SE1 postal service problems (part 3)

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Current: 1 of 10
Wednesday 31 March 2004 6.38pm
A new thread as requested, continuing where this thread left off.

The upgrade to the forum with automatic splitting of threads into multiple pages is on its way, before anyone asks.

Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Thursday 1 April 2004 10.55am
Just to let you all know - I have received an email from Anthony Phelan, manager at the SE1 sorting office , wanting to set up a meeting to discuss our appalling post. I am planning to give him details of the postal problems, without giving any names and addresses, if that suits people? Names and addresses are being passed onto Cllr Porter, for the criminal investigation.
I will keep you posted (hah) on what's happening, and if anyone else would like to be at the meeting with Anthony Phelan, then email me, as usual at [removed]@hotmail.com - with se1 post meeting as your subject header.
Thanks
Hat



Edited 1 times. Last edit at 1 February 2006 10.29am by James Hatts.
Thursday 1 April 2004 3.37pm
aha, see even the impending threat of going to the media and we get a response from our target! Hat, way to go...
Friday 2 April 2004 10.18am
I was made redundant from the postal survey and here's the explanation:

Following on from our recent letter where we informed you that we were suspending your participation, and your subsequent enquiry, I am writing to explain the situation.

Back in January, the postal regulator brought to our attention the on-line discussions taking place on the London SE1 forum about the postal survey, and queried the impartiality of a small number of our panellists. Our remit is to ensure that there is no potential for any bias in our recruitment of panellists and therefore we have to follow very strict guidelines. With this in mind we have sought to remove any panellists connected with the forum as we cannot guarantee their annonymity. I am sorry but while you may not have discussed the survey with your Postman or other contact with Royal Mail, your association with the forum has lead to your removal.

I am sorry if this is disappointing for you and I do thank you for your interest.
Friday 2 April 2004 10.42am
Don't worry Cathy. I'll still continue to grossly falsify my returns on the post survey. In future, I'll double my efforts to try and compensate for your exclusion :0)



...there's plenty more c**** in the cup.
hat
Friday 2 April 2004 11.40am
I like the idea that if you're affected by the bad service, you must be biased, as opposed to knowledgeable about the problems...
Friday 2 April 2004 11.53am
Also the idea that they think they can tell who's in the survey and cross reference this to usernames on this forum.

Following this logic is very instructive as to how postpeople's minds work.



...there's plenty more c**** in the cup.
Friday 2 April 2004 12.19pm
"the postal regulator brought to our attention the on-line discussions taking place on the London SE1 forum about the postal survey, and queried the impartiality of a small number of our panellists. "

"Our remit is to ensure that there is no potential for any bias in our recruitment of panellists and therefore we have to follow very strict guidelines. "

"With this in mind we have sought to remove any panellists connected with the forum as we cannot guarantee their annonymity"

These statements have no logical connection to each other.

I do recognise that there is a real risk that some posters could be plants employed by private postal/courier providers (or for their highly-paid financial and corporate affairs advisers) who are seeking to eliminate the Post Office's monopoly on local delivery on the grounds of alleged inefficiency.

However, I can see no other grounds for bias. People who don't know that their post is being stolen/lost don't complain!!!

It is appalling that Posctomm seem to be putting process issues of this sort ahead allegations of a complete operational breakdown of local Post Office management, coupled with allegations of widespread theft of both valuable items and documents required for identity fraud.

I can accept that where there are posters who use names that are obvious variants on their real names and who have given address details in their posts, then it may be unwise to include them in the sample (It makes sense to assume that the perpetrators of the alleged thefts may be reading this forum since the South London Press coverage.)

I would suggest that every affected poster dropped from the survey (and anyone else who feels strongly) writes to complain to:

Nigel Stapleton
Chairman
Postal Services Commission,
Hercules House
Hercules Road
London
SE1 7DB

cc to Simon Hughes.

It might be useful for you to include a statement that you have no conflicts of interests with other postal providers.
Friday 2 April 2004 12.25pm
How the hell are the survey people connecting your postal names and details with your username for this site? I thought that was anonymous.

Can you confirm complete anonymity if the user has requested it, James H?

(I take it you did not pass on our username details to the police/councillors/postal office, Hat. Can you confirm?)

Not to come over all heavy, but we need to know exactly how they are making these decisions re the tests. It smells like classic corporate bully-tactics to me!
Friday 2 April 2004 12.29pm
I certainly have not passed any details to the regulator, or anyone else for that matter.



Editor of the London SE1 website.
Subscribe to our SE1 Direct weekly newsletter.
Pages:  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Current: 1 of 10

This thread has been closed

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: