[Direct answer]The compensation is divided into three tiers: 1. For insured shipments, the compensation is calculated based on the insured amount (the insured clause is generally valid, but if the insured amount is significantly lower than the actual value or the standard terms fail to provide adequate disclosures, the compensation may be adjusted to the actual losses). 2. For uninsured shipments, the compensation is first determined according to the terms of the transportation contract or consignment note. If the contract stipulates "compensation based on the freight rate multiple," which is obviously unreasonable, the consignor may claim compensation based on the actual losses. 3. Under the transportation contract, the carrier bears a presumption of liability for cargo damage or shortages. The carrier must prove its exemption from liability (e.g., force majeure, the nature of the goods, or the consignor's fault) to avoid liability. In the Beijing area, disputes over lost shipments during e-commerce deliveries and returns are frequent. Retaining delivery receipts and proof of the goods' value is crucial for successful claims.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

When the seller hands over the goods to the logistics company, if they are lost or damaged during transportation, the logistics company will say, "We'll compensate you three times the shipping fee, up to a maximum of a few dozen yuan," dismissing the thousands of yuan worth of goods. If the sender has purchased insurance, the logistics company will argue, "You set the insurance amount too low." In the end, how much the sender can recover depends on the balance between the insurance amount, the contractual agreement, and the actual losses.

II. Key points of contention

First, the effectiveness and adjustment boundaries of the price guarantee clause. Second, a review of the rationality of the "double compensation for freight" clause when no price guarantee is provided. Third, the presumption of the carrier's fault and the burden of proof for exemption from liability. Fourth, the standard of proof for the value of the goods.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The first layer: The dual nature of the guaranteed value clause: The guaranteed value is the declared value of the goods by the shipper. Under the guaranteed value transportation, compensation is made according to the guaranteed amount, which is usually effective. However, if the guaranteed value differs greatly from the actual value (such as a guaranteed value of 100 yuan for a 10,000 yuan worth of goods) and the logistics company fails to provide a clear warning about "proportional compensation for insufficient guaranteed value", the standard clause may be deemed to have failed to fulfill its obligation to provide adequate notice, and the court may adjust the compensation based on the actual losses. Practical advice: Declare the value of high-value goods truthfully, and leave a record of the warning and explanation on the guaranteed value form. The second layer: Fairness review of the unguaranteed value clause: The clause on the back of the consignment note stating "no guaranteed value, compensation of three times the freight charge" is a standard clause. If the freight charge is vastly disproportionate to the value of the goods (e.g., 10 yuan freight charge for 3,000 yuan worth of goods), this clause may be deemed to exempt the carrier from its main liability and be invalidated. The shipper may claim actual losses. Review points include whether the logistics company has provided clear warnings, whether the shipper has been given the option to declare a guaranteed value, and whether the ratio of the value loss to the freight charge is reasonable. The third layer: Presumption of the carrier's fault: Under the goods transportation contract, the carrier bears liability for damage or loss of the goods unless it can prove the existence of statutory exemption clauses (force majeure, the natural characteristics of the goods, or reasonable wear and tear, or the fault of the shipper or consignee). The carrier cannot automatically be exempted from liability just by saying "the goods were lost". It must provide specific evidence of exemption, and if the evidence cannot be provided, compensation must be made. In the case of multimodal transportation and subcontracting, the contracting carrier is jointly liable to the outside world and may seek recourse from the actual carrier, without the shipper needing to concern themselves with internal division of responsibilities. The fourth layer: Proof of the goods' value: Invoices, purchase contracts, payment records, transaction prices of the same batch, and screenshots of online purchase orders and payments can all serve as proof of value. Photographing and keeping records at the time of delivery, guaranteed value records, and logistics system traces (showing "no updates after pickup") constitute a complete chain of evidence. Beijing-based courts often determine the value of e-commerce return and exchange orders based on the order payment amount combined with logistics records. Final reminder: When sending high-value items, it is essential to declare a guaranteed value and retain proof of value. In the event of a dispute, immediately fix the logistics traces and communication records to avoid "lack of written evidence".

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The first step is to insure high-value goods at their actual value, and keep the insurance declaration and the proof of value together. The second step is to collect orders, invoices, and payment records for uninsured goods to prove the actual losses. The third step is to file a written claim against the logistics company and preserve the evidence of their refusal to compensate. If no agreement can be reached through negotiation, the claimant can file a complaint or lawsuit. The fourth step is to argue in the lawsuit that the uninsured price clauses are unfair and strive to obtain compensation based on the actual losses. The main legal basis includes the provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China on the carrier's liability in transportation contracts and standard clauses, as well as the rules on compensation for lost parcels in the Interim Regulations on Express Delivery Services. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective provisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

There are three key points regarding cargo loss: 1. If insured, compensation is calculated based on the insured value (but can be adjusted if it's too low). 2. If uninsured, compensation is based on the actual loss (but this must be proven). 3. The "double the freight fee" compensation rule is not an absolute law. If the compensation amount is too disparate, the standard clauses can be overturned. 4. In cases of carrier liability, if the exemption clauses are unclear, the carrier must compensate. For disputes involving transportation contracts, you can seek resolution through legal channels.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesThe service provides a comprehensive solution, which involves e-commerce rights protection and can be combined with other services.Special services and other casesFor more information on consumer rights protection, please refer to the relevant sections.Personal injury and medical disputesFor any questions regarding the column, please feel free to consult us.Special servicesColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If I set a low guaranteed price, will the logistics company compensate me based on the lower price?

Generally, compensation is made according to the insured amount, but if the insured amount is significantly lower than the actual value and the logistics company fails to provide clear instructions on proportional compensation, the standard clause may be adjusted, and the court may award compensation based on the actual losses.

Q2: What should I do if the logistics company refuses to compensate more than three times the shipping fee even though there's no insurance for the package?

The "freight multiplier compensation" is a standard clause. If the compensation amount is disproportionately high compared to the value of the goods and is clearly unfair, the party concerned may claim that the clause is invalid and seek compensation for the actual losses. To do this, they need to provide proof of value such as the order invoice.

Q3: If the goods are lost during the logistics outsourcing process, who should I ask for compensation?

The contracting carrier assumes unified responsibility externally, and the consignor can directly contact the contracted logistics company. The logistics company will then seek compensation from the actual carrier. Internal subcontracting does not affect your claim object.

Q4: Can the carrier say "the loss of the goods is not my responsibility" to avoid liability?

No. Under the transportation contract, the carrier bears the presumption of fault liability for cargo damage and shortage, and must prove statutory exemption grounds such as force majeure, the nature of the goods, or the shipper's fault. Otherwise, the carrier shall be liable for compensation.

Q5: How can I prove the value of the goods?

Invoices, purchase contracts, payment records, online shopping orders and payment screenshots, as well as transaction prices of the same batch, can all be used as evidence. When sending the materials, taking photos of them and keeping track of the logistics process together will form a complete chain of evidence.

The above questions and answers are mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the interpretation of the law in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Business and commercial legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.