I want to write this with plenty of expletives injected into each sentence as adjectives or nouns. But, let’s be civil on here.
Singpost took their own sweet time to reply me. Four simple questions that requires four simple answers. It does raise another issue though.
They emailed me:
Dear Mr Robert Sim,
We apologise for the inconvenience caused. We have investigate the situation and have advise the courierman incharge to follow strictly SingPost Procedure. Normally courierman should leave a failed advise slip which you can call the hotline at 18002225777 to request for redirection to Post Office for collection or redelivery at your preferred timing. The receipient need to signed the package and courierman need to bring back the signed consigment note to the delivery based. We sincerely apologise for this bad experience you went through.
Once again, we thank you for your feedback as this help us in trigerring our service lapse and work to improve to serve our customer better.
Customer Service Officer
Customer Service (Business Division),
Singapore Post Limited (Reg No. 199201623M)
Note: Other than the [name redacted] portion, this extract is in its entirety. Now, the glaring language errors aside, there are points to note.
- The officer wrote that the signed consignment note must be brought back to the delivery base. The consignment note is with me, or at least the copy is. The copy is unsigned.
- In the previous blog entry, I have noted that no one in my family had signed the note, since no one was there to receive the parcel.
- In the same entry, I have also noted that the delivery status had been updated and even backdated.
Now my assumption is that the person updating will require a signed consignment note to be presented so that s/he can update the system. I can forgive the backdating if the updating is being done manually. But I cannot forgive if the consignment note that was presented is being signed fraudulently.
Another question that I have raised:
Just being curious, if my dad had held his suspicions about this innocent package being an explosive device and the relevant authorities were being called in to dispose it. Do not say that it is the onus of the addressee to inform whoever is at the address about the delivery, since there would have no one being around anyway to receive the parcel at that time of the day. Who is to compensate for the loss?
Upon reading through the initial complaint that I have sent, I realised that I have asked a similar question that went unanswered:
3. I would like to know who will be responsible in an event that the parcel being switched with one of a dubious origin during the time the parcel is left unattended. To be honest, my dad had a slight suspicion of the parcel to be an explosive device.
Oh, what joy.
P.S. Besides investing in similar delivery technology that DHL, UPS and the likes have, I strongly recommend the company to invest in a good spell-checker if they are not using Microsoft Outlook.