Actual Idiocy from the Royal Mail

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://oolonrantingintospace.blogspot.c ... -mail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Firstly thanks to the Royal Mail press office for a response at 10.30 this morning, which for a query sent on Saturday is pretty good going.
A clear unambiguous answer was given to me, I asked:

The simple question is: if a household puts a notice above their letter box saying "don't deliver to neighbours", will it be honoured?

and was told:

In answer to your specific point, the trial does not involve an "opt-out" facility.

So, secondly, apologies to Consumer Focus for suggesting they might be after cheap publicity.

The consultation document is available online, and makes interesting reading and raises some of the key points but not all. I'd urge you to read it and respond to the address included in it. (I won't put it in the body of the post, but it is on page 13 of the PDF document along with the questions.)

It is clear that the choice of neighbour would be up to Royal Mail:

Royal Mail proposes that its delivery staff will have a degree of flexibility to identify a suitable choice of neighbour who is willing to accept delivery of an undeliverable item at the time of delivery. If a suitable neighbour is identified the item will be left with the neighbour and a card will be placed through the letterbox of the addressee notifying them that an item has been left with the relevant neighbour. Royal Mail proposes that: "a neighbour can be defined as a person who lives within close proximity to the stated delivery address on the item. They may be a next door neighbour or someone who lives in close proximity."


There is no guarantee that any wishes expressed by the addressee would be respected, and the response to my question indicates the intention to ignore such expressions.

Without an opt-out this raises all sorts of problems. Even without malicious or incapable neighbours receiving packages you have issues with confidentiality: neighbours would note a signed for letter from a lawyer say, or a package with interesting return to address.

Then you have problems with neighbours acting with good intentions. With good-will I could accept a package as you are at work. If I work shifts it isn't inconceivable that it could be many days before we are both awake and in at the same time. This however isn't a killer blow: you'd learn to refuse packages and it will probably still be quicker than finding time to go to collect a package for many.

The killer is the malicious neighbour: the neighbour who takes the package and opens it, or denies receiving it. The violation of confidentiality is one problem: There is scope malicious outing of someone's political or religious views or sexuality. Consider a signed for legal documents or replacement credit card going to such a neighbour. Then there is outright theft: I've always wanted a copy of that DVD, and no I never received it. The hassle in sorting that out would be considerable, and in the meantime it could be repeating, moreover Postcomm's consultation says:

If the changes proposed by Royal Mail are ultimately accepted, whether as a contractual matter and/or in the context of revised regulatory conditions under the regime established under the Postal Services Act 2011, it appears to us to be a consequence that Royal Mail will effectively have limited its liability for any loss or damage to relevant postal packets from the point at which the item is left with the neighbour selected by Royal Mail. From that point, liability for any loss or damage to the relevant item will rest with the neighbour. The implications of that , in terms of contractual liability, liability under Royal Mail schemes, responsibility under any "essential conditions", or in the context of the relevant offences under sections 83 and 84 of the Postal Services Act 20008 are acknowledged by Royal Mail in its application.

Put simply: go to Royal Mail and they might tell you to go away. (Original draft had a ruder expression here.) Again even for a neighbour with good will this raises issues that could be considerable: do you have accidental damage insurance? How do you establish it was or wasn't broken before delivery to the neighbour? I should make clear Postcomm are asking about this issue in the consulation.

This is simply resolved by making it opt-out, or better yet opt-in.

So kudos to the Royal Mail press team, and brickbats to whoever thought this was a sensible approach.

Now to write a version of this to Postcomm.

[Tman]

So the delivery postie decides who to ask to take the package in, the neighbour has the choice to say yes or no, but the neighbour could be malicious or thieving or even a shift-worker.

That's different to now, in what way? Winker blogger...

[TrueBlueTerrier]

So the delivery postie decides who to ask to take the package in, the neighbour has the choice to say yes or no, but the neighbour could be malicious or thieving or even a shift-worker.

That's different to now, in what way? Winker blogger...

In answer to your specific point, the trial does not involve an "opt-out" facility.

At the moment we can't leave items with neighbours unless the DOM has accepted specific instructions from the receiver who nominates a safe place or neighnour, and even that is questionable.

[fishtank]

So the delivery postie decides who to ask to take the package in, the neighbour has the choice to say yes or no, but the neighbour could be malicious or thieving or even a shift-worker.

That's different to now, in what way? Winker blogger...

I think he makes that clear.
No opt-out and no liability.
At the moment if i'm dumb enough to hand a packet to a "shady neighbour" and it goes missing RM are liable because i haven't done my job properly.
In future...i will have and RM won't be.

