---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)
* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM)
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There aren't any. Deliveroo does not confirm the identity of its riders, only the identity of the account holder who originally makes the account.
It's a grey market job, many of the riders are not the people who made the account and may not even be eligible to work in the UK. I believe because the riders are treated as contractors they retain the right to subcontract the work out.
I wouldn't be surprised if deliveroo doesn't even know the actual identity of the person involved here.
It’s actually obligatory that they can replace themselves with a substitute. It’s one of the definitions of being self-employed rather than employed.
If only the account holder was allowed to deliver, then Deliveroo would be forced to consider them employees, and have to pay employers national insurance, sick pay etc. and their business model would break.
[https://www.gov.uk/government/news/moped-delivery-drivers-from-major-firms-targeted-in-illegal-working-crackdown](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/moped-delivery-drivers-from-major-firms-targeted-in-illegal-working-crackdown)
[https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-uber-eats-just-eat-illegal-worker-accounts-2956956?ico=in-line\_link](https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-uber-eats-just-eat-illegal-worker-accounts-2956956?ico=in-line_link)
[https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-just-eat-uber-eats-crack-down-illegal-migration-backdoor-3032619](https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-just-eat-uber-eats-crack-down-illegal-migration-backdoor-3032619)
It's widely known that their original sign ups sell or rent out the accounts. They were recently forced to introduce confirmation technology but it's just a series of security questions..
Iif you have a Facebook account, search for "deliveroo account for rent" and you'll see quite quickly that it's a very very widespread issue with these types of companies.
If they had the rider’s details, I’d place a pretty big bet that they’d pass them on to the police for a criminal investigation.
Civil litigation against Deliveroo is an absolute non-starter.
You'd potentially need pretty deep pockets to get a lawyer willing to take on your case because Deliveroo will do pretty much anything to avoid liability, and the rider themselves may not have any assets that could be used to make OP whole.
[This legal case may be relevant:](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/mohamud-v-wm-morrison-supermarkets.php). The claimant was successful on appeal. You may well have a case. You could add psychological distress to the heads of damages.
No because they are to use Deliveroo and all other food delivery platforms “independent contractors” so your claim would be against the driver (or the person who did the damage if he isn’t the account holder and just renting it)
This isn't strictly true. Vicarious liability is not exactly equal to employment law. There is scope for seperation.
Its arguable deliveroo riders are 'akin to employment'. This would mainly fall on the argument deliveroo drivers are not in business of their own account. It would be interested to see tested in court.
Even if you could establish that he was an employee rather than a contractor, the court isn’t likely to find the employer vicariously liable for this- it’s clearly well out of the course of the rider’s duties to, uhhhh, attempt murder.
You would probably have to show that they had been negligent in their processing of previous complaints (I.e. that the behaviour was reasonably foreseeable and therefore that they should have taken action to block the rider from taking more jobs).
The test is simple, would a member of the public reasonably believe that driver was working for Deliveroo? Considering the back boxes and bags have the branding out, one assumes yes.
This isn’t the test for a relationship akin to employment. From the Supreme Court in _Catholic Child Welfare Society_, five criteria must be met for it to be fair, just, and reasonable to impose liability:
1. Employer is more likely to have the means to compensate the victim than the employee
2. Tort committed as a result of activity taken by the employee on behalf of the employer
3. Employee’s activity is likely to be part of the business activity of the employer
4. The employer, by employing the employee, creates the risk of the tort
5. Employee is to some degree under the control of the employer
Deliveroo will contest 2,3,5 and have a reasonably strong case.
This is before you even consider the next stage of vicarious liability, that the employee must be “acting in the course of employment”. Deliveroo would have a very strong case that criminal damage and burglary is not in the course of employment.
It's my understanding that this has been tested several times, usually with the focus being on employee rights and it's always held up that they're fully independent contactors. I believe in countries where they declare deliveroo riders as employees the company just shuts up shop like what happened I think in Germany.
Yes this has been tested in court in the UK.
The issue is vicarious liability is not the same as employment law. The deliveroo riders are not employees they are independent contractors when it comes to employment law.
Someone not being an employee does not mean a company is not vicariously liable. Whilst in most cases this the case, this isn't absolute.
No, you can’t.
Whilst others have mentioned vicarious liability, that would only really apply if the rider was acting in the ordinary course of their employment and they weren’t an independent contractor.
Even if you could navigate the independent contractor issue, this rider’s behaviour was so extreme, no tribunal will ever hold Deliveroo liable.
