Royal Mail conning customers or not

Money_Grabber13579

user1977 said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

mr_stripey said:

Of course in most cases, stuff gets where it needs to be on time. If they don't achieve that, you can claim the postage cost back.

 

Except in this case, Royal Mail say you can’t.

But I think you already answered that in your previous post that during the strike they could not guarantee delivery for almost three weeks.

Indeed. But if they can’t guarantee delivery, they should either withdraw the service entirely or permit people to claim a refund for the difference between the special delivery cost and whatever is the nearest non guaranteed delivery service price. 

In my view, it’s not acceptable to charge the same price but just randomly withdraw some of the benefits.  A supermarket wouldn’t be able to sell packets of chicken and then say they couldn’t put any chicken in them for 3 weeks but continue to sell them as if they were exactly the same thing.

But it still offered the other benefits of being tracked and higher compensation levels. 

So you’d be happy to pay the same price for a service, even if the supplier decided to withdraw some of the benefits? For some people, I accept that the higher compensation will be the primary benefit but for others, getting there quickly will be the primary benefit. 

If I book an electrician to come and install a new light fitting and also repair an electrical socket and they only install the new light fitting, I’m not going to pay them for the repair. In this case, why should anyone pay Royal Mail for failing to deliver on time when that is one (but not the only) benefits of the service and a key selling point?

Not sure what you think the solution ought to be? I doubt they can quickly put in place some sort of ad hoc discounted price - flagging up to customers that they're not currently getting the usual guarantee seems fair enough to me.

I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to offer some kind of discounted fee service (as you say, that would be logistically difficult). However, they have a process of refunding the special delivery fee where delivery is not made on time and refunding the cost of the service during strike times in the same way they would at any other time would seem to be an acceptable solution. It is not the fault of Royal Mail’s customers that the postal workers have gone on strike…

Money_Grabber13579

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

mr_stripey said:

Of course in most cases, stuff gets where it needs to be on time. If they don't achieve that, you can claim the postage cost back.

 

Except in this case, Royal Mail say you can’t.

But I think you already answered that in your previous post that during the strike they could not guarantee delivery for almost three weeks.

Indeed. But if they can’t guarantee delivery, they should either withdraw the service entirely or permit people to claim a refund for the difference between the special delivery cost and whatever is the nearest non guaranteed delivery service price. 

In my view, it’s not acceptable to charge the same price but just randomly withdraw some of the benefits.  A supermarket wouldn’t be able to sell packets of chicken and then say they couldn’t put any chicken in them for 3 weeks but continue to sell them as if they were exactly the same thing.

But it still offered the other benefits of being tracked and higher compensation levels. 

So you’d be happy to pay the same price for a service, even if the supplier decided to withdraw some of the benefits? For some people, I accept that the higher compensation will be the primary benefit but for others, getting there quickly will be the primary benefit. 

If I book an electrician to come and install a new light fitting and also repair an electrical socket and they only install the new light fitting, I’m not going to pay them for the repair. In this case, why should anyone pay Royal Mail for failing to deliver on time when that is one (but not the only) benefits of the service and a key selling point?

If the electrician had posted on their website that due to other factors they are not able to guarantee some part of the service then yes I wouldn’t expect it. 

Royal Mail set out what they could not do due to the strike action and it was your choice to still use the service. 

I don’t understand the point you’re making - are you saying you wouldn’t expect the electrician to charge when they don’t provide part of the service but are quite happy for Royal Mail to charge when they can’t provide part of the service? 

jon81uk

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

mr_stripey said:

Of course in most cases, stuff gets where it needs to be on time. If they don't achieve that, you can claim the postage cost back.

 

Except in this case, Royal Mail say you can’t.

But I think you already answered that in your previous post that during the strike they could not guarantee delivery for almost three weeks.

Indeed. But if they can’t guarantee delivery, they should either withdraw the service entirely or permit people to claim a refund for the difference between the special delivery cost and whatever is the nearest non guaranteed delivery service price. 

In my view, it’s not acceptable to charge the same price but just randomly withdraw some of the benefits.  A supermarket wouldn’t be able to sell packets of chicken and then say they couldn’t put any chicken in them for 3 weeks but continue to sell them as if they were exactly the same thing.

But it still offered the other benefits of being tracked and higher compensation levels. 

So you’d be happy to pay the same price for a service, even if the supplier decided to withdraw some of the benefits? For some people, I accept that the higher compensation will be the primary benefit but for others, getting there quickly will be the primary benefit. 

If I book an electrician to come and install a new light fitting and also repair an electrical socket and they only install the new light fitting, I’m not going to pay them for the repair. In this case, why should anyone pay Royal Mail for failing to deliver on time when that is one (but not the only) benefits of the service and a key selling point?

If the electrician had posted on their website that due to other factors they are not able to guarantee some part of the service then yes I wouldn’t expect it. 

Royal Mail set out what they could not do due to the strike action and it was your choice to still use the service. 

I don’t understand the point you’re making - are you saying you wouldn’t expect the electrician to charge when they don’t provide part of the service but are quite happy for Royal Mail to charge when they can’t provide part of the service? 

