Royal Mail....oh dear

[AdamWW]

Here's a good one.

Yet again I had cause to complain to the Royal Mail.

I eventually got an email back saying that they were too busy to reply to complaints on a reasonable timscale (wonder why that would be?) and are hoping that the problem has magically solved itself anyway. (It hasn't).

But if I still want them to consider my complaint I need to let them know by replying to the email.....which came from an address that doesn't accept incoming emails.

Quite clever really.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In a short period of time they have turned from a national institution albeit with some out of date working practices (where have we seen that elsewhere? ) to a third rate parcel courier often worse than Evri. The cause appears to be taking on contractors.

 

[Vexed]

I've never had delays over a day or two from Royal Mail before but I'm currently waiting for a couple of letters that I'd have expected to come on Wednesday or Thursday last week.

Parcels are still coming in on time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've never had delays over a day or two from Royal Mail before but I'm currently waiting for a couple of letters that I'd have expected to come on Wednesday or Thursday last week.

Parcels are still coming in on time.

I've had it in the past, Milton Keynes was notorious in the early 2000s, first class sometimes took a week. I had to delay picking up my first car because the banker's draft (remember those?) was stuck in the post. I've not had issues with letters of late though, much as I rarely get any now. Parcels on the other hand, unless they're small ones that the postie delivers they're less reliable than Evri now. I guess their core competence HR wise is managing a dedicated, employed, unionised workforce, not contractors who tend to misbehave if not very closely managed and incentivised.

 

[skyhigh]

In a short period of time they have turned from a national institution albeit with some out of date working practices (where have we seen that elsewhere? ) to a third rate parcel courier often worse than Evri. The cause appears to be taking on contractors.

They are so overwhelmed as to be totally useless. I sent a fairly expensive parcel Special Delivery to make sure it would insured. The tracking never said it was delivered and the recipient claimed it hadn't arrived. Made a claim with Customer Services who "investigated" and told me based on the evidence they had the parcel was "likely" delivered but just not scanned so my claim was denied.

And there was the time I booked a parcel collection from home. DPD turned up at about 11.40 to deliver a parcel but left it outside the front door. Royal Mail turned up at about 11.45 and rather than ringing the doorbell to check that was the parcel they were collecting just put their label on it and went. That took a lot of sorting out.

 

[Snow1964]

In a short period of time they have turned from a national institution albeit with some out of date working practices (where have we seen that elsewhere? ) to a third rate parcel courier often worse than Evri. The cause appears to be taking on contractors.

It also appears to be a weak regulator, that sets targets, with no real consequences for percentage that is outside the target.

eg A percentage of First class mail by tomorrow, but no further target or penalty if miss it, so delaying further and delivering day 7 (or 2 weeks late), is treated same missing next day. Hence why having some depots understaffed, and being able to cover holidays is seen as cost effective

 

[AdamWW]

They are so overwhelmed as to be totally useless. I sent a fairly expensive parcel Special Delivery to make sure it would insured. The tracking never said it was delivered and the recipient claimed it hadn't arrived. Made a claim with Customer Services who "investigated" and told me based on the evidence they had the parcel was "likely" delivered but just not scanned so my claim was denied.

I'd like to see them defend that in the small claims court.

But at least customer services actually got back to you, I suppose.

 

[MartinC]

I am surprised that the King still allows it to be "Royal"

 

[speedy1]

I've read reports online about missed NHS appointments, missed summons notifications etc because of extreme delays and batching by Royal Mail leading to delays of a few days up to nearly two weeks.

It seems like some wholesale changes in legislation and policy at the highest levels are required to adjust to this new reality that it is not 1960 any more, and letters simply aren't treated with any urgency?

 

[Oxfordblues]

I once placed a postcard at Preston station into a letterbox on the side of the Whitehaven-Huddersfield TPO departing at 23:15. It was delivered in Cleckheaton at 07:35. The stamp cost 4.5p. That was 1974: an altogether different world. My friend still has the card!

 

[Freightmaster]

Just seen this on my BBC news feed:

Royal Mail plans to cut 2,500 head office and support function jobs

The postal service firm wants to cut head office and other non-frontline jobs by the end of 2027.

www.bbc.co.uk

Royal Mail has announced plans to cut 2,500 head office and other supporting roles by the end of 2027 as it battles competition and falling demand for letter deliveries.

The cuts at the postal service will represent about 2% of the 131,000-strong workforce.

 

[Djgr]

Just seen this on my BBC news feed:

Royal Mail plans to cut 2,500 head office and support function jobs

The postal service firm wants to cut head office and other non-frontline jobs by the end of 2027.

www.bbc.co.uk

After the railways, the water companies, the insourcing of the Civil Service Pension scheme disaster, this needs to be on the renationalisation to do list.