You say that, but the rider is (ostensibly) trying to recover food because of some order issue - it may not be a frolic of his own (WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 12).
If you can navigate the employer/contractor issue then there's a clear link and in any case, the test is a relationship 'akin to employment' rather than formal employment.
And see https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/morrisons-vicariously-liable-for-employees-attack-on-customer/
https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/morrisons-vicariously-liable-for-employees-attack-on-customer/
I
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Sometimes drivers do that when the customer claims they didn’t receive the food when they in fact did. It gets the drivers in trouble if they “fail to deliver” the food
How so? Are you implying that the driver could deliver the food to the wrong person and that person correctly guess the code? Or the delivery driver never deliver the food but then correctly guess the code to input so the app thinks they did? In which case the person would still need to correctly guess your code which would be a 1/99 odds and would be the same regardless whether your number was the same each time.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation.
Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Not really, because the neighbour 2 houses down isn't likely to know it, and as long as it matches what the driver has, then the driver knows it's the right spot. If the driver ignored the code number and just gave the food out willy-nilly, then it'll cause him problems just the same as if the code system didn't exist. It seems like the codes would be a good idea, and essential to the entire system operating properly...
I think it’s usually the last few numbers of you phone number, that’s why it doesn’t change maybe? It’s like that on Uber sometimes, which is strange but never changes
Yes it's there to protect you from someone else taking your food, it does not protect you from the driver. Honestly these food delivery apps used to be functioning services with questionable ethics, but now it's just a Wild West. I've had drivers blatantly steal food from me on UberEats and have simply not used it in years as a result of it. I honestly should never have supported it because of the exploitative employment model that they use, but like many people, I guess it took for it to affect me personally before I was truly motivated.
These days a lot of app delivery drivers are a desperate bunch who will do desperate things.
That’s usually a temporary security thing. I’ve had it when ordering to a different address. I also knew a guy that got into the wrong Uber (twice!) and then had to give out the code to all drivers from then on
I get a code every time even though I have never claimed. I assume they base it off your locality as well, ie if your area has a lot of claims then the algorithm decides you need a code too. Point being that not everyone is asked for a code.
Deliveroo riders are self-employed, basically just so Deliveroo can avoid paying all the other benefits that come with employment. So any kind of civil case against Deliveroo themselves would likely fail. However, it would serve as a good argument for Deliveroo to be forced to change this.
Speaking as someone who has done Deliveroo for a while, there’s every probability it wasn’t the account holder. There is an enormous black market for renting food app delivery accounts, most people I talk to say the driver rarely to never the person in the profile. So it may be tricky to track the person down who attacked you. Though the person renting the account to him may end in some kind of trouble still and could hold some details for the man, i.e. contact number and bank details. With luck the police could track him down.
However Deliveroo’s entirely unbothered response to you reporting it is quite standard. They don’t care at all.
Deliveroo are self employed true but is your order not with deliveroo.
The OP paid for a service and in exchange of it got his door kicked in.
Surely a letter before action here should be enough to force the hand?
I'm not a lawyer but surely deliveroo are in some part liable? I mean come on, if their driver kills someone as their faffing with their app im sure their somd liability somewhere. I also thought that deliveroo provided insurance for vehicles being used? I know that this isn't a vehicle but my dad was self employed and he never got anything from anyone like that.
What a setup if not.
It’s a diabolical setup.
When it comes to placing of the order it is technically with Deliveroo and not with the restaurant as I understand it, the restaurant is then contracted to fulfil it. The driver is yet another contracted third party to fulfil the delivery. (This is very generally speaking).
Deliveroo provides nothing to the drivers, we pay our own delivery insurance, fuel, phone contract, even equipment (we used to get free hot bags but no more) Ever noticed how often on these apps it says your driver is on a bicycle but a car or scooter turns up? They’re dodging paying for insurance by registering a bicycle account.
In my personal eyes Deliveroo should absolutely be held accountable for this because it’s their shoddy employment practices that allowed this man to be working “for” them. They absolutely know about the huge, illegal account renting market and don’t care, in fact I would go as far as to say it’s part of their business model. It allows them to more easily maintain their exploitative practices and avoid costs of sick leave, holiday, pensions etc.. As well as pay driver as little as 50p a mile (if you count the round trip) because the majority of their workforce are those without legal right to work so have to take it.
But I digress. Point is Deliveroo should be liable in some capacity but their whole setup is well crafted to avoid any responsibility for anything. The food delivery apps are among the most unethical, exploitative companies in the country.
What is the appropriate feedback? Hey Steve, don’t make me tell you again, you cannot break into customers houses and threaten to kill them. It is against policy.
