Recorded Delivery problems

[h8_Halifax]

i posted a recorded delivery letter to our friends at Lowell. the royal mail trace facility quickly showed that it had been delivered the following day. it also mentioned that the epod (electronic proof of delivery) might not be available for 5 days. after 5 days its status changed from the "wait 5 days" message to "Sorry, an electronic proof of delivery is not available for this item." so i rang the number shown on the web site and was told to wait 8 days. after the 8 days i spent 3 further days trying to get through to the same number without luck.

 

by this time, exactly the same thing had happened to a second letter, posted just a week after the first, so i wrote to the royal mail. since then i've had a third letter (the first of my 12+2 letters) go from "wait 5 days" to "not available".

 

although i've had an acknowledgement from RM, i still don't have any epods.

 

has anyone else had problems getting epods for letters to financial "institutions"?

does the Royal Mail Recorded Delivery system have an intrinsic problem?

is there an alternative to recorded delivery that actually works?

has the royal mail got some sort of deal not to produce epods various financial "institutions"?

must we have proof of delivery for the series of CCA letters?

[JonCris]

I have always used 'Special' Delivery which you can time & track on line

 

Are you writing to their full postal address or a box no? If a box no. get their full postal address from the PO to use before you next write

[rory32]

This is from the Interpretation Act regarding service by post.

7. Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expression "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

The Royal Mail state it's delivered. Therefore it is.

[h8_Halifax]

joncris: po box. i'll do that in the future. thanks.

 

This is from the Interpretation Act regarding service by post.

The Royal Mail state it's delivered. Therefore it is.

cheers rory. i have saved the RM delivered status screen as a jpeg.

 

just a thought, after reading your quote, it would seem to me that having a proof of posting would legally be just as "good" as recorded delivery as the posting office stamps that the letter was posted to a specific address.

what do you think? ... it would save the additional recorded delivery fee.

 

thanks again both of you.

[rory32]

Proof of posting is sufficient, but recorded delivery removes any wriggle room on the part of DCA's, etc. Often it is denied that letters have been received.

[h8_Halifax]

the third letter in this series (red debt/lowell 12+2) now has an epod

- although the name of the person who signed for it looks very much like mine but with something quite unintelligible at the end.

 

i wonder if my complaint has caused the RM to actually do what their customers are paying for? (at least with Red Lowell)

[Michael Browne]

RD's to large companies are often delivered in bulk and only receive a single signature for the whole lot, so a screenshot of 'RM Delivered' is a good idea

[h8_Halifax]

RD's to large companies are often delivered in bulk and only receive a single signature for the whole lot, so a screenshot of 'RM Delivered' is a good idea

 

i can see that it must be tempting for RM to do that. however, i've now seen in other threads that some companies have used the lack of a specific signature as proof that the letter was not delivered. someone even said that had stopped using recorded. to get to my point, if we are only getting half a service then shouldn't we get a discount when we write any company that the RM can't be bothered to complete the contract for?

[robcag]

In my view the RM recorded delivery service is very poor in so far as I very rarely see an EPOD for letters I send, in fact I can't remember the last time I saw one. Occasionally the letters even go missing.

 

The Special Delivery service (guaranteed) is not perfect either. I've seen a few of the ones I've sent in the past few months with no signature available online, and even when following up using the (free/included) written confirmation I've had a reply along the lines of "We confirm the item was delivered but we do not have a signature".

For printed proof requests see: http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/content2?catId=13900163&mediaId=15100173

 

So just what are we paying RM a price premium for?

 

Rob

[tomterm8]

Legally, as Rory has said, a first class stamp with proof of postage is entirely sufficient.

[h8_Halifax]

thanks tom, i think that's what i'll be doing from now on.

 

however, as far as the RM is concerned:

how does a mass complaint to the RM Ombudsman sound?

does paying for a signed delivery constitute a contract? if so, when the RM don't get that signature, are they breaking that contact and would contacting the TS be appropriate?

 

sorry, but i feel we've all been ripped off and we ought to be able to make them do what's being paid for.

[barracad]

i can see that it must be tempting for RM to do that. however, i've now seen in other threads that some companies have used the lack of a specific signature as proof that the letter was not delivered.... if we are only getting half a service then shouldn't we get a discount when we write any company that the RM can't be bothered to complete the contract for?

 

Even when a signature is obtained in bulk it will specifically state which item numbers are being signed for so you are getting a signature for your item, so you are not only getting half a service if you do indeed get a copy of the signature - the fact that they have also signed for several other items at the same time is irrelevant.

 

 

does paying for a signed delivery constitute a contract? if so, when the RM don't get that signature, are they breaking that contact and would contacting the TS be appropriate?

 

No. The Recorded Delivery service is provided under the Postal Services act 2000 and is not a contractual service. No contract is formed when you send or receive any such item.

[h8_Halifax]

Even when a signature is obtained in bulk it will specifically state which item numbers are being signed for so you are getting a signature for your item, so you are not only getting half a service if you do indeed get a copy of the signature - the fact that they have also signed for several other items at the same time is irrelevant.

with respect, out of the three items i've posted recently i've only got 1 signature. without a signature that seems like only half of what i thought i had paid the extra for.

 

No. The Recorded Delivery service is provided under the Postal Services act 2000 and is not a contractual service. No contract is formed when you send or receive any such item.

so a mass complaint to an ombudsman then?

name and shame them on watchdog?

[barracad]

with respect, out of the three items i've posted recently i've only got 1 signature. without a signature that seems like only half of what i thought i had paid the extra for.

 

Well that may be, but I was responding specifically to your comment about the signature being taken along with other items, rather than no signature taken at all.

 

so a mass complaint to an ombudsman then?

name and shame them on watchdog?

 

If you think it will make a difference then go for it. Personally I think the best thing to do would be that if you have an item where a signature is not obtained, complain and get a refund. You will in fact find that rather than send you a cheque for the 70p you paid, they'll send you a book of stamps which covers the fee several times over. If there are indeed a lot of occasions where the signature is not being taken and they're losing money due to the amount they're paying out, then they'll do something about it.

[h8_Halifax]

i've now received my book of 12 first class stamps - for two missing signatures. if i'm reading barracad's post correctly it would seem that the moral of this story is that you should write a seperate letter to complain about each missing signature so that you get a book of stamps per complaint.

 

 

p.s.

do you really think that the RM would even notice the financial side of sending a book of stamps to the very few people who can be bothered to complain?

if they did notice the costs i think they'd be far more likely to just close a few more post offices.

[h8_Halifax]

Well that may be, but I was responding specifically to your comment about the signature being taken along with other items, rather than no signature taken at all.

sorry but you seem to misunderstand.

the RM always get a signature, or so they they claim, for Recorded & Special Delivery, HOWEVER, when the signature is for a bulk delivery that signature is not shown on the individual items epods.

surely if just one signature is obtained for more than one item then why not simply display that signature on all the epods that were being signed for? is that such a "wild" idea? after all, if i, say, won a comp to spend a few hours with the stars of my favourite group, football team, whatever ... and during that quality time i asked for their autographs, how happy would i be if one of them said "i'll sign for everyone"?