 

[Buzby]

I'd like to see them defend that in the small claims court.

They do - I caused them 2 days in court, and even when staff criminality was involved, their solicitors used Postal Act fine print to body swerve their liability. The judge explained he was powerless, but agreed to reject their claim of additional costs saying we all had to pay our own.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems like some wholesale changes in legislation and policy at the highest levels are required to adjust to this new reality that it is not 1960 any more, and letters simply aren't treated with any urgency?

Letters just aren't necessary in the way they were. Important documents would be sent by Special Delivery or document courier (company internal, or something like DX*) but almost everything can be done online now. Yes, there are a few people who don't do online but they are, to be fairly crude, rapidly dying out. The NHS is what needs to modernise and stop sending appointments by letter when there are a load of better ways of doing it, not least being sufficiently organised as to make the followup appointment with you in person when you're at the previous one.

* DX is named for "Document eXchange", though they are a general parcel courier now too as that's where money is now.

 

[jon81uk]

In a short period of time they have turned from a national institution albeit with some out of date working practices (where have we seen that elsewhere? ) to a third rate parcel courier often worse than Evri. The cause appears to be taking on contractors.

I'd say they are a decent parcel courier, at least at the standard of our local Evri contractors. But Royal Mail is no longer a good mail company, all the effort goes on being a parcel courier now, not a post service.

 

[sprunt]

I am surprised that the King still allows it to be "Royal"

Does the king have any say in the matter? I've genuinely no idea, is there any law preventing me from setting up a company called 'Royal Felt Tip Pens Ltd?' What if my surname were Royal?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Does the king have any say in the matter? I've genuinely no idea, is there any law preventing me from setting up a company called 'Royal Felt Tip Pens Ltd?' What if my surname were Royal?

Fairly sure that Companies House won't let you register a limited company with the word 'Royal' in it, without the specific prior permission of the Secretary of State. Issue seems to be that using the word 'Royal' might suggest you have royal patronage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fairly sure that Companies House won't let you register a limited company with the word 'Royal' in it, without the specific permission of the Secretary of State. Issue seems to be that using the word 'Royal' might suggest you have royal patronage.

And it does indeed. No guarantee it will continue to have it long term though - there's always the chance they go to open tender for the "socially necessary" letter post service once the present contract expires.

 

[sabanda]

I had a grey customs slip arrive yesterday morning for a parcel which I paid for, and collected, last Thursday!

 

[CharlieSpotted]

Fairly sure that Companies House won't let you register a limited company with the word 'Royal' in it, without the specific prior permission of the Secretary of State. Issue seems to be that using the word 'Royal' might suggest you have royal patronage.

It does seem possible to have a 'Royal' brand, if not a 'Royal' company, as in these purveyors of fine Halal ready meals which can be found in Sainsbury's :

https://www.royalsweets.co.uk/

I'm a particular fan of the Biryani.

The company itself isn't called "Royal" anything, mind you, it's apparently Bombay Halwa Ltd.

 

[MotCO]

They are so overwhelmed as to be totally useless. I sent a fairly expensive parcel Special Delivery to make sure it would insured. The tracking never said it was delivered and the recipient claimed it hadn't arrived. Made a claim with Customer Services who "investigated" and told me based on the evidence they had the parcel was "likely" delivered but just not scanned so my claim was denied.

And there was the time I booked a parcel collection from home. DPD turned up at about 11.40 to deliver a parcel but left it outside the front door. Royal Mail turned up at about 11.45 and rather than ringing the doorbell to check that was the parcel they were collecting just put their label on it and went. That took a lot of sorting out.

I had to send an important tax return by post, so sent it 'Signed For' at additional cost (there was not an on-line alternative). I monitored the letter, saw it had been collected, but not that it had been delivered. I phone the Post Office who said they never sign for letters at tax offices, so could not prove whether or not it had been received. What's the point of the Post Office accepting and charging for 'Signed For' when they know that it will not be receipted?

 

[AdamWW]

I had to send an important tax return by post, so sent it 'Signed For' at additional cost (there was not an on-line alternative). I monitored the letter, saw it had been collected, but not that it had been delivered. I phone the Post Office who said they never sign for letters at tax offices, so could not prove whether or not it had been received. What's the point of the Post Office accepting and charging for 'Signed For' when they know that it will not be receipted?

I had something similar (not tax), and was told that when a batch of letters are delivered they only sign once for the entire batch.

But still as they had no proof of delivery they did refund the postage cost.

Not very helpful though.

 

[Ken X]

I had to send an important tax return by post, so sent it 'Signed For' at additional cost (there was not an on-line alternative). I monitored the letter, saw it had been collected, but not that it had been delivered. I phone the Post Office who said they never sign for letters at tax offices, so could not prove whether or not it had been received. What's the point of the Post Office accepting and charging for 'Signed For' when they know that it will not be receipted?