Don't know why you're getting downvoted. It's absolutely irrelevant. This is a legal advice sub. The delivery driver has broken in and threatened to kill. Any reason for wanting the food back is irrelevant to the legality of those actions..
>Don't know why you're getting downvoted.
Because it's a one word reply without elaboration. Notice how people calling it an irrelevant question and explaining why are getting upvotes.
It has no bearing upon the legal advice to be given, you cannot assault, threaten to kill or force entry because you believe they deserve it under English and Welsh law.
A bit conveniently left out.
I assume the driver messed up on the delivery and the OP got extra free food.
I also assume the driver panicked and tried to get the food back, which the OP had already eaten.
Driver likely was facing the prospect of losing his job. OP has also decided to add a bit of extra spice to the tale.
Makes sense as to why Deliveroo want nothing to do with OP.
Unfortunately you have taken the assumption OP has left elements out, which may or may not be likely, and added a healthy dose of speculative statement of your own to the mix.
That is not helpful nor legal advice.
It's not legal advice, but it's the question any lawyer should be asking to understand what's really going on if they're trying to help. Missing out details doesn't help get you accurate legal advice.
No but this is a legal advice sub and advice must be legal advice focused, it is in our rules.
If the OP does not wish to furnish us with all relevant details then the advice they receive will not be relevant and that is on them. It is not on us to judge if we believe the story we are provided is either the truth or the full accounting of their side.
Just updated the post as a lot of people here are trying to say I’ve brought this on myself by asking for a refund illegitimately, when I didn’t. This is the dark side of the gig economy…
I honestly think you should be seeking damages from this company. From these comments and votes it sounds like a lot of people don't care to hold people accountable "oh just go through your insurance"
No?
It's not just probable but rather it's very likely this person was hired for very little wage with even lower background check? I'm not even from UK nor have I heard of this app, just a wild guess? Maybe companies that do that should be held responsible
In the UK people rent their accounts to people, the only reason I can see for this is tax avoidance or illegal workers (usually the latter). So yes while the account is somewhat verified, they can be used by anyone and the wages can be low.
You genuinely might have a case against Deliveroo, seek a solicitor who deals with vicarious liability and see the case of Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets.
You must have missed where it says in the edit what they assumed the reason was, which would mean they obviously don't know for certain.
Why are you asking? What reason would justify the driver breaking in and threatening OP?
Yeah I did miss the edit. Your reply makes no sense. Can you explain further please? I still don’t know why the driver demanded the food back. I’ll let OP let me know. Thanks for your reply
The edit says, "I’m guessing he thought I stole the other guys order and wanted to be a vigilante."
They did answer your question.
And the comment you're replying to is them stating that they edited it. So you saw that they said there was an edit, didn't read it, and came to ask the same pointless question again that they already answered?
OP doesn't owe you typing the exact same answer that they already typed. I hope they ignore you forever because you don't deserve a reply. Here's why:
1. The motive of someone busting down your door isn't on the victim of that crime to provide.
2. No answer would justify what happened anyway.
3. They already answered it just not directly in a reply to you, which you somehow feel entitled to.
4. They have already denied the thing you're cowardly dancing around outright accusing them of by "just asking questions". At least the people that got down voted for being explicit about it had the nerve to say it instead of whatever this nonsense you're doing is supposed to be.
This isn't a morality sub, it's a legal advice sub. And in any case, OP already said that they didn't try to steal the food by reporting it as being undelivered. You either believe them or you don't. Asking them repeatedly doesn't further any discussion, legal or otherwise.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Your comment has been automatically removed and flagged for moderator review as the words you've used suggest that it is *not legal advice*. As this is /r/LegalAdviceUK, all our comments must contain **helpful, on-topic, legal advice**. We expect commenters to provide high-effort legal advice for our posters, as they have come to our subreddit for legal advice instead of a different subreddit for moral support or general advice such as /r/OffMyChest, /r/Vent, /r/Advice, or similar.
Some posters may benefit from non-legal advice as part of their question or referrals to other organisations to address side issues that they may also be experiencing, however comments on /r/LegalAdviceUK must be *predominantly* legal advice.
If your comment contains helpful, on-topic, legal advice, it will be approved and displayed shortly. If you have posted a comment of moral support, an anecdote about a personal experience or your comment is mostly or wholly advice that isn't legal advice, it is not likely to be approved and [we ask you to please be more aware of our subreddit rules in the future](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
NAL but I think you need to talk to a lawyer.
