Tesco Discussion Chat & Grabbits 11+ Xmas/New Year Edition

76rosie

GlitchHunter wrote: »

76rosie

Nice to meet you this morning and you'll be please to hear I found a use for the tea.

Hope your OH enjoys the guacamole and don't build him up too much else he'll end up as big as me (ugh!!).

he managed to get to 70kg once:eek:

Found amoy succelent szechaun tomato stir fry sauce barcode ends 6831 24p in L.V tesco. could swear there was 3 more boxes on top shelf. Expect that it will be in other stores.

zippydooda

jumblejack wrote: »

I'm sorry but posting things like this is going to give a minority ideas of obtaining goods by deception.

Yes, they may be better off in the short term, but at what cost?

An honest delivery guy who was trying to do them a favour by saving them a journey to the depot or having to rearrange delivery loses his job at Christmas and is doomed to picking up a giro as his future employment prospects are zero. Nice Christmas present for him and his dependants.

Stating facts about the odd dishonest delivery driver does not provide justification for honest delivery drivers losing their jobs for the mistake of being trusting.

I am personally shocked that such a thing is even being discussed.

i would never report things as not delivered when they were.
1. it saves a lot of time not having to rearrange delivery and be in for it.
2. your delivery driver will know that he delivered ok even though he may not be able to prove it.
3. ive been told by someone in the trade that certain houses get black listed when items keep going missing.
4. they are only trying to do their job the best they can.

nikki sorry your son seen the books but he could also have answered the door to the delivery as well. although it wasnt a clever place to leave them

kiddy_guy

French_Knickers wrote: »

Which totally wrecks your previous argument!!!

Its about trust and honesty...a few rogue drivers and a few dishonest customers cannot be allowed to dictate the policy for the majority of honest drivers and customers.

Absolutely - and when you show me a big retailer that works on the basis of trust and honesty, I'll show you one ripe for exploitation.

My point is (if you choose to actually acknowledge it), is that the proof of POD actually benefits both parties. Yes sometimes it doesn't work, but the comparative would be this.

If you lock your house door, it doesn't mean it won't be broken into. If you leave all windows and doors open, you're actively inviting a burglary.

The POD systems works broadly similarly, which is why retailers insist usually on signatures from over 16's and also often take pictures of the residence, and also update onthe HHT's where the item (if left safe - contradiction in terms) has been left.

From a supply chain perspective, Customer not being at home is the most frustrating thing,which is why texting, emailing, calling have all been introduced over last 10 yrs (not always successfully), but I'd rather have safe parcel in the depot than one left safe which you then claim non receipt.

mymerrywidow

afternoon all. just nipping back to catch up on last night chit chat.

zippydooda

im JEALOUSE of nikki doing her ironing. she is getting the nice warmth from it and ive now got to go out in the freezing cold and take the dogs out for a walk.;)

kiddy_guy

jumblejack wrote: »

I'm sorry but posting things like this is going to give a minority ideas of obtaining goods by deception.

Yes, they may be better off in the short term, but at what cost?

An honest delivery guy who was trying to do them a favour by saving them a journey to the depot or having to rearrange delivery loses his job at Christmas and is doomed to picking up a giro as his future employment prospects are zero. Nice Christmas present for him and his dependants.

Stating facts about the odd dishonest delivery driver does not provide justification for honest delivery drivers losing their jobs for the mistake of being trusting.

I am genuinely shocked that such a thing is even being discussed.

Edit:

Something else to consider for anyone else considering fraud (for that is exactly what this is), losing your job when you have tried to do someone a favour, in this economic climate, could push a guy over the edge...
...don't forget that your address is known to them!!!

And you don't think that they know already? Really? REALLY? People will steal (as witnessed in the rioting) petty small things. If you could get an £800 laptop for free, and you were dishonest - why wouldn't you?

You say stating facts about the dishonest, does not justify the good ones losing their jobs. The good ones get a POD. The ones who don't are being lazy or have best intentions of helping customer. The first ones deserve to lose the job, and whilst I have massive empathy with the latter, why would you expose yourself to potentially losing your job by trying to do somebody you don't know a favour?

Oh, and BTW, you might think it's the customer who is dodgy. You leave parcels on a doorstep anyone will nick them. If you as the driver lose your job as a result of doing what you thought was right,you might lose your job due to assumed theft, and then go after the recipient, you'll end up with a convistion for that. No job ever again.

Delilahh

Having gone through the last 20 pages, I can't see anything new appeared. I'm assuming the Old El Paso is now over?

Just a normal shop for me today then.

locarr

Just logged on after going out last night on my xmas lash up, 31 pages to catch up!:eek: have I missed anything!:D

French_Knickers

kiddy_guy wrote: »

Absolutely - and when you show me a big retailer that works on the basis of trust and honesty, I'll show you one ripe for exploitation.

My point is (if you choose to actually acknowledge it), is that the proof of POD actually benefits both parties. Yes sometimes it doesn't work, but the comparative would be this.

If you lock your house door, it doesn't mean it won't be broken into. If you leave all windows and doors open, you're actively inviting a burglary.

The POD systems works broadly similarly, which is why retailers insist usually on signatures from over 16's and also often take pictures of the residence, and also update onthe HHT's where the item (if left safe - contradiction in terms) has been left.

From a supply chain perspective, Customer not being at home is the most frustrating thing,which is why texting, emailing, calling have all been introduced over last 10 yrs (not always successfully), but I'd rather have safe parcel in the depot than one left safe which you then claim non receipt.

Yes, I accept its better than nothing, but I do think some common sense should be used too. Systems that are too rigid arein danger of becoming a hinderance rather than a help.

I agree fully that people ordering parcels also have a responsibility to be in when they are delivered or to actually leave alternative instructions.

French_Knickers

Delilahh wrote: »

Having gone through the last 20 pages, I can't see anything new appeared. I'm assuming the Old El Paso is now over?

Just a normal shop for me today then.

I do wish you'd change your username. Everytime I see one of your posts I burst into song and start flinging knickers at my laptop!