I had exactly the same experience. Put the claim in for lost post and received the same explanation. Had to recreate all the paperwork again and send a second batch. Fortunately HMRC were happy with my explanation. Got the impression even then I wasn't the first person to have problems.

I really wish they would accept documentation in electronic format like the rest of the banking and legal world.

 

[Cdd89]

In a short period of time they have turned from a national institution albeit with some out of date working practices (where have we seen that elsewhere? ) to a third rate parcel courier often worse than Evri.

Yes, and controversial opinion, this is not a bad thing.

The only thing we need of the royal mail is a commitment to (eventually) deliver to every UK address, and even that is only needed for essentially legacy reasons that we could theoretically eliminate with enough effort. Beyond that, timely delivery of letters is not essential and how they run their business and make their money is not the state's interest. Personally, I don't find that service quite that bad yet, but if it reaches that level, I will just shop elsewhere. I certainly wouldn't want any money to go into subsidising them.

 

[Vexed]

I had something similar (not tax), and was told that when a batch of letters are delivered they only sign once for the entire batch.

But still as they had no proof of delivery they did refund the postage cost.

Not very helpful though.

I read this online, so when I sent something to the DVLA recently I just got a normal 2nd class stamp and handed it in at a Post Office aksing for proof of posting (free).

On a more positive note, I exclusively use Royal Mail for what I sell on eBay (mainly random small computer parts a handful of times a year) as most of what I sell can fit in a post box so it's the most convenient. I've never had a Tracked 48 I've sent take more than 3 working days.

 

[AdamWW]

I read this online, so when I sent something to the DVLA recently I just got a normal 2nd class stamp and handed it in at a Post Office aksing for proof of posting (free).

On a more positive note, I exclusively use Royal Mail for what I sell on eBay (mainly random small computer parts a handful of times a year) as most of what I sell can fit in a post box so it's the most convenient. I've never had a Tracked 48 I've sent take more than 3 working days.

I've had lots of stuff sent to me with Tracked 24 and Tracked 48 and they have generally got through the system quickly.

Where it goes wrong is when the postman turns up when I'm out (or sometimes when I'm in) and just dumps the parcel on the doorstep.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I suppose I could live with 2nd class post taking longer than it used to BUT what horrifies me is some of my post just goes missing.
If we all know how long a letter takes then we can plan and expect - companies can allow longer for correspodance to be received.

As for 1st class, I suspect the time taken to separate the letters out from all the second class post means they are not cost effective. My Grandmother believed 1st class was a con just to get you to pay more. She used to phone up and ask when we received letters and she was not clear that 1st class was quicker.

In which case Royal Mail now delivering slower might be a plan to drive up 1st class sales, it most likely is succeeding in driving up sales of Tracked-24 and Tracked-48.

 

[DelW]

Where it goes wrong is when the postman turns up when I'm out (or sometimes when I'm in) and just dumps the parcel on the doorstep.

I had a Tracked 48 jiffy-bag size delivery due last Monday morning. I wasn't sure if it would fit through the letterbox so I stayed in for the morning. About 11am I heard the letterbox flap rattle so I looked on the mat - there were several letters and some leaflets but no jiffy bag. I thought maybe it was big enough to be a van delivery instead, but a few minutes later I got a "your order has been delivered" email. So I opened the front door, and the bag was leaning against it, in full view of the road a few feet away. It was too big for the letterbox, but would a ring on the doorbell be too much to ask, especially when the shipper has paid for tracking?

More generally, I seem to get a post delivery about twice a week at best, often half a dozen or more items in one go then nothing for four or five days. A weekly magazine which should arrive on Thursday or Friday often comes on Monday or Tuesday of the next week.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, and controversial opinion, this is not a bad thing.

The only thing we need of the royal mail is a commitment to (eventually) deliver to every UK address, and even that is only needed for essentially legacy reasons that we could theoretically eliminate with enough effort. Beyond that, timely delivery of letters is not essential and how they run their business and make their money is not the state's interest. Personally, I don't find that service quite that bad yet, but if it reaches that level, I will just shop elsewhere. I certainly wouldn't want any money to go into subsidising them.

You'd have to remove the letters monopoly to allow competition though. At present they're more like a privatised water firm.

 

[AdamWW]

You'd have to remove the letters monopoly to allow competition though. At present they're more like a privatised water firm.

Is it no longer the case that competing letter delivery companies are not only permitted in the UK but the Royal Mail is required to carry their letters for the "last mile"?

I'm sure it used to be. Though now I think of it, I'm not sure when the last time was that I saw such a letter.