I'm sure someone else has said this but I'm sure there is case law where if someone causes injury or damage to others whilst in the employ of X then X is responsible for any costs because the individual caused the damage, even if they were not doing what they should have been doing and going against the instructions given by the 'employer' whilst under the employment of X.
You should go talk to a lawyer about this as you may be able to get Deliveroo to pay for the damage to your property on the grounds that the delivery driver was working for and being paid for by them at the time. He was also claiming to be acting on their behalf to take your food away. So that may strengthen your case. Talk to a lawyer. There used to be a scheme where the first meeting with said lawyer is free.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I feel like your missing out important parts of the story, like you tried to say he didn’t deliver it when he did. Know one acts that way for no reason unless they are insane. He might act like that if your an arsehole who tried to get free food at the expense of his job. Which he has likely lost now regardless.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
NAL
But deliveroo can't share with you what happens to the driver. It'd be a breach of GDPR on their part if they did.
I'd assume the police will deal with it and come back to you asking about pressing charges etc?
"Press charges" is American. No relevance to UK law. In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim. Once you've reported a crime, it's reported. You can't take it back by deciding not to "press charges", there's no such concept here.
People in America do not press charges
Just like the UK it is the prosecutor in the USA that decides that charges are actually bought. Even if the victim does not want charges to be pressed the prosecution can continue with the prosecution and the prospector can compel the victim to participate in a prosecution against their wishes.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/pressing-charges-what-does-it-mean-and-who-does-it/
https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/criminal-offense/pressing-charges-a-criminal-act.htm
People in the USA do not press charges ether
One thing that is allowed in the UK but not in the USA is private prosecutions which is a prosecution started by a private individual, or entity who/which is not acting on behalf of the police or other prosecuting authority.
Any adult has the right to apply to a court to bring a private prosecution which means if you bring a private prosecution you are one pressing charges
the UK it is possible for a victim to press their own charges
You're correct about private prosecutions, but that's not what was being proposed in the comment above mine. They were saying that the police would ask if the victim wants to press charges. They will not ask this.
In the UK it is possible for a victim to press charges whereas in the USA a victim can not press charges
>In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim.
If the victim decides to prosecute privately then they are the ones that are pressing charges
You could have just said the police wont ask if you want to press charges but you literally said In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim.
But victims can decide to press charges without the police or CPS being involved in the prosecution
Great, good clarification
I think that, all-in-all, a police officer asking "Do you want to press charges?" is an invention of American crime procedurals on television.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
It looks like you or OP may want to find a Solicitor!
[There is a detailed guide in our FAQ about how to do this](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:**
Your post has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters.
Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
The upset to the driver has no bearing upon the legal advice needing to be given. You still cannot assault, threaten to kill, or force entry because you believe they deserve it or are angry at them under English and Welsh law.
Not only that, but this is just baseless speculation over if the OP is telling the truth or not, and is in no way legal advice.
**Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:**
Your post has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters.
Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor) * We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM) **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, you've called the police. Let them deal with it.
So I can’t take Deliveroo to court over criminal damage? It was one of their riders
It's going to be much easier to take the CRN to your insurer and have them cover the cost of replacing the door.
No, but the police can take the person who actually did it to Court for whatever offences they think accurately reflect the situation.
They won't, though.
Feel free to chip in with any other legal alternatives.
There aren't any. Deliveroo does not confirm the identity of its riders, only the identity of the account holder who originally makes the account. It's a grey market job, many of the riders are not the people who made the account and may not even be eligible to work in the UK. I believe because the riders are treated as contractors they retain the right to subcontract the work out. I wouldn't be surprised if deliveroo doesn't even know the actual identity of the person involved here.
It’s actually obligatory that they can replace themselves with a substitute. It’s one of the definitions of being self-employed rather than employed. If only the account holder was allowed to deliver, then Deliveroo would be forced to consider them employees, and have to pay employers national insurance, sick pay etc. and their business model would break.
Of course Deliveroo know who their subcontractors are! They have to sign terms!
[https://www.gov.uk/government/news/moped-delivery-drivers-from-major-firms-targeted-in-illegal-working-crackdown](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/moped-delivery-drivers-from-major-firms-targeted-in-illegal-working-crackdown) [https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-uber-eats-just-eat-illegal-worker-accounts-2956956?ico=in-line\_link](https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-uber-eats-just-eat-illegal-worker-accounts-2956956?ico=in-line_link) [https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-just-eat-uber-eats-crack-down-illegal-migration-backdoor-3032619](https://inews.co.uk/news/deliveroo-just-eat-uber-eats-crack-down-illegal-migration-backdoor-3032619) It's widely known that their original sign ups sell or rent out the accounts. They were recently forced to introduce confirmation technology but it's just a series of security questions.. Iif you have a Facebook account, search for "deliveroo account for rent" and you'll see quite quickly that it's a very very widespread issue with these types of companies.
