Whats the point of special delivery?

nanker

thanks custardy for clarifying that RM cannot allow items to be opened before delivery is complete and that delivery is not complete until signed for.

this means that RM is not suitable to me, or anyone else, who wishes to send valuable items as i take the view that when signed for, it means the correct goods have been received by the recipient. i do this for my customers protection as well as my own.

i wonder how much business would be lost by RM if senders were aware of this situation? as i say, other companies allow the recipient to do this.

mpython

nanker

I presume you're going to find an alternative carrier now for your needs? When you've found one, can you post it & here and let us all know?

My firm spends a very large amount of money with most of the couriers inc RM, and their T&Cs on this point about signing before inspecting the contents are, by & large, all the same (happy for anyone to correct me). Maybe you've spotted a gap in the market and can start a company to fill it?

custardy

RD isnt suitable for valuable items anyway. £34 max
i dont know what you are expecting from RM.

most large companys(carphonewarehouse comes to mind)
just seal and mark their SD items as to be refused if the bag is damaged or the seals broken

imagine the scene.
postie comes back with an SD item open saying customer refused it as the order is incomplete.
who proves this to be the case?
what if the company say everything was there? do you think they will put any weight in what a postie says?
what does a foot postman do with this item now?
post office counters will not accept a damaged SD item for return to the delivery office.

the way RM is set up means there is no ambiguity over open mail.a postie should never have open mail on delivery.
if mail is damaged at the sorting stage then it should be sealed in official damaged mail bags before leaving the office.

if someone tries to return opened mail to me on delivery i refuse it.
im leaving myself wide open returning with opened letters

KILL_BILL

Whenever i receive something i always scrawl - item not checked in a signatire form so that it appears that im siging for it

custardy

and if it was delivered by me you wouldnt be getting it until i had a legible signature
many times ive had to hand the card back and ask for a legible signature

RadoJo

I do see why the RM cover is limited, otherwise what would stop someone taking out insurance, sending an empty envelope, and then claiming there were items of value in there. However, the case stated by Bclark is exactly what RM can do - the package had been tampered with, so the sender can make a claim as something happened to the contents whilst in transit.

I'm not really sure why Royal Mail would insure someone against being ripped off by another company - if the package doesn't contain what it should and it isn't Royal Mail's fault, why shoud they take responsibility? Similarly, if the package does contain what it should, but is damaged by Royal Mail, then they have a claims process for items sent by special delivery.

There is no system which can guarantee 100% that nothing untoward would happen to your item - even if you took it yourself, and were mugged, or had your car stolen on the way, there are things that can go wrong.

advantix

I always thought that signing for something as "unchecked" carried no legal weight as it is irrelevant, you are only signing that you have received a package/letter/parcel/whatever. You are not signing for the contents.

Pennywise

custardy wrote: »

and if it was delivered by me you wouldnt be getting it until i had a legible signature
many times ive had to hand the card back and ask for a legible signature

Well, I for one wouldn't give you a legible signature - there is no legal requirement for one and mine is certainly not recognisable as my name. I do however write my name properly on the card where it says "print name". In law, the "signature" needs be nothing more than the "mark" of the person - an "X" or a squiggle is just as legally binding as a legible signature. In fact, in these days of ID theft and security, I would have thought that it would be in everyone's best interests to adopt a signature that is unique.

custardy

Pennywise wrote: »

Well, I for one wouldn't give you a legible signature - there is no legal requirement for one and mine is certainly not recognisable as my name. I do however write my name properly on the card where it says "print name". In law, the "signature" needs be nothing more than the "mark" of the person - an "X" or a squiggle is just as legally binding as a legible signature. In fact, in these days of ID theft and security, I would have thought that it would be in everyone's best interests to adopt a signature that is unique.

i said legible.it doesnt have to be the signature you use in day to day matters ,does it?

KILL_BILL wrote: »

Whenever i receive something i always scrawl - item not checked in a signatire form so that it appears that im siging for it

note i was replying to this post where it was stated 'not checked' was used in place of a proper sig.


so would you be happy if you sent an item and i accepted not checked as a recieving signature?