More CDs lost in the post

[Roland Perry]

In article <4D542CA3-2724-4365-A8B6-B1F31E5F3595@batten.eu.org>, Ian 
Batten <igb@batten.eu.org> writes
>> I recently had to send a passport in for renewal (enclosing the old 
>>one along with the application). It makes me very sad that the Post 
>>Office recommends that you need to send such a thing by Special 
>>Delivery, just to make sure it's not nicked within their system.
>
>Running the entire postal system securely is unreasonable, given most 
>of the material doesn't justify it.  There's no evidence the situation 
>is any worse than it used to be, as historically large portions of the 
>population didn't receive mail that was valuable.

Sending something to a passport office from a post office is a fairly 
closed system. The items should always be on RM property, or in one of 
their vans etc. The only difference that Special Delivery has is that it 
purports to give you some idea about how far the item got, before it was 
nicked. (Plus the insurance money of course).

It seems to me that the main advantage of SD, which is getting a 
signature from the addressee in person, thus making sure it was handed 
over to the *right* person as well as making sure it was delivered 
*somewhere*, doesn't apply to passports, as they aren't delivered like 
normal post.

I wonder if that's why their Track and Trace system claims it's been 
delivered but then says: "Sorry, an electronic proof of delivery [1] is 
not available for this item". I suspect they *don't* actually do the 
final stage paperwork for these - unless someone can convince me that 
I'm the victim of a one-off slip-up.

ps I don't know if it's changed, but when I worked just around the 
corner from the Peterborough Passport Office it wasn't possible to 
hand-deliver an application to them. They had bouncers on the door to 
turn people away. You *had* to mail it! Unless you made an appointment, 
which is a whole different ballgame.

[1] Basically a scan of the signature of the addressee.
-- 
Roland Perry