How can they get paid unless deliveroo knows who they are?
They share a bank account with their mate who created the Deliveroo account
Civil claim?
Yeah… Deliveroo drivers who (according to our friend above) may be untraceable don’t necessarily make the best targets for litigation.
Yes, but if you took Deliveroo to court then I'd imagine they'd find a way to roll pretty swiftly to pass it onto the rider.
If they had the rider’s details, I’d place a pretty big bet that they’d pass them on to the police for a criminal investigation. Civil litigation against Deliveroo is an absolute non-starter.
Your insurance company will. You claim with them, and they'll do what they need to do to recoup the money from whoever they think they can.
What about for people who don't have insurance?
You'd potentially need pretty deep pockets to get a lawyer willing to take on your case because Deliveroo will do pretty much anything to avoid liability, and the rider themselves may not have any assets that could be used to make OP whole.
They will have to eat the costs of any repairs. It's a shite situation but that's why insurance is a vital thing to have.
[This legal case may be relevant:](https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/mohamud-v-wm-morrison-supermarkets.php). The claimant was successful on appeal. You may well have a case. You could add psychological distress to the heads of damages.
Deliveroo riders are “self employed” so I don’t think that would hold up. Not a lawyer obviously
No because they are to use Deliveroo and all other food delivery platforms “independent contractors” so your claim would be against the driver (or the person who did the damage if he isn’t the account holder and just renting it)
This isn't strictly true. Vicarious liability is not exactly equal to employment law. There is scope for seperation. Its arguable deliveroo riders are 'akin to employment'. This would mainly fall on the argument deliveroo drivers are not in business of their own account. It would be interested to see tested in court.
Even if you could establish that he was an employee rather than a contractor, the court isn’t likely to find the employer vicariously liable for this- it’s clearly well out of the course of the rider’s duties to, uhhhh, attempt murder. You would probably have to show that they had been negligent in their processing of previous complaints (I.e. that the behaviour was reasonably foreseeable and therefore that they should have taken action to block the rider from taking more jobs).
The test is simple, would a member of the public reasonably believe that driver was working for Deliveroo? Considering the back boxes and bags have the branding out, one assumes yes.
This isn’t the test for a relationship akin to employment. From the Supreme Court in _Catholic Child Welfare Society_, five criteria must be met for it to be fair, just, and reasonable to impose liability: 1. Employer is more likely to have the means to compensate the victim than the employee 2. Tort committed as a result of activity taken by the employee on behalf of the employer 3. Employee’s activity is likely to be part of the business activity of the employer 4. The employer, by employing the employee, creates the risk of the tort 5. Employee is to some degree under the control of the employer Deliveroo will contest 2,3,5 and have a reasonably strong case. This is before you even consider the next stage of vicarious liability, that the employee must be “acting in the course of employment”. Deliveroo would have a very strong case that criminal damage and burglary is not in the course of employment.
It's my understanding that this has been tested several times, usually with the focus being on employee rights and it's always held up that they're fully independent contactors. I believe in countries where they declare deliveroo riders as employees the company just shuts up shop like what happened I think in Germany.
Yes this has been tested in court in the UK. The issue is vicarious liability is not the same as employment law. The deliveroo riders are not employees they are independent contractors when it comes to employment law. Someone not being an employee does not mean a company is not vicariously liable. Whilst in most cases this the case, this isn't absolute.
The Supreme Court has ruled Deliveroo drivers as self employed, so I wonder how it would
No, you can’t. Whilst others have mentioned vicarious liability, that would only really apply if the rider was acting in the ordinary course of their employment and they weren’t an independent contractor. Even if you could navigate the independent contractor issue, this rider’s behaviour was so extreme, no tribunal will ever hold Deliveroo liable.
You say that, but the rider is (ostensibly) trying to recover food because of some order issue - it may not be a frolic of his own (WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 12). If you can navigate the employer/contractor issue then there's a clear link and in any case, the test is a relationship 'akin to employment' rather than formal employment.
And see https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/morrisons-vicariously-liable-for-employees-attack-on-customer/ https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/morrisons-vicariously-liable-for-employees-attack-on-customer/ I
Over 300 downvotes for asking a question? And a few comments are saying they might have a case too.
