Don't post your bass via Parcelforce/RoyalMail

[The Funk]

That's disgusting.

[cetera]

I hope you reported him..... to your Manager and the Police.....?

[Shaggy]

Just another word in praise of Parceline/UPS – I used then specifically because of advice on this thread last week to send a neck-thru bass, no hard case, from Swansea to Northern Ireland last week, arrived in 48 Hrs no problem Total cost £38 with insurance cover for £1000 (would have been £32 for £750), and pick up from home address.

[paul, the]

[quote name='Shaggy' post='37731' date='Jul 27 2007, 11:17 AM']Just another word in praise of Parceline/UPS – I used then specifically because of advice on this thread last week to send a neck-thru bass, no hard case, from Swansea to Northern Ireland last week, arrived in 48 Hrs no problem Total cost £38 with insurance cover for £1000 (would have been £32 for £750), and pick up from home address. [/quote]

Sounds good. Thanks for the input.


How much did the bass weigh Shaggy?

[Shaggy]

[quote name='paul, the' post='37743' date='Jul 27 2007, 11:44 AM']Sounds good. Thanks for the input.
How much did the bass weigh Shaggy?[/quote]
Bass was 4.7Kg (just over 10lb), but I put some full length wooden reinforcing in the box, so whole box came to 11Kg. All booking done on line (site earlier in this thread) - I'll certainly use them again

[Dood]

Hey folks! Try not to have a company use TNT either! As they will lose your parcel!

"That's a bit cr@p isn't it?" I hear you say!

"Yes!" I reply "especially when they admit the parcel was signed into their depot and they emptied the van themselves...and it's still in there..... somewhere!"

Honestly, what sort of people get employed to work in these places? Not happy! an hour n' a half round trip to be greeted with these muppets.

[OldGit]

Well I'm still arguing with the Post Office and that's 4.5 months since the bass was killed in their care.
Maybe if everyone kept their fingers crossed and send good full moon vibes and nice thoughts at Post Office Customer Services department it may get sorted out ...
OG

[Dood]

I really hope they do.. this is disgraceful! gawwwd.. we should start a seperate rogues gallery and a tally of who is getting it wrong the most!

[Hamster]

Well, I've just had a cheque in full compensation from Interparcel. Claim was passed to their claims dept from Customer Services on 29th July, cheque arrived this morning. A happy ending but I'd rather not of had the hassle of repairing it in the first place

Hamster

[OldGit]

OK I know I'm sounding like an obsessive, or habitual displacement activity user .. I'm not really but this is almost fun ...

I got a level 3 supervisor to review the situation - sent them the results of a survey I did of PO staff proving that they all said "pack it in bubble wrap, mark it fragile and send it special delivery next day" with no mention of the cardboard box - the pivotal item "if you'd put it in a cardboard box, we'd have paid out" one person said, a few layers of management ago.
The survey results had names and call times etc and I asked the people I spoke to to make a paper record of the conversation in case the PO Customer Services claims people wanted to check it out. (because someone in the PO customer services department said "prove it" when I told them I'd already asked 6 PO people about this and been given the same "wrong" information...)

All well and good.

The reply said "thanks, we have reviewed the availability of info and are making sure PO staff can access the recommendations. However, as you didn't ask us for advice before packing your parcel the claim remains rejected"

In other words, THEY didn't give me the wrong info so it's not their fault. Even though I packed it exactly how they would have told me, had I called and asked. Doh!

So in a final attempt to resolve this I have skipped several further levels of the hierarchy of the Post Office customer services and written direct to the director of customer services for Royal Mail - ie the boss of customer services for the whole organisation.

I laid out the facts as I saw them mixed with my reaction as a customer, I quoted the Royal mail's own website back at him about the need to treat customers fairly or they will shop elsewhere and I mentioned that I was enthralling my friends with the tale, including a community of several hundred musicians who regularly buy and sell things that are then sent in parcels.

I have reminded him that an organisation is measured by the way it handles its mistakes and just mentioned that Which, The Guardian and You and Yours would be very interested in this story.

