Parcelforce 'Clearance fee'

fwor

Steph_W wrote: »

Funny how postwatch allowed Royal Mail to double their clearance fee recently isn't it considering they are only now asking RM to prove it is legal.

Aren't you completely missing the point that the OP was making?

I thought his point was ~not~ that the clearance fee was illegal, but that it was illegal for RM to withhold your "goods in transit" until you pay it.

JohalaReewi

fwor wrote: »

Aren't you completely missing the point that the OP was making?

I thought his point was ~not~ that the clearance fee was illegal, but that it was illegal for RM to withhold your "goods in transit" until you pay it.

That's what I thought too. The OP is claiming that it is illegal for Parcelforce to hold on to your goods until you have paid the duty and admin fee.

RAH_3

Brooke_Daver wrote: »

Plenty of businesses only release people's goods when the account has been settled.

Those would be goods that belong to the companies UNTIL the account has been settled by the purchaser.

Here we are talking about goods that belong to the customer already - they have already been fully paid for and are 100% YOUR property.

fwor wrote: »

Aren't you completely missing the point that the OP was making?

I thought his point was ~not~ that the clearance fee was illegal, but that it was illegal for RM to withhold your "goods in transit" until you pay it.

I would say to this comment about the fees being legal. Yes they are legal, but are they representative of the costs involved? THAT was the argument against the excessive bank charges that has now caused such a backlash.

Banks :- Charge £25 for automatically printing a letter and posting it - no human interaction involved at the bank.

Parcelforce :- Charge £8 - 13.50 for what I assume is an automated electronic transfer of funds triggered by HMRC's computers once HMRC decide the level of VAT/Import/Excise duty - no human interaction by Parcelforce with the individual transaction.

OK - so PF need to cover the cost of delivering the parcel to the customer, but the customer has already paid for delivery to their address, and PF should reclaim the money via the 'Universal Postal Union' Terminal Dues. The same way a carrier from the US would handle the delivery if I sent something there - I pay the UK carrier (potentially a lot of money to RM to send something to California, even though they only have to get it as far as Heathrow).

smcaul

Rah, there is an awful lot more involved in customs clearance of an item, hence why the cost, it is certainly no fully automated process - I would think the cost is very representative of the work involved.

I would also challenge your point about the item being the property of the purchaser - it is normal that the ownership of the property does not pass to the purchaser until delivery - at least this was always the way when I was in parcels.

Sterlingtimes

smcaul wrote: »

Rah, there is an awful lot more involved in customs clearance of an item, hence why the cost, it is certainly no fully automated process - I would think the cost is very representative of the work involved.

It's absolutely reasonable to have to pay for an end-to-end service, but the cost of the service ought to be predicable because it affects the purchase decision. I ended up this week paying £50 for £50 purchase from Eddie Bauer in the USA.

The brokerage charge of £14 is far more expensive than the postage. If this were charged as a front-end levy then we would know where we stood.

custardy

a lot of USA carriers offer a full package including customs fee's(the likes of UPS offer this)
so you have ther option to do it this way.
given the items and charges are available on the customs site you can see whether customs charges are applicable and key in a clearence fee before purchasing if this is a deciding factor

Rafter

custardy,

If I pay postage from the US I expect that is the total cost I will have to pay for carriage.

I expect customs to charge me VAT and duty if applicable and to bear there own costs for collecting and processing my payment.

Just because my parcel is intercepted by customs, I should not expect to pay a different charge depending on the carrier which can be totally disproportionate to the value of the goods.

Parcelforce should spread any additional costs over all the parcels from the US and not just mine.

This is blatantly anti-competitive since parcelforce can undercut other carriers from the US and then charge extra in the UK.

I hope they do lose the case and think this is worthwhile use of police time. 1000's of customers being ripped off is not something that should be overlooked. It is corrupt.

R.

custardy

you realise ALL(including those from companies outside the uk like UPS) couriers charge a clearence fee in the uk?
you realise customs decide which items are charged?

Steph_W

fwor wrote: »

Aren't you completely missing the point that the OP was making?

I thought his point was ~not~ that the clearance fee was illegal, but that it was illegal for RM to withhold your "goods in transit" until you pay it.

Er nope, the original poster was CHRISUP who was suprised he received a clearance fee from PF, how can I miss that???

My comments were aimed at the 'suddenly so quiet' Geolabuk, who, if you check his first post on this thread comments that the clearance fee is not legal.

My response was that I am suprised to see that Postwatch are suddenly questioning the legality of such charges since the charges are governed by Postcomm.

Anyway since the lovely Geolabuk is not here to say any different, I will assume that Postwatch told him to go and waste somebody elses time!!:D

smcaul

Rafter wrote: »

custardy,

If I pay postage from the US I expect that is the total cost I will have to pay for carriage.

I expect customs to charge me VAT and duty if applicable and to bear there own costs for collecting and processing my payment.

Customs do, but they choose to engage the services of the courier to do it on their behalf, take it up with C&E.

Just because my parcel is intercepted by customs, I should not expect to pay a different charge depending on the carrier which can be totally disproportionate to the value of the goods.

well take it up with customs, they decide on the duty rates of each item.

Parcelforce should spread any additional costs over all the parcels from the US and not just mine.

Why? What makes you so special that everyone else should subsidise your purchases - do you do the same when you go into a shop? do you expect those just looking to pay for part of your purchase?

This is blatantly anti-competitive since parcelforce can undercut other carriers from the US and then charge extra in the UK.

They charge the market rate, in fact they are cheaper then many couriers for their clearence fees, I suggest you phone a few up and see what their prices are. Also, it is down to the courier in the US to decide who their partner in the UK is, they do not have to choose PF.

I hope they do lose the case and think this is worthwhile use of police time. 1000's of customers being ripped off is not something that should be overlooked. It is corrupt.

R.

Highly unlikely to happen as it is down to C&E and as they have more powers then the Police, it is highly improbable!