Going "Postal" over Postal Insurance?
For the first time I can remember, I just bought "postal insurance" on a package I mailed. Being naturally curious, especially of any bureaucracy, I asked questions so that I might better understand what I was paying for.
Postal insurance covers me (the item I am sending) up to the amount of insurance against loss or theft. For me, this translated into my paying extra to actually get the package to where I was sending it. The customer service representative did not follow my logic for several minutes, but eventually she admitted I was right.
At first she thought I was accusing the USPS of soemthing! I suppose I can understand how it seems accusatory, since I asked questions like, "So, insuring this package really just protects me from the postal service losing this package?"
I did not lose my cool; I was not upset. Ok, I was a little upset. It seems clear to me that I paid the initial $3.75 (or so) to "maybe" get the package delivered. if I was only willing to pay $3.75, then a light-fingered postal employee or a truck fire or whatever else were chances I was willing to take.
For an additional $3.75 (or so), the USPS was willing to assure me they wouldn't let their dishonest employees near my package, nor would they be reckless in loading my package onto a truck that was going to catch fire.
Do you suppose in the "good ol' days" companies actually took responsibility for items left in their hands without the customer paying extra?
Postal insurance covers me (the item I am sending) up to the amount of insurance against loss or theft. For me, this translated into my paying extra to actually get the package to where I was sending it. The customer service representative did not follow my logic for several minutes, but eventually she admitted I was right.
At first she thought I was accusing the USPS of soemthing! I suppose I can understand how it seems accusatory, since I asked questions like, "So, insuring this package really just protects me from the postal service losing this package?"
I did not lose my cool; I was not upset. Ok, I was a little upset. It seems clear to me that I paid the initial $3.75 (or so) to "maybe" get the package delivered. if I was only willing to pay $3.75, then a light-fingered postal employee or a truck fire or whatever else were chances I was willing to take.
For an additional $3.75 (or so), the USPS was willing to assure me they wouldn't let their dishonest employees near my package, nor would they be reckless in loading my package onto a truck that was going to catch fire.
Do you suppose in the "good ol' days" companies actually took responsibility for items left in their hands without the customer paying extra?
posted by Steve Heyduck at 2:43 PM
2 Comments:
"Do you suppose in the "good ol' days" companies actually took responsibility for items left in their hands without the customer paying extra?"
No. At leats not regularly. But then I'm cynical sometimes.Of course, having a monopoly isn't conducive to the best in customer service.
Testy? Not exactly. I was actually more frustrated with the attendant's unwillingness to admit that a customer should have any general expectation of deliver of product UNLESS insurance was bought.
Post a Comment
<< Home