So ..
We will see

Edited September 7, 2007 by OldGit

[Dood]

I await a response from them with some eagerness now! Defintely sounds like they are doing an awesome 'back-peddling' attempt!

[OldGit]

[quote name='dood' post='56888' date='Sep 7 2007, 11:38 AM']I await a response from them with some eagerness now! Defintely sounds like they are doing an awesome 'back-peddling' attempt![/quote]

Well I hold out little hope

[The Funk]

I don't understand these company drones - it's not their money and they will not be rewarded for keeping hold of it, so WHY DO THEY FIGHT SO HARD WHEN THEY'RE IN THE WRONG?

Edited September 7, 2007 by The Funk

[skywalker]

[quote name='The Funk' post='56899' date='Sep 7 2007, 11:51 AM']I don't understand these company drones - it's not their money and they will not be rewarded for keeping hold of it, so WHY DO THEY FIGHT SO HARD WHEN THEY'RE IN THE WRONG?[/quote]

In the parcels/shipping iundustry the drones are given 5 seconbs training and made to sit by a phone, and given a manual written by a consultant. The whole thing is a recipe for disaster. The drone will (in some cases) tell you whatever comes into their head, and then the supervisor or manager drone tries to tell you what the manual says.

A/ The first drone hasn't a clue and

B/ The manager drone can't understand the manual.

The thought here is that as they have half read the manual and you haven't they can BS you all day bcoz you don't know any different. It is good that someone really takes them to task sometimes and gets them to wake up.

[lemoley]

i sent a bass off yesturday through Parcel Force

*shitting one*

[skywalker]

[quote name='lemoley' post='56906' date='Sep 7 2007, 12:05 PM']i sent a bass off yesturday through Parcel Force

*shitting one*[/quote]


Oh Dear...............

[OldGit]

[quote name='lemoley' post='56906' date='Sep 7 2007, 12:05 PM']i sent a bass off yesturday through Parcel Force

*shitting one*[/quote]

My problem is wth the Post Office not Parcel Force...
Your worry is that the max you can claim from them, should anything go wrong, is £150 and you should have read these packing guides for a guitar before hand and complied with them....

[url="http://www.parcelforce.com/portal/pw/content1?catId=25800694&mediaId=load105018"]Parcel Force packaging guidelines[/url]

Oddly it's under the heading of

[b]Prevent movement of items in transit[/b]

and says

Please ensure that multiple items within a parcel do not touch. Place contents in a firm cardboard box, closed so that it cannot come open during transit. Guitars and other musical instruments should be packaged in a hard case with sufficient internal packaging to ensure that the instrument cannot move during transit. Please note that if the instrument hard case is used as the external packaging then the case itself will be treated as packaging and not contents, as a result the case will not be covered for damage compensation. Any instrument strings should be loosened. [size=4]Musical instruments will only be covered up to £150 of compensation for loss or damage.[/size]

In reality I am sure only a very small amount of stuff does get damaged or nicked. It's just that they seem to have no idea how to handle the complaint past the initial rejection.
I suspect that out of 100 claims they reject, only 50% will appeal and then only 20% of thse will stick with it if the appeal is rejected etc until they end up with a few people each year like me pig-headed enough to hang on and fight for what is right .... pass me that cape and mask will you?

[lemoley]

well considering i bought the bass 2nd hand in Cash Converters for £115 and sold it for £130 on ebay i dont think there should be a problem

[OldGit]

[quote name='skywalker' post='56902' date='Sep 7 2007, 12:03 PM']In the parcels/shipping iundustry the drones are given 5 seconbs training and made to sit by a phone, and given a manual written by a consultant. The whole thing is a recipe for disaster. The drone will (in some cases) tell you whatever comes into their head, and then the supervisor or manager drone tries to tell you what the manual says.

A/ The first drone hasn't a clue and

B/ The manager drone can't understand the manual.