As long as it is clearly communicated that service will be affected and refunds will not be given, it’s then the users choice whether to purchase or not. 

In this case Royal Mail said there might be disruption and they won’t refund. 

screech_78

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

mr_stripey said:

Of course in most cases, stuff gets where it needs to be on time. If they don't achieve that, you can claim the postage cost back.

 

Except in this case, Royal Mail say you can’t.

But I think you already answered that in your previous post that during the strike they could not guarantee delivery for almost three weeks.

Indeed. But if they can’t guarantee delivery, they should either withdraw the service entirely or permit people to claim a refund for the difference between the special delivery cost and whatever is the nearest non guaranteed delivery service price. 

In my view, it’s not acceptable to charge the same price but just randomly withdraw some of the benefits.  A supermarket wouldn’t be able to sell packets of chicken and then say they couldn’t put any chicken in them for 3 weeks but continue to sell them as if they were exactly the same thing.

But it still offered the other benefits of being tracked and higher compensation levels. 

So you’d be happy to pay the same price for a service, even if the supplier decided to withdraw some of the benefits? For some people, I accept that the higher compensation will be the primary benefit but for others, getting there quickly will be the primary benefit. 

If I book an electrician to come and install a new light fitting and also repair an electrical socket and they only install the new light fitting, I’m not going to pay them for the repair. In this case, why should anyone pay Royal Mail for failing to deliver on time when that is one (but not the only) benefits of the service and a key selling point?

If the electrician had posted on their website that due to other factors they are not able to guarantee some part of the service then yes I wouldn’t expect it. 

Royal Mail set out what they could not do due to the strike action and it was your choice to still use the service. 

I don’t understand the point you’re making - are you saying you wouldn’t expect the electrician to charge when they don’t provide part of the service but are quite happy for Royal Mail to charge when they can’t provide part of the service? 

As long as it is clearly communicated that service will be affected and refunds will not be given, it’s then the users choice whether to purchase or not. 

In this case Royal Mail said there might be disruption and they won’t refund. 

I agree with this. Special Delivery parcels were still being prioritised so you had the peace of mind knowing your parcel would get there in at least a couple of days. Things I had ordered and were sent 1st class took around 3 weeks to arrive.

born_again

Money_Grabber13579 said:

I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to offer some kind of discounted fee service (as you say, that would be logistically difficult). However, they have a process of refunding the special delivery fee where delivery is not made on time and refunding the cost of the service during strike times in the same way they would at any other time would seem to be an acceptable solution. It is not the fault of Royal Mail’s customers that the postal workers have gone on strike…

Given all the strikes. Who would be using the service, knowing they were on strike?

user1977

Money_Grabber13579 said:

user1977 said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

jon81uk said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

mr_stripey said:

Of course in most cases, stuff gets where it needs to be on time. If they don't achieve that, you can claim the postage cost back.

 

Except in this case, Royal Mail say you can’t.

But I think you already answered that in your previous post that during the strike they could not guarantee delivery for almost three weeks.

Indeed. But if they can’t guarantee delivery, they should either withdraw the service entirely or permit people to claim a refund for the difference between the special delivery cost and whatever is the nearest non guaranteed delivery service price. 

In my view, it’s not acceptable to charge the same price but just randomly withdraw some of the benefits.  A supermarket wouldn’t be able to sell packets of chicken and then say they couldn’t put any chicken in them for 3 weeks but continue to sell them as if they were exactly the same thing.

But it still offered the other benefits of being tracked and higher compensation levels. 

So you’d be happy to pay the same price for a service, even if the supplier decided to withdraw some of the benefits? For some people, I accept that the higher compensation will be the primary benefit but for others, getting there quickly will be the primary benefit. 

If I book an electrician to come and install a new light fitting and also repair an electrical socket and they only install the new light fitting, I’m not going to pay them for the repair. In this case, why should anyone pay Royal Mail for failing to deliver on time when that is one (but not the only) benefits of the service and a key selling point?

Not sure what you think the solution ought to be? I doubt they can quickly put in place some sort of ad hoc discounted price - flagging up to customers that they're not currently getting the usual guarantee seems fair enough to me.

I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to offer some kind of discounted fee service (as you say, that would be logistically difficult). However, they have a process of refunding the special delivery fee where delivery is not made on time and refunding the cost of the service during strike times in the same way they would at any other time would seem to be an acceptable solution. It is not the fault of Royal Mail’s customers that the postal workers have gone on strike…

But where it's inevitable that the items won't be delivered on time, a full refund would leave RM providing the insurance and tracking free of charge - I can see why they might decide that isn't sustainable.

user1977

born_again said:

Money_Grabber13579 said:

I wouldn’t necessarily expect them to offer some kind of discounted fee service (as you say, that would be logistically difficult). However, they have a process of refunding the special delivery fee where delivery is not made on time and refunding the cost of the service during strike times in the same way they would at any other time would seem to be an acceptable solution. It is not the fault of Royal Mail’s customers that the postal workers have gone on strike…

Given all the strikes. Who would be using the service, knowing they were on strike?

Those who want the insurance and/or tracking, or who have a legal need to send something via the service.