 'wasting my time' complaining\r\n\r\n3. Refusal to offer the general managers\/owners\/directors email address - (fyi the Directors home address is listed on Companies House, just pop him a letter in the post)\r\n\r\nBe warned! Transglobal are all fine and dandy when they take your money, but when they fail to provide the service you pay them for and they lose your insured property, they will ensure you are left out of pocket because of their failure.\r\n\r\nUnethical is a polite term for this company."