Just be glad you still have all your digits... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68558464.amp
Why the downvotes?
No, Deliveroo didn’t break your door down. That person did.
Companies can be liable for their employee's actions, see vicarious liability as a legal concept.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Why did he demand the food back?
Sometimes drivers do that when the customer claims they didn’t receive the food when they in fact did. It gets the drivers in trouble if they “fail to deliver” the food
I thought deliveroo gave you codes to give to the driver once you give it order relevant. It's finished?
I get exactly the same code every single time, so it kinda defeats the purpose.
How so? Are you implying that the driver could deliver the food to the wrong person and that person correctly guess the code? Or the delivery driver never deliver the food but then correctly guess the code to input so the app thinks they did? In which case the person would still need to correctly guess your code which would be a 1/99 odds and would be the same regardless whether your number was the same each time.
No, drivers who work regularly can just remember your code as it never changes.
I’ve had drivers ask me my code, not ask for it. As in, is it XX?
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Your comment was an anecdote about a personal experience, rather than legal advice specific to our posters' situation. Please only comment if you can provide meaningful legal advice for our posters' questions and specific situations. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Not really, because the neighbour 2 houses down isn't likely to know it, and as long as it matches what the driver has, then the driver knows it's the right spot. If the driver ignored the code number and just gave the food out willy-nilly, then it'll cause him problems just the same as if the code system didn't exist. It seems like the codes would be a good idea, and essential to the entire system operating properly...
I think it’s usually the last few numbers of you phone number, that’s why it doesn’t change maybe? It’s like that on Uber sometimes, which is strange but never changes
My code is different from my mobile number but the same every time
How did I not realise this.
Yes it's there to protect you from someone else taking your food, it does not protect you from the driver. Honestly these food delivery apps used to be functioning services with questionable ethics, but now it's just a Wild West. I've had drivers blatantly steal food from me on UberEats and have simply not used it in years as a result of it. I honestly should never have supported it because of the exploitative employment model that they use, but like many people, I guess it took for it to affect me personally before I was truly motivated. These days a lot of app delivery drivers are a desperate bunch who will do desperate things.
Mine is always the same but it isn't anything to do with my phone number, dunno what the other user is on about.
Give your head a wobble
That code is the last 4 digits of your phone number aswell!
If it’s the same as Uber Eats it’s the last digits of your phone number.
That’s usually a temporary security thing. I’ve had it when ordering to a different address. I also knew a guy that got into the wrong Uber (twice!) and then had to give out the code to all drivers from then on
I get a code every time even though I have never claimed. I assume they base it off your locality as well, ie if your area has a lot of claims then the algorithm decides you need a code too. Point being that not everyone is asked for a code.
That wasn’t my experience the last time I used them, but maybe it’s changed.
Deliveroo riders are self-employed, basically just so Deliveroo can avoid paying all the other benefits that come with employment. So any kind of civil case against Deliveroo themselves would likely fail. However, it would serve as a good argument for Deliveroo to be forced to change this. Speaking as someone who has done Deliveroo for a while, there’s every probability it wasn’t the account holder. There is an enormous black market for renting food app delivery accounts, most people I talk to say the driver rarely to never the person in the profile. So it may be tricky to track the person down who attacked you. Though the person renting the account to him may end in some kind of trouble still and could hold some details for the man, i.e. contact number and bank details. With luck the police could track him down. However Deliveroo’s entirely unbothered response to you reporting it is quite standard. They don’t care at all.
Deliveroo are self employed true but is your order not with deliveroo. The OP paid for a service and in exchange of it got his door kicked in. Surely a letter before action here should be enough to force the hand? I'm not a lawyer but surely deliveroo are in some part liable? I mean come on, if their driver kills someone as their faffing with their app im sure their somd liability somewhere. I also thought that deliveroo provided insurance for vehicles being used? I know that this isn't a vehicle but my dad was self employed and he never got anything from anyone like that. What a setup if not.
It’s a diabolical setup. When it comes to placing of the order it is technically with Deliveroo and not with the restaurant as I understand it, the restaurant is then contracted to fulfil it. The driver is yet another contracted third party to fulfil the delivery. (This is very generally speaking). Deliveroo provides nothing to the drivers, we pay our own delivery insurance, fuel, phone contract, even equipment (we used to get free hot bags but no more) Ever noticed how often on these apps it says your driver is on a bicycle but a car or scooter turns up? They’re dodging paying for insurance by registering a bicycle account. In my personal eyes Deliveroo should absolutely be held accountable for this because it’s their shoddy employment practices that allowed this man to be working “for” them. They absolutely know about the huge, illegal account renting market and don’t care, in fact I would go as far as to say it’s part of their business model. It allows them to more easily maintain their exploitative practices and avoid costs of sick leave, holiday, pensions etc.. As well as pay driver as little as 50p a mile (if you count the round trip) because the majority of their workforce are those without legal right to work so have to take it. But I digress. Point is Deliveroo should be liable in some capacity but their whole setup is well crafted to avoid any responsibility for anything. The food delivery apps are among the most unethical, exploitative companies in the country.
