Royal Mail !! What can I say??

IronWolf

custardy wrote: »

wheres the complication?
if your item exceeds the limits on one postal method,then you move to the next

http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/jump2?catId=400105&mediaId=47500706&campaignid=pip

Yes and how many people have accurate scales at home. Then you somehow have to measure accurately if your envelope is over 5mm thick.

Most of us don't have the time to queue in the post office just to send a simple letter.

custardy

IronWolf wrote: »

Yes and how many people have accurate scales at home. Then you somehow have to measure accurately if your envelope is over 5mm thick.

Most of us don't have the time to queue in the post office just to send a simple letter.

so what your saying is the method used for years,eg weight
is flawed because nobody has scales
yet people are also incapable of measuring 5mm?
so theres no method acceptable to you?
if you send a 'simple' letter then all it needs is a stamp
see how easy it is?

Torry_Quine

I kept the guide sent by Royal Mail when the system changed and use it for large envelopes and if item is thicker eg home made cards. Have never had an issue with working out correct postage.

alanq

When the new charges were introduced there were free cardboard templates available to take away from my local Post Office. I suppose that they could become inaccurate with use if the slot enlarged but it was better than nothing. AFAIK nothing similar is now available. Royal Mail suggest buying an official template from Avery but they cost £9.99 + £2.50 p&p so only likely to be of interest to a business.

https://pip.averyweigh-tronix.com/

custardy

alanq wrote: »

When the new charges were introduced there were free cardboard templates available to take away from my local Post Office. I suppose that they could become inaccurate with use if the slot enlarged but it was better than nothing. AFAIK nothing similar is now available. Royal Mail suggest buying an official template from Avery but they cost £9.99 + £2.50 p&p so only likely to be of interest to a business.

https://pip.averyweigh-tronix.com/

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Royal-Mail-Small-Large-letter-size-guide-2011-rates-/220762385803?pt=UK_Packaging_Materials&hash=item336676ad8b

plus other options

asbokid

buddy143 wrote: »

I used A5 envelope. I folded the A4 papers into half and put it in. This is exactly why I dont understand 1 1st class stamp isnt enough.

It's a moot point, but that envelope size is known as C5. It's slightly larger than A5, so as to accommodate it. As long as the stuffed envelope wasn't thicker than 5mm, it shouldn't have been charged as a Large Letter. That said, the 99p shop was selling slightly oversized C5 envelopes which technically breached the rules.

I can sympathise with the OP over the delay. I sent a legal document by Recorded Delivery. However, the intended recipient refused to sign for it, and since there was no return address on the envelope, my letter was sent to a Royal Mail processing centre in Belfast.

At the Belfast office it was officially opened to establish the address of the sender (my address). Only then, six weeks later, was the letter returned to me with a stamp on it which read: "NO RESPONSE TO P739. UNDELIVERED FOR REASONS STATED. RETURN TO SENDER".

I learned a lesson there.

Firstly, legal documents should be sent by normal, not recorded delivery. There are some people who refuse, on principle, to sign for Recorded Delivery letters. From previous experience, they have presumably learned that Recorded Delivery letters only ever bring bad news! By refusing to sign for a Recorded Delivery letter, it can proved to a court that the document was never served! By contrast, the Courts accept that a correctly addressed standard delivery letter which can be shown to have been sent will have been delivered correctly.

Secondly, always put a "Sender:" address on the back of an envelope. That would have saved weeks of time waiting for the letter to be officially opened by the Royal Mail, the sender identified from the contents, and then the letter resealed and returned to the sender.

.

asbokid

IronWolf wrote: »

Yes and how many people have accurate scales at home. Then you somehow have to measure accurately if your envelope is over 5mm thick.

Most of us don't have the time to queue in the post office just to send a simple letter.

I agree.

Precision scales are something that every household should own. The stationery company STAPLES often gives away postal scales with all new orders. They are fine for letters and small parcels but with an accuracy of just 1 gram, they are useless for weighing other things.

For accurately measuring the thickness of envelopes, a pair of micrometer calipers also comes in very useful. They are only a few pounds from places like LIDL.

The big problem I find with weighing and stamping your own parcels is trying to calculate the most efficient way to stamp them using just 1st and 2nd class stamps. These are the only value of stamps that you can usually purchase outside of Post Office opening hours.

There is scope there for some rationalisation in Royal Mail pricing. Every increment in posting price should be available using just those two stamps, IYSWIM.

custardy

asbokid wrote: »

I agree.

Precision scales are something that every household should own. The stationery company STAPLES often gives away postal scales with all new orders. They are fine for letters and small parcels but with an accuracy of just 1 gram, they are useless for weighing other things.

For accurately measuring the thickness of envelopes, a pair of micrometer calipers also comes in very useful. They are only a few pounds from places like LIDL.

The big problem I find with weighing and stamping your own parcels is trying to calculate the most efficient way to stamp them using just 1st and 2nd class stamps. These are the only value of stamps that you can usually purchase outside of Post Office opening hours.

There is scope there for some rationalisation in Royal Mail pricing. Every increment in posting price should be available using just those two stamps, IYSWIM.

but you have online access to paying for postage?

custardy

asbokid wrote: »

It's a moot point, but that envelope size is known as C5. It's slightly larger than A5, so as to accommodate it. As long as the stuffed envelope wasn't thicker than 5mm, it shouldn't have been charged as a Large Letter. That said, the 99p shop was selling slightly oversized C5 envelopes which technically breached the rules.

I can sympathise with the OP over the delay. I sent a legal document by Recorded Delivery. However, the intended recipient refused to sign for it, and since there was no return address on the envelope, my letter was sent to a Royal Mail processing centre in Belfast.

At the Belfast office it was officially opened to establish the address of the sender (my address). Only then, six weeks later, was the letter returned to me with a stamp on it which read: "NO RESPONSE TO P739. UNDELIVERED FOR REASONS STATED. RETURN TO SENDER".

I learned a lesson there.
the stamp is the standard one used at the deliveryoffice,nothing to do with the RLB
Firstly, legal documents should be sent by normal, not recorded delivery. There are some people who refuse, on principle, to sign for Recorded Delivery letters. From previous experience, they have presumably learned that Recorded Delivery letters only ever bring bad news! By refusing to sign for a Recorded Delivery letter, it can proved to a court that the document was never served! By contrast, the Courts accept that a correctly addressed standard delivery letter which can be shown to have been sent will have been delivered correctly. often companies/councils/courts will send an RD and a 1st class letter of whatever documents

Secondly, always put a "Sender:" address on the back of an envelope. That would have saved weeks of time waiting for the letter to be officially opened by the Royal Mail, the sender identified from the contents, and then the letter resealed and returned to the sender.
totally agree,its amazing how many people send stuff without it,IMO it should be a requirement that all business mail and all mail sent via a PO has a return address.
.

.............................