Hello one and all.

I've been reading this thread and ones from another site about this ludicrous ParcelForce charge. I have an item held by them at the moment, and reading some of these posts inspired me to kick up a bit of a fuss.

At first I was just going to pay the full amount, thinking that it was all Customs charges (though I did think that just over twenty quid was a lot for a fifty-five quid item). I got pretty annoyed at ParcelForce after reading through these posts and decided to send them an angry email after being quite courteous previously. I'd already emailed them a bit to ask about tracking numbers etc, and they seemed to send quite personal replies instead of the usual computer-generated spiel. However, after sending my 'annoyed customer' email - complete with law quotes and everything - they just sent back the same old nonsense that any old faceless, money-grabbing company would.

Here is my email and their reply, if anyone's interested. Also, I'd like to know what anyone thinks I should about it. I might just get fed up and cave in, as I would like the item delivered asap, though it's the principle - adding £13.50 to the cost of my shopping for no good reason is a bit outrageous.

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

Dear ParcelForce (PF),

"Please ensure that you include the full history of your enquiry so far in order to help us respond to you as quickly as possible." - Please see the emails below - scroll to the bottom for the earliest.


I would like to say that both the letter sent to me on 26/4/2009 (four days after my item arrived in the country) and the email I received from Marie Heath on 27/4/2009 are very misleading.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 3:46 PM, <parcelforce AT parcelforce.co.uk> wrote:
"In this instance, we have not delivered your parcel because a Customs charges payment is required of £22.09 before it can be released for delivery."

This amount, £22.09, is not a Customs charge. Only £8.59 is a Customs charge, and £13.50 is PF's 'Clearance Fee'. This statement is false, misleading and possibly unlawful.


The letter sent to me on 26/4/2009 states that "Delivery of this parcel is subject to payment of charges raised by HM Revenue & Customs." I agree with this and am willing to pay the Customs charges. Thank you for paying them for me, but I would rather pay them myself. Why is there not a system in place for the customer to do so?

"The withholding of delivery of a parcel until the 'clearance fee' is paid is in direct contradiction to sections 84-105 of the Postal Services Act of 2000. It is a clear material breach of criminal law."


If you would like to avoid breaking the law please let me pay ONLY the Customs charges (in my case the £8.59 is purely VAT, no import or export duty) and deliver my item to the original address.


Invoice date:
UPI number:
PF ref number:

Address:



Many thanks,

Yours Faithfully,

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

Dear Mr

Thank you for your enquiry.

I am sorry to learn that you are not happy with the Customs charges and Clearance Fees
that have been charged for your parcel.

Items imported into the United Kingdom from outside European Union are subject to Duty
and VAT which is calculated by HM Revenue & Customs on the value of the parcel as
declared by the sender. Parcelforce Worldwide will charge Clearance Fee only when duty
and VAT is applicable. We have two