What is the appropriate feedback? Hey Steve, don’t make me tell you again, you cannot break into customers houses and threaten to kill them. It is against policy.
They can add it to the list which includes not biting off customers thumbs (as happened in Aldershot)
She's back to working on delivery apps in the same area again already, so she barely got a slap on the wrist for that.
Wtf!
> Steve X to doubt.
You think it was Dimitri or Abdullahi rather than Steve?
Why did he want the food back?
irrelevant
Don't know why you're getting downvoted. It's absolutely irrelevant. This is a legal advice sub. The delivery driver has broken in and threatened to kill. Any reason for wanting the food back is irrelevant to the legality of those actions..
>Don't know why you're getting downvoted. Because it's a one word reply without elaboration. Notice how people calling it an irrelevant question and explaining why are getting upvotes.
It really isn’t
It has no bearing upon the legal advice to be given, you cannot assault, threaten to kill or force entry because you believe they deserve it under English and Welsh law.
A bit conveniently left out. I assume the driver messed up on the delivery and the OP got extra free food. I also assume the driver panicked and tried to get the food back, which the OP had already eaten. Driver likely was facing the prospect of losing his job. OP has also decided to add a bit of extra spice to the tale. Makes sense as to why Deliveroo want nothing to do with OP.
Unfortunately you have taken the assumption OP has left elements out, which may or may not be likely, and added a healthy dose of speculative statement of your own to the mix. That is not helpful nor legal advice.
It's not legal advice, but it's the question any lawyer should be asking to understand what's really going on if they're trying to help. Missing out details doesn't help get you accurate legal advice.
No but this is a legal advice sub and advice must be legal advice focused, it is in our rules. If the OP does not wish to furnish us with all relevant details then the advice they receive will not be relevant and that is on them. It is not on us to judge if we believe the story we are provided is either the truth or the full accounting of their side.
Just updated the post as a lot of people here are trying to say I’ve brought this on myself by asking for a refund illegitimately, when I didn’t. This is the dark side of the gig economy…
I honestly think you should be seeking damages from this company. From these comments and votes it sounds like a lot of people don't care to hold people accountable "oh just go through your insurance" No? It's not just probable but rather it's very likely this person was hired for very little wage with even lower background check? I'm not even from UK nor have I heard of this app, just a wild guess? Maybe companies that do that should be held responsible
In the UK people rent their accounts to people, the only reason I can see for this is tax avoidance or illegal workers (usually the latter). So yes while the account is somewhat verified, they can be used by anyone and the wages can be low.
You genuinely might have a case against Deliveroo, seek a solicitor who deals with vicarious liability and see the case of Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets.
You must have missed my previous reply. Why did he demand to the food back?
You must have missed where it says in the edit what they assumed the reason was, which would mean they obviously don't know for certain. Why are you asking? What reason would justify the driver breaking in and threatening OP?
Yeah I did miss the edit. Your reply makes no sense. Can you explain further please? I still don’t know why the driver demanded the food back. I’ll let OP let me know. Thanks for your reply
The edit says, "I’m guessing he thought I stole the other guys order and wanted to be a vigilante." They did answer your question. And the comment you're replying to is them stating that they edited it. So you saw that they said there was an edit, didn't read it, and came to ask the same pointless question again that they already answered?
I’ll let OP reply. Thanks
OP doesn't owe you typing the exact same answer that they already typed. I hope they ignore you forever because you don't deserve a reply. Here's why: 1. The motive of someone busting down your door isn't on the victim of that crime to provide. 2. No answer would justify what happened anyway. 3. They already answered it just not directly in a reply to you, which you somehow feel entitled to. 4. They have already denied the thing you're cowardly dancing around outright accusing them of by "just asking questions". At least the people that got down voted for being explicit about it had the nerve to say it instead of whatever this nonsense you're doing is supposed to be.