The thought here is that as they have half read the manual and you haven't they can BS you all day bcoz you don't know any different. It is good that someone really takes them to task sometimes and gets them to wake up.[/quote]


Possibly.

My view on what has happened here is that the problem is that the claims assessors are employees of the company I'm claiming against. They are probably targeted with not approving more than a certain number or value of claims per month.

Once that decision has been made - one of hundreds that day, I am sure, and by a low down person who cuts and pastes a letter from some source - then the superiors support that decision whatever. Many of the conversations I have had with them have loudly resonated with "we cannot change this decision no matter what you say, even if we see your point and agree with you" That's 1st and 2nd level managers refusing to change a decision made by a drone ....

How many commercial companies would do that? In real life the operative at the cutting edge would get a bit of retraining and advice, the process would get a review (in this case the yawning chasm between the packaging advice given to customers by front line staff and that by which the wrapping is assessed by the drone in claims) and the manager, being gifted with the wider view of business, would override the decision and pay out in the hope that the customer might return and tell mates how well the problem was resolved and how apologetic the company was...


It's old but true.. do exceptionally well and the average customer will recommend you to 5 mates, do badly and the average customer will tell 15 mates not to do business with you.

Edited September 7, 2007 by OldGit

[OldGit]

[quote name='lemoley' post='56926' date='Sep 7 2007, 12:52 PM']well considering i bought the bass 2nd hand in Cash Converters for £115 and sold it for £130 on ebay i dont think there should be a problem[/quote]

[The Funk]

[quote name='OldGit' post='56935' date='Sep 7 2007, 01:02 PM']"we cannot change this decision no matter what you say, even if we see your point and agree with you"[/quote]

Thank them for that information and tell them that you'll advise their superior that he should be sacked as he appears to have no function.

[skywalker]

[quote name='OldGit' post='56935' date='Sep 7 2007, 01:02 PM']Possibly.

My view on what has happened here is that the problem is that the claims assessors are employees of the company I'm claiming against. They are probably targeted with not approving more than a certain number or value of claims per month.

Once that decision has been made - one of hundreds that day, I am sure, and by a low down person who cuts and pastes a letter from some source - then the superiors support that decision whatever. Many of the conversations I have had with them have loudly resonated with "we cannot change this decision no matter what you say, even if we see your point and agree with you" That's 1st and 2nd level managers refusing to change a decision made by a drone ....

How many commercial companies would do that? In real life the operative at the cutting edge would get a bit of retraining and advice, the process would get a review (in this case the yawning chasm between the packaging advice given to customers by front line staff and that by which the wrapping is assessed by the drone in claims) and the manager, being gifted with the wider view of business, would override the decision and pay out in the hope that the customer might return and tell mates how well the problem was resolved and how apologetic the company was...
It's old but true.. do exceptionally well and the average customer will recommend you to 5 mates, do badly and the average customer will tell 15 mates not to do business with you.[/quote]

Another part of this is that we live in an increasingly litigious and blame cultured (is that the right phrase??) world, and the first line of the manual says ADMIT NOTHING. Blame the packing, blame the customer for incorrectly addressing it, blame anybody, but admit nothing.

[The Funk]

Try this, head all correspondence with big, bold "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS".

Might scare 'em slightly.

Edited September 7, 2007 by The Funk

[misrule]

[quote name='The Funk' post='56982' date='Sep 7 2007, 02:17 PM']Try this, head all correspondence with big, bold "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS".

Might scare 'em slightly.[/quote]
What does the Save As To Costs bit mean? I understand Without Prejudice means it can't be used as evidence, that you are just having a discussion.

Cheers

Mark

[OldGit]

[quote name='The Funk' post='56982' date='Sep 7 2007, 02:17 PM']Try this, head all correspondence with big, bold "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS".

Might scare 'em slightly.[/quote]

nah I've actually said "I'll take you to court" which is what that means ...

Actually my solicitor mate says not to do that (in another argument I'm having) as that precludes it from being used as evidence should it ever get to court ..

The Funk you are a lawyer arn't you? What's your view?