I read with amused sympathy Roger Harris’s statement in his April 15 letter titled, “LIME, post office take heat.” Mr. Harris wrote that he had just received a package from the United Kingdom dated November 2014 with its wrapper labelled “Missent to the British Virgin Islands.” Many of us have had similar incidents over the years. They do seem to be getting more frequent, though.
A lively discussion recently followed a complaint on Facebook’s BVI Community Board. Somebody in Seas Cow Bay had had no mail in their post box for three weeks. In the light of a similar, though shorter, period in which someone in East End unknowingly had their mail withheld from their box by the post office, I suggested, apparently correctly, that something similar had happened to them. After indignant protests from several participants, it seemed that a senior manager realised the wrongs the PO had inflicted by taking this action without notifying the customer, but I have never read any public acknowledgment of the problems created by the introduction of such a draconian measure.
Three examples
My indignation at such thoughtless action has since turned to alarm at the depths to which our postal services have sunk — and without any blame pinnable on external factors like the shrinking airlift — after discovering three examples of the delivery of our own household’s mail being tampered with.
In the first case, I ordered an on-demand facsimile of a Caribbean history book from an Indian distributor through AbeBooks. It quoted delivery to anywhere in the world within 16 days. Despite AbeBooks’ rules prescribing a maximum of 30 days from despatch for claims, I waited a further month before enquiring about its status. Within two days, the supplier reported that he had located my package in his local post office, to which it had been returned without any reason given. I am now waiting for a replacement to arrive.
Secondly, we received a letter addressed to “The Occupier” of our post box referring to a letter a UK bank had sent to my wife three months ago which had been marked “Gone away — return to sender.” The bank was seeking our assistance in finding out where she was now living, and assured us that it would not be bothering us with any further correspondence sent to her.
The third incident occurred this week when I found a message on my bank account in response to my query as to why I could no longer obtain PDF statements online. I was told that a letter to me had been returned to sender and that they needed me to verify my address by sending proof of it to my local branch in England or mailing it to them (implying that my online services might be restricted until they have confirmation of my current address).
It seems that Roger Harris’s experience was just the tip of an iceberg in which thoughtless maladministration by our PO might already have endangered our financial ratings and inflicted actual monetary losses.
{fcomment}