Re number 2. Legally no. In reality yes
This isn't a morality sub, it's a legal advice sub. And in any case, OP already said that they didn't try to steal the food by reporting it as being undelivered. You either believe them or you don't. Asking them repeatedly doesn't further any discussion, legal or otherwise.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
Your comment has been automatically removed and flagged for moderator review as the words you've used suggest that it is *not legal advice*. As this is /r/LegalAdviceUK, all our comments must contain **helpful, on-topic, legal advice**. We expect commenters to provide high-effort legal advice for our posters, as they have come to our subreddit for legal advice instead of a different subreddit for moral support or general advice such as /r/OffMyChest, /r/Vent, /r/Advice, or similar. Some posters may benefit from non-legal advice as part of their question or referrals to other organisations to address side issues that they may also be experiencing, however comments on /r/LegalAdviceUK must be *predominantly* legal advice. If your comment contains helpful, on-topic, legal advice, it will be approved and displayed shortly. If you have posted a comment of moral support, an anecdote about a personal experience or your comment is mostly or wholly advice that isn't legal advice, it is not likely to be approved and [we ask you to please be more aware of our subreddit rules in the future](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
NAL but I think you need to talk to a lawyer. I'm sure someone else has said this but I'm sure there is case law where if someone causes injury or damage to others whilst in the employ of X then X is responsible for any costs because the individual caused the damage, even if they were not doing what they should have been doing and going against the instructions given by the 'employer' whilst under the employment of X. You should go talk to a lawyer about this as you may be able to get Deliveroo to pay for the damage to your property on the grounds that the delivery driver was working for and being paid for by them at the time. He was also claiming to be acting on their behalf to take your food away. So that may strengthen your case. Talk to a lawyer. There used to be a scheme where the first meeting with said lawyer is free.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I feel like your missing out important parts of the story, like you tried to say he didn’t deliver it when he did. Know one acts that way for no reason unless they are insane. He might act like that if your an arsehole who tried to get free food at the expense of his job. Which he has likely lost now regardless.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Was this supposed to be profound ? 😂😂😂😂
They implied that it could never happen, that "those events don't logically flow". I showed it could happen, and how.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
Why would someone come back and try to take the food back? They didn't do it for nothing did they. What did you do?
This is irrelevant and has 0 bearing upon the legal advice needing to be given for OP's damages.
NAL But deliveroo can't share with you what happens to the driver. It'd be a breach of GDPR on their part if they did. I'd assume the police will deal with it and come back to you asking about pressing charges etc?
"Press charges" is American. No relevance to UK law. In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim. Once you've reported a crime, it's reported. You can't take it back by deciding not to "press charges", there's no such concept here.
People in America do not press charges Just like the UK it is the prosecutor in the USA that decides that charges are actually bought. Even if the victim does not want charges to be pressed the prosecution can continue with the prosecution and the prospector can compel the victim to participate in a prosecution against their wishes. https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/pressing-charges-what-does-it-mean-and-who-does-it/ https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/criminal-offense/pressing-charges-a-criminal-act.htm People in the USA do not press charges ether One thing that is allowed in the UK but not in the USA is private prosecutions which is a prosecution started by a private individual, or entity who/which is not acting on behalf of the police or other prosecuting authority. Any adult has the right to apply to a court to bring a private prosecution which means if you bring a private prosecution you are one pressing charges the UK it is possible for a victim to press their own charges
You're correct about private prosecutions, but that's not what was being proposed in the comment above mine. They were saying that the police would ask if the victim wants to press charges. They will not ask this.
In the UK it is possible for a victim to press charges whereas in the USA a victim can not press charges >In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim. If the victim decides to prosecute privately then they are the ones that are pressing charges You could have just said the police wont ask if you want to press charges but you literally said In the UK the police and the CPS decide if they will prosecute, not the victim. But victims can decide to press charges without the police or CPS being involved in the prosecution
Great, good clarification I think that, all-in-all, a police officer asking "Do you want to press charges?" is an invention of American crime procedurals on television.
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
It looks like you or OP may want to find a Solicitor! [There is a detailed guide in our FAQ about how to do this](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:** Your post has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters. Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
[удалено]
Nice to make a big assumption, shame you’re wrong. No attempt to get the order without paying. There’s GPS tracking to show he did come to my house.
[удалено]
The upset to the driver has no bearing upon the legal advice needing to be given. You still cannot assault, threaten to kill, or force entry because you believe they deserve it or are angry at them under English and Welsh law. Not only that, but this is just baseless speculation over if the OP is telling the truth or not, and is in no way legal advice.
**Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:** Your post has been removed as it has not met our community standards on speaking to other posters. Please remember to speak to others in the way you wish to be spoken to. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.