Royal Mail Delivery To A Neighbour Opt Out Scheme !!!

[Salomina27]

What an utter disgrace it is, they just add insult to injury ....
and then charge us through the nose for this big con that RM have now become

[maplegin]

here as we work from home we ofton have the packets for the neigbours, infact the delivery people ofont now come straight to us as if the cars are not there on th 8 houses lower down the hill are not home as they all are out to work, on the whole it works fine Last week postman rang the bell & said for a change its something for you.

[bunsock]

I wonder what would happen if a seller wanted to claim from Royal Mail for a lost "Signed for" package which had been signed for by a neighbour but that the consignee states he hasn't received it?

[darklisruthven]

that would be an interesting one!

[astral276]

I wonder what would happen if a seller wanted to claim from Royal Mail for a lost "Signed for" package which had been signed for by a neighbour but that the consignee states he hasn't received it?

I would guess: If RM can legally leave such an item with another, and that person has signed for it, but the addressee claims they never got it, the addressee would have to take legal action against the person that signed for it - as they are claiming they are a thief.

There are a multitude of scenarios where it looks as though the system is flawed. RM will do what all such concerns do, make it so difficult for customers to get satisfaction that 99% will give up and go away. The odd 1% that dig in and fight they will recompense when they have no other option.

[rokins_toys]

With requring a signature, I thought by law it was the addressess who had to sign for it or another individual at that address who can also sign for it. In the past, I have received cards through the door saying they could not deliver something because it required a signature and no one was in and because I am sure it is someone at the actual address who can only sign for it, then they are not allowed to have neighbours and aliens from out of space sign for it because they do NOT live at the address the letter/parcel is intended for. I know courier firms often leave items with neighbours and have them sign for things, so it is a bit of a messed up situation. With couriers, they do it to save them coming back again as it's not like they have a local depot you can freely visit to collect something. With RM, you have local depots you can visit to collect items in such circumstances, especially if it is a recorded signed for item.

RM need to tread carefully because they cannot re-write the law in this situation. And as far as I know, no changes have been made in this area with regards to laws and legislation, RM cannot make it up as they go along, they are not FeeBay. I do not see the problem with RM just taking something back to the depot concerned and popping a card through your door letting you know it is at the depot, couldn't be delivered for whatever reason etc! This is a system they have been using for years so why screw around with a system that is already in place and works despite any periodical issues due to the incompetence of the delivery staff.

In most situations, there will not be any problems with something being left with a neighbour, and we have good neighbours boths sides, and that is the same for the majority of people. So you know nothing will get stolen. If you live in a more dodgy area with untrustworthy neighbours then I understand the concerns that many people have.

Trouble is, legally, the only person who should be signing for something is the individual themself or another individual who lives at the address the letter/parcel is intended for. Such laws/legislation are in place for a reason, to prevent possible problems like many of you are raising. So RM are just like FeeBay in someways because they are doing silly things that will only create unnecessary problems that can end up dragging on for months. RM need to get a grip on reality and stop introducing insane policies that are just going to lead to trouble down the road and they need to stop messing around with things.

We all know why they are doing this, trying to cut costs, trying to reduce staff, trying to streamline things that in reality cannot be streamlined, trying to cut out having to have parcels redelivered etc to save fuel/time etc. but in the end, they are not really saving anything as when the bantha poodu hits the fan, as it often will, RM will be forced to compensate and compensation claims will increase and due to the increase in problems, RM will not have saved any money because those who run RM are as incompetent and short-sighted as those running the country so they are creating problems, unnecessary problems at that.

[darklisruthven]

Legally I do agree that RM have opened a minefield for themselves.

[damian_steele]

That is the sticker they are sending out to those who wish to opt out of the scam. Sorry, scheme.

For a business that works in the communication sector, it would have been much better if they could have found someone to create it for them that had an ability to correctly construct a sentence.

At the moment I am wondering why items would be delivered to the delivery office and where it is that they should be returned to.

I'd suggest:

Please return to the delivery office items that can't be delivered to the addressee.

[raindropsies]

Just a thought.

Who do the items legally BELONG to whilst in the care of a delivery company?

Surely that would be the sender as the recipient has not gained ownership of the goods until they get them, so could that be a legal matter that they need to address?

[darklisruthven]

I understand that in ebays case certainly, if not in laws governing mail order and online buying in general, they consider the item to be the senders responsibility until such time as the person buying the item has recieved it.