Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry
It could also be the case that the postperson knows how inconvenienced a customer might be by having to go to their local collection / sorting office in the event that they weren't there to sign. Alternatively, what if the postperson saw that they were tax documents and having considered the deadline - together with the fact that there is industrial action going on, used his / her initiative to ensure that your neighbour was not further inconvenienced / fined?
Bottom line - if you arrive home and it's there do you throw a hissy fit at not having been asked for your autograph or do you recognise initiative when you see it?
|
None of the cases I've mentioned were documents which could have been identified externally. The most recent letter I referred to was a personal letter from an self employed accountant to his client - NOT an official HMRC marked letter. The two other cases I previously mentioned were also just personal letters. If our postman was so dilligent and caring as to act in the way you decribe, I really don't think he'd keep on delivering items that don't belong to us and posting our mail through other people's doors.
I think you're looking at the wrong end of the equation with respect. If a third party has paid RM to provide a service that should guarantee them proof of delivery they should get that service and not have a postman simply disregard that. As it stands the sender of those items who paid for the service has no proof that they were delivered because no signature was obtained.