Royal Mail delivery

[Bic Basher]

I've always popped mail into other people's places that's been sent to me by mistake. Usually it's only a few doors down, although I've had to go to Melford Road a couple of times.

[Spartacus]

This popped up on BBC London news this morning

BBC News - Royal Mail: 2.5 million faced Christmas post delays, says Citizens Advice

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60394576

Love the claim that "the vast majority of post was delivered on time"

Not here dear not here 🤔

[kiera]

Thanks Spartacus. Interesting to read in the link you provided that "Royal Mail is exempt from its targets in December, due to the volume of festive post". That goes a long way to explaining why our December's post was left in crates and not delivered.

[Sue]

My post seems to have gone back to normal.

Things are arriving within a couple of days of being posted, and Private Eye was on time.

Also I am no longer receiving items posted weeks/months ago.

Fingers crossed they have cleared the backlog and now have enough staff to deliver current post.

I hope I am not tempting fate by posting (no pun intended) this.

[bonaome]

Yesterday received a Christmas card posted from Lewisham mid-December.

And both this week's The Week, and last week's The Week.

[Spartacus]

After the disaster of Christmas post (I'm still misding small parcels that were sent 6 weeks ago) they add insult to injury

BBC News - Price of first class stamps to rise to 95p

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60620378

Interesting to read that coronavirus lockdowns led to a sharp reduction in letter volumes yet the system couldn't cope with the reduced load

Something very wrong there..

[Sue]

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> After the disaster of Christmas post (I'm still

> misding small parcels that were sent 6 weeks ago)

> they add insult to injury

>

> BBC News - Price of first class stamps to rise to

> 95p

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60620378

>

> Interesting to read that coronavirus lockdowns led

> to a sharp reduction in letter volumes yet the

> system couldn't cope with the reduced load

>

> Something very wrong there..

But surely there was an increase in volume due to people buying things online?

[Nigello]

? More likely that letters were fewer but parcels (including the ones that pass as deliverable as standard mail) increased due to home shopping.

[Sue]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ? More likely that letters were fewer but parcels

> (including the ones that pass as deliverable as

> standard mail) increased due to home shopping.

Yes, that was what I meant, sorry if it wasn't clear!

[Penguin68]

The PO is being disingenuous here. The concept of the USO on stamps for letters (same price, wherever delivered in the UK) is based on cross-subsidy - rural mail delivery is subsidised by urban deliveries, which are more cost efficient. In the same way (surely?) parcel deliveries by the Royal Mail postmen cross subsidise letter deliveries - so that if one class of delivery reduces in volume, but another increases - the two should both contribute to meeting the overall costs of postal delivery. In their PR at least the PO is suggesting that the reduction in letter volumes should be treated as stand-alone in their cost recovery considerations.

It may very well be that the PO is operating at slimmer, or even negative, margins; but they need to demonstrate their overall revenue shortfalls across their delivery service, not just across one element of it, to justify their price hike. 'Stamps' are of course their payment medium for both letter and parcel post - but the prices (in stamps) set for parcels and letters are different.

Of course they are being competed against on parcel delivery in a way they are not on domestic letter delivery, so this is a way they can leverage their effective letter monopoly for domestic post - but there are rules on exploiting monopolies and these should be invoked.

[jazzer]

Don't forget that from later in the year current stamps will not be usable and they will be able need to be exchanged from later this month. If that doesn't happen the stamps will not be recognised by the PO.

[Bic Basher]

jazzer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't forget that from later in the year current

> stamps will not be usable and they will be able

> need to be exchanged from later this month. If

> that doesn't happen the stamps will not be

> recognised by the PO.

It's the end of January 2023 when non-barcode stamps will lose their validity.