Royal Mail - No Compensation (Don't Use Royal Mail)

custardy

Crabman wrote: »

There are plenty of operators who deliver to our doors. How naive to think that Royal Mail are the only entity capable of carrying out deliveries. If Royal Mail is so great, let them be sued and face the courts by members of the public, what have they got to fear? really. who delivered you letters this week then. all i had was Royal Mail. who did you get?

As you're supposedly an "ex-postie", perhaps you could explain how a parcel can become lost? supposedly? if you want help do you think insinuating Im a liar is the way to get it?

It was addressed properly and packaged securely so there is no prospect that it was "lost" or wrongly delivered. how do you work that out. a wrong delivery by its very nature is wrong. the other day i got 2 dozen rolls left outside my house door by a baker.the rolls were for a shop some 4 miles away. packaging can and does get damaged


Options:

1) It was stolen by post office staff at the start of its journey

2) It was stolen by Royal Mail staff during its journey

3) It was stolen by the postman near/at the point of delivery

Apart from the point of delivery stage (where postmen are sometimes allowed to use their own vehicles) at what other stage could a parcel be stolen without anyone noticing?
many ways,also I have and still do disagree with the use of private vehicles for mail delivery. thankfully this should be phased out soon
There is surely no way someone could walk out of a sorting centre with a parcel under their arm without someone else noticing, unless this is normal behaviour for Royal Mail staff and such behaviour is accepted by on-site management.
nobody should be carrying items out of Mail Centres but they are large operations and where theres a will.everything gets carried out of delivery offices. it just depends where its going to

Similarly it is unlikely that a post office member of staff could leave with a parcel - someone would notice. Especially the post office I used which was based inside a retail shop. no but its still possible

I'm interested to hear your thoughts as to what happens to all those lost parcels. Do Royal Mail inform the police and cooperate with the authorities when a parcel is reported lost/stolen?


authorities? RM have the capability to bring about their own court cases.
however running that dept. costs money and is tiny compared to the size of the business

now try replying without attitude

DWatts

Custardly, there are plenty of couriers (DPD, CityLink, DHL etc.) that carry out deliveries every single day - most of them much cheaper than Royal Mail. There's even some basic alternatives for sending small mail.

But the point he was making was that if Royal Mail believe in their service, then they should have to face punishment if they fail to provide that service. At the moment it's a fairly hollow promise, and their claims process leaves a lot to be desired. Not that other couriers are perfect, but they're not in a monopoly position, and RM are.

Hermione_Granger

DWatts wrote: »

Custardly,
but they're not in a monopoly position, and RM are.

A monopoly by its very definition means that there can only be one person or business providing the goods or service.
How can RM possibly have a monopoly when earlier in your post you stated that

there are plenty of couriers (DPD, CityLink, DHL etc.) that carry out deliveries every single day - most of them much cheaper than Royal Mail. There's even some basic alternatives for sending small mail.

custardy

DWatts wrote: »

Custardly, there are plenty of couriers (DPD, CityLink, DHL etc.) that carry out deliveries every single day - most of them much cheaper than Royal Mail. There's even some basic alternatives for sending small mail.

But the point he was making was that if Royal Mail believe in their service, then they should have to face punishment if they fail to provide that service. At the moment it's a fairly hollow promise, and their claims process leaves a lot to be desired. Not that other couriers are perfect, but they're not in a monopoly position, and RM are.

you are confused
Royal Mail Group has a courier arm
that is called Parcelforce
why are you giving me a list of couriers as competitors to Royal Mail?

your definition of monopoly seems somewhat skewed

DWatts

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

A monopoly by its very definition means that there can only be one person or business providing the goods or service.
How can RM possibly have a monopoly when earlier in your post you stated that

Monopoly is common term used in a business context to describe both a true monopoly (i.e. one supplier) and an essential monopoly (i.e. there are no other major businesses that send letters). During the late 90's and early 00's Microsoft was repeatedly fined for abusing a monopoly position. The EU and American courts consistently called Microsoft a monopoly yet you still had Apple and Linux technically providing alternatives. So enough time wasting with semantics please, it adds nothing.

custardy wrote: »

you are confused
Royal Mail Group has a courier arm
that is called Parcelforce
why are you giving me a list of couriers as competitors to Royal Mail?

your definition of monopoly seems somewhat skewed

Deliveries = mail and larger packages. Hence there are plenty of alternatives to Royal Mail's courier arm which, by the way, isn't limited to Parcelforce. Royal Mail also ship Standard Parcels through their standard network. You seem to be missing the point a little.