[brunswick]

will r.mail be allowing allowing for delivery time duties to be altered to facilitate for doing this,suppose pegasus has already done so

[DGP1]

After trying several neighbours, I couldn't find one to take the packet that's going to be my line if asked

[MinisterofCucumber]

Condition 4 sets out Royal Mail‟s responsibility for meeting quality of service standards. One of the so-called “standardised measures” that is assessed is the percentage of items “delivered correctly”. Under licence condition 4.1(e):
“a letter is “delivered correctly” if it has been delivered either to the named recipient, or to the address on the letter”.

http://www.psc.gov.uk/documents/1995.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can see where these f***ers are going. Not only will this put a neighbour who signs for another's package at all sorts of risk, the main aim is to set a precedent for RM to be allowed not to deliver to the address or recipient. The next step would be communal mail boxes at the end of streets and in village centres. Deliveries to these would require much fewer posties.

:dcfo :ncfo :vcfo

[blackadder]

ministerofcucumber how could you say such things, you do know royal mail prides itself on customer service and how it looks after its staff. meanwhile in the real world...............

[chunk]

i think theres an unfair expectation on the postie to find a "good " neighbour.
just whos responsible when it goes missing?

Try to stick to those customer arrangements that you already have! dont go into the "unknown"
by knocking on random doors and thinking that rm arnt going to turn on you.
especially when packets are missing.

[MrPPatt]

At the moment we can't leave items with neighbours unless the DOM has accepted specific instructions from the receiver who nominates a safe place or neighnour, and even that is questionable.

What? My "trainer" told me that if they left a card in their window saying "Please leave any parcels with No34" then I was OK to do so, if I left a card informing them. The DOM? So I have to OK this with the DOM (not just my line manager) for every house that has such a note?

I actually asked my line-manager this after a few weeks to double-check, and he twisted and weasled like I'd asked him some embarrassing question and ended up saying "yes - but use your discretion" So that was total bull$hit???

FFS - this is the problem with little or no training - you have to rely on gossip from other employees who didn't have any propper training either.

[parcelboy]

At the moment we can't leave items with neighbours unless the DOM has accepted specific instructions from the receiver who nominates a safe place or neighnour, and even that is questionable.

What? My "trainer" told me that if they left a card in their window saying "Please leave any parcels with No34" then I was OK to do so, if I left a card informing them. The DOM? So I have to OK this with the DOM (not just my line manager) for every house that has such a note?

I actually asked my line-manager this after a few weeks to double-check, and he twisted and weasled like I'd asked him some embarrassing question and ended up saying "yes - but use your discretion" So that was total bull$hit???

FFS - this is the problem with little or no training - you have to rely on gossip from other employees who didn't have any propper training either.

I was always taught deliver as addressed Goalpost moving again til u raise a grievance RM need to go back a few years and sort their s***out my god it gets worse by the day

[Stormproof]

I don't leave any item with a neighbour and I won't leave it hidden to do the customer a favour. If something goes missing its always your fault and the customer would soon crap on you even if you've been doing them a favour for years. So 739 everything and back to the office with it.

[chunk]

This will be Royal Mails answer to all the huge amounts packets being taken back everyday thanks to us getting out 2hrs later on deliveries than 5 years ago and this new revision, delivery method making the whole thing twice as back because there is no separate driver to take out packets so we have packets in the CDV's for longer and people are not going to stay in all day waiting.

In essence its a band aid response to an all mighty f**k up which has left callers offices now drowning in undelivered packets et al everyday.

your not wrong that most parcel offices have literally run out of shelf space due to increased packets generally and rm arnt going make the callers offices bigger.
Are they are going to pressure posties into not bringing packets back?
its the cheaper option so lets guess which way the winds blowing.

[IloveMYredTROLLEY!]

At the moment we can't leave items with neighbours unless the DOM has accepted specific instructions from the receiver who nominates a safe place or neighnour, and even that is questionable.

What? My "trainer" told me that if they left a card in their window saying "Please leave any parcels with No34" then I was OK to do so, if I left a card informing them. The DOM? So I have to OK this with the DOM (not just my line manager) for every house that has such a note?

I actually asked my line-manager this after a few weeks to double-check, and he twisted and weasled like I'd asked him some embarrassing question and ended up saying "yes - but use your discretion" So that was total bull$hit???

FFS - this is the problem with little or no training - you have to rely on gossip from other employees who didn't have any propper training either.

It is my undertstanding, which may be wrong I might add, that you should not be leaving parcels with No34 unless this request is officially on record at the depot as a special instruction. Cards in the window or verbal arrangements do not comply with the current protocol and when it goes wrong it will be the postie's neck on the chopping board.

No answer at the door within one minute after knocking, "739" the item and take it back to the depot, unless there is a written instruction on the item or there is a "special instruction" on record at the depot (in which case "739" saying what you have done with the item).

The policy changed at my depot over a year ago after a "door stepping" work time learning session, but it was left to the postie's to inform customers that any longstanding informal arrangements had to stop immediately, with discipilanary action threatened against anyone who got caught disregarding the WTL. It is stuff like this that would actually make a constructive door to door for us to deliver...