Royal Mail worker `demands baby’s signature’

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ature.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A pensioner has complained that a postal worker refused to hand over a parcel to him unless his nine-day-old baby granddaughter signed for it.


By Richard Savill
Published: 1:08PM GMT 06 Nov 2009

John Berry, 70, said he was startled when he was told by the worker at a sorting office that he could not pick up the package on behalf of his new-born granddaughter, Amber.

The retired aerospace engineer cycled to the depot in Cheltenham, Glos, after a postman dropped a card through his letter box to say a package was waiting for the infant.

But when he arrived he was told that only Amber could sign for it because her name was on the parcel.

“It was absolutely ridiculous,” said Mr Berry, who has lived in the same house in Cheltenham for 43 years.

“I was frustrated because I had many forms of identification on me, including my driving licence, which proved I lived at the address on the parcel.

“He still wouldn’t allow me to take the package claiming that Amber needed to sign for it herself. I told him she was a baby but he kept persisting.”

Mr Berry’s wife, Hazel, 65, a civil servant, said that when she complained, Royal Mail cited data protection law. “This country has gone stupid, there is red tape everywhere," she said.

Amber was born weighing 6lb 10oz to the Berry's son Matthew, a builder, and his wife Charlotte. The package contained a gift from a friend in Australia.

A Royal Mail spokesman said that as John Berry was not the named person on the package, or the card, he would have needed to produce formal identification that had both his name and address on it, such as a driving licence, passport or bank book. A signature would not then be needed.

The spokesman added: “We are sorry to learn about the difficulties experienced by Mr Berry and apologise for any inconvenience caused. His complaint is being investigated by the local delivery manager.”

He said arrangements had been made to re-deliver the package which arrived yesterday (Fri).

[delboy]

Some jobs worth behind the counter, thinking they are king of RM...

[not me]

Some jobs worth behind the counter, thinking they are king of RM...

we had someone in our office complain as there were not asked for ID
he comes in 6 days a week to collect from his PO box but lodged a formal complaint that he could have been anyone

[Stormproof]

Rules are rules and he may of been another 'mystery shopper' for RM, if you don't do your job right you get the gooner. When I worked in callers I let people collect packets for other people if they showed me their ID and some sort of ID of the person they are collecting for, as stated on the P739.

[opgpat]

"A Royal Mail spokesman said that as John Berry was not the named person on the package, or the card, he would have needed to produce formal identification that had both his name and address on it, such as a driving licence, passport or bank book. A signature would not then be needed."

Well the guy did that Mr RM spokesman and he was refused the item!

I quote from our p739 April 09
"If someone's collecting on your behalf, they'll need to provide proof of your identity". So the RM spokesman got it wrong, the guy in callers office followed guidlines on card and without ID this baby aint gettin no more packets!

[oneweepostiee]

that boy has he making off a boss

[bitchface]

listen carefully,i shall say this only wonce....

WE DELIVER TO ADDRESSES NOT NAMES.

the fricking jobsworth is another old school idiot, no doubt that thinks he knows whats what,but in reality is a cock
they are all over my office..

opps almost forgot,according to the courior ,me arnt supposed to accept a signature off of anyone under 18