As for monopoly, see above.

custardy

DWatts wrote: »

Monopoly is common term used in a business context to describe both a true monopoly (i.e. one supplier) and an essential monopoly (i.e. there are no other major businesses that send letters). During the late 90's and early 00's Microsoft was repeatedly fined for abusing a monopoly position. The EU court consistently called Microsoft a monopoly. Yet you still had Apple and Linux technically providing alternatives so enough time wasting with semantics please.



Deliveries = mail and larger packages. Hence there are plenty of alternatives to Royal Mail's courier arm which, by the way, isn't limited to Parcelforce. Royal Mail also ship Standard Parcels through their standard network. You seem to be missing the point a little.

As for monopoly, see above.

no,these are Royal Mails competitors

http://www.psc.gov.uk/postallicencesandoperators/licensedoperators

so wheres the monopoly?
these are all licensed to deliver mail in the UK

RM carry packets but are required to deliver to every address in the UK six days a week
how many of your courier 'competitors' have the same requirement?
so how many have it and those that done. how can they be a competitor?

DWatts

Royal Mail operates a massive network in the UK. If I want to send a letter I can go to a Post Office, or go to one of the hundreds of thousands of large to small shops that sell Royal Mail Stamps, or print out a postage label from the Royal Mail website and put it in a Royal Mail postbox. If you can show me a competitor to Royal Mail that has that kind of infrastructure then I'll agree Royal Mail aren't a monopoly. Until then, it's pretty obvious they are.

Because of said infrastructure and monopoly position (or, if you like, significant and dominant market position - the term used is unimportant) they are subject to said requirements. But you seem to be suggesting that they shouldn't be accountable for it because, hey, at least they try right? So if they decide to rip off a customer and deny their claim against them for no reason, they shouldn't face any kind of comeback for that like most other couriers because at least they're kind of trying? I'm not even sure I know what your point is.

custardy

DWatts wrote: »

Royal Mail operates a massive network in the UK. If I want to send a letter I can go to a Post Office, or go to one of the hundreds of thousands of large to small shops that sell Royal Mail Stamps, or print out a postage label from the Royal Mail website and put it in a Royal Mail postbox. If you can show me a competitor to Royal Mail that has that kind of infrastructure then I'll agree Royal Mail aren't a monopoly. Until then, it's pretty obvious they are.

Because of said infrastructure and monopoly position (or, if you like, significant and dominant market position - the term used is unimportant) they are subject to said requirements. But you seem to be suggesting that they shouldn't be accountable for it because, hey, at least they try right? So if they decide to rip off a customer and deny their claim against them for no reason, they shouldn't face any kind of comeback for that like most other couriers because at least they're kind of trying? I'm not even sure I know what your point is.

so now you are saying its an infrastructure monopoly and there are competitors?
who aren't couriers as you first stated (who have infrastructure)
the ones with an infrastructure in place

so when the market was 'opened' why was there no system in place to get an infrastructure in place for a true open market?
given we are now heading towards the privitisation of RM
so you want RM to be legally tied up but are happy for there to be no competitors?

DWatts

With respect I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say. I can't even tell if you're disagreeing with me about something I said.


Edit: In fact, I don't even really care about this issue, so I'll just leave this conversation with "I disagree with what you're probably saying."

Hermione_Granger

So enough time wasting with semantics please, it adds nothing.

It adds plenty.
It's just that it doesn't add something that you agree with or that helps your argument.