Package STOLEN by Yodel...

ThumbRemote

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I agree with the OP it is a rip off.

When you entrust a parcel into the care of a delivery service they have a duty of care and they if then lose it IMO they should reimburse you for your loss.

If you took a suit into the dry cleaners and they lost it would you not expect them to replace it? If you took your glasses into the opticians and they lost them would you not expect them to replace them?

What is the difference?

Any courier company knows they will lose and damage a small proportion of parcels. They know they will have to pay compensation for this. The cost of this compensation needs to be paid for out f the money they make from customers.

They have two options.

1. Split the fee equally across all parcels. In this case everyone pays a set 'insurance'. But what if the courier carries lots of parcels values at over £100? If you're sending a valueless sheaf of papers you'd still have to pay the insurance towards covering all those expensive parcels, making the courier cost expensive, so you'd take it elsewhere. Courier eventually goes bust due to this pricing model.

2. Offer insurance per parcel, based on the value. The 'insurance' is tailored to the value of each individual parcel. To give lots of flexibility you could even make it optional for people to pay. If they want to 'self-insure' they can - but they need to be aware that the relatively high price of insurance offered by the courier company may just be a reflection of the number of parcels they lose or damage.

It's not quite the same as an opticians or dry cleaners as neither of those are likely to lose many items, and the price differential between the cheapest and most expensive isn't likely to be as great. As a result they use option 1 for their insurance.