Boots Advent calendars destroyed by RM duo to nail varnish

marliepanda

Mateus109 wrote: »

The only prohibited item in the parcel was the nail varnish (one 10ml bottle in each parcel). RM confirmed that the rest of the items were fine. They said that if she'd removed this item from each parcel, the parcels would not have been stopped and destroyed.

Which calendar is it?

As stated twice, the current sold out £38 one, with a £148 value, has three bottles in of 4ml each.

If it's not this one, which is it?

Mateus109

marliepanda wrote: »

Which calendar is it? As stated twice, the current sold out £38 one, with a £148 value, has three bottles in of 4ml each. If it's not this one, which is it?

Interesting, it is the one you refer to. Sorry, I was simply going on the printed report RM gave us: "1 x 10ml Nail Varnish" (which was followed up by a phone call from us to RM). The contents, according to Boots' website, is below. Which is the nail varnish?!

No7 Lip Crayon Delicate Pink 1.4g
No7 Mini BB Lip Blink Pink 5ml
No7 Shine & Tint Lip Gloss 4ml
No7 Skin Illuminator Peach 10ml
No7 Stay Perfect Nail Colour 4ml Mememe
No7 Gel Look Shine 4ml Pillarbox
No7 Nail Effects Sun Rays 4ml
No7 Mini Eye Shadow 1.5g top shade moonlight shadow
No7 Mini Eye Shadow 1.5g bottom shade forest fruits
No7 Extravagant Volume Waterproof Mascara Black 7ml
No7 Lovely Lashes Mascara Black 7ml
No7 Stay Perfect Amazing Eyes Pencil Bronze 1.2g
No7 Stay Perfect Amazing Eyes Pencil Black 0.8g
No7 Stay Perfect Amazing Eyes Pencil Brown 0.8g
No7 Eye Lash Curler
No7 Smokey Eye Brush
No7 Airbrush Away Primer 10ml
No7 Beautiful Skin Eye Make Up Remover 30ml
No7 Radiance Revealed Exfoliator 15ml
No7 Youthful Eye Serum 7ml
No7 Protect & Perfect Intense Advanced Intense Day Cream 25ml
No7 Protect and Perfect Intense Advanced Night Cream 25ml
No7 Protect & Perfect Intense Hand Cream Day 10ml
No7 Beautiful Skin Blissful Body Wash 50ml
No7 Beautiful Skin Perfecting Body Polish 50ml

marliepanda

The 5th, 6th and 7th items on that list are nail varnish products.

Mateus109

marliepanda wrote: »

The 5th, 6th and 7th items on that list are nail varnish products.

OK, thanks. I guess RM's report should be read as "one lot of nail varnish goods to a total of approx 10ml", rather than 1x10ml bottle.

Anyways, the damage is done. Time to move on. (Still very annoying though!)

custardy

For anyone else. This basic poster should be up in all PO's



Little bit more info

custardy

Mateus109 wrote: »

Where's the deterrent now? The parcel was attempted to be sent! My girlfriend is serious p155ed off, very angry and very very upset. If RM had allowed her to collect the parcel (even if it meant driving across the country and paying a high fee) at least she's get £100 worth of Christmas presents back. Either way she'd never try to send the parcel again but at least Christmas wouldn't have been ruined! The parcels could have been delivered in person by her when visiting the relatives in the New Year (as long as the nail varnish was placed in a plastic bag in her hand luggage). I still think RM should give customers the option to collect impounded goods for a fee, especially when the offending item was 2x single 10ml bottles of nail varnish within, a claimed, 2x £148 collection of non-prohibted Boots goods.

Also, both large parcels had the Boots logo in large print on all sides. Why didn't the RM clerk think/ask if they contained nail varnish!? My girlfriend is someone who prides herself in always following rules/laws but she never thought to check whether a 10ml bottle of nail varnish was on the prohibited list (because she often carries nail varnish in her hand luggage).

So how much would the fee be?

powerful_Rogue

Mateus109 wrote: »

Where's the deterrent now?

Would you send the same parcel again? If not, then thats the deterrent.

Mateus109 wrote: »

but at least Christmas wouldn't have been ruined!

Oh come on.

Mateus109 wrote: »

Also, both large parcels had the Boots logo in large print on all sides. Why didn't the RM clerk think/ask if they contained nail varnish!?

Much easier for customers to read the notices and declare what they have, rather then the clerks having to memorise the itinerary of every store.

JP08

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Much easier for customers to read the notices and declare what they have, rather then the clerks having to memorise the itinerary of every store.

We're talking about the poster posted above, right? You really read that every time you go in and send a parcel (because it might have changed)? Bet you read terms and conditions from end to end every time too.

Also, can you imagine the queues if everyone read (and re-read to check for changes) every time they sent a parcel ?

ThumbRemote

custardy wrote: »

But get your goods back with little penalty.
What are you making the fee?

marliepanda wrote: »

It's not theft.

They clearly broke the rules for sending and unsafe item, and now they've lost it.

If you have prohibited goods confiscated at an airport, they're not stealing them.
They are being disposed of, by selling them.

You give up ownership when you try and send goods that are classed as unsafe.

pulliptears wrote: »

Exactly. Why should RM pay out to return to sender when the sender has ignored the postage rules?
By auctioning the goods they get a revenue which keeps the wheels turning, I suspect if they didn't do it they would have to find other ways to raise that revenue and costs to the consumer would go up.

Got to love all the posters on here who think it's quite acceptable for Royal Mail to keep someone's parcel, then sell it themselves for a profit.

Yet if someone posted on here about Royal Mail making a mistake and misdelivering a parcel to them, they'd be up in arms at the suggestion the recipient could keep it and sell the contents.

sheramber

Mateus109 wrote: »

Where's the deterrent now? The parcel was attempted to be sent! My girlfriend is serious p155ed off, very angry and very very upset. If RM had allowed her to collect the parcel (even if it meant driving across the country and paying a high fee) at least she's get £100 worth of Christmas presents back. Either way she'd never try to send the parcel again but at least Christmas wouldn't have been ruined! The parcels could have been delivered in person by her when visiting the relatives in the New Year (as long as the nail varnish was placed in a plastic bag in her hand luggage). I still think RM should give customers the option to collect impounded goods for a fee, especially when the offending item was 2x single 10ml bottles of nail varnish within, a claimed, 2x £148 collection of non-prohibted Boots goods

Also, both large parcels had the Boots logo in large print on all sides. Why didn't the RM clerk think/ask if they contained nail varnish!? My girlfriend is someone who prides herself in always following rules/laws but she never thought to check whether a 10ml bottle of nail varnish was on the prohibited list (because she often carries nail varnish in her hand luggage).

If it had been allowed she would have to ahve gone to Belfst to collect it- that is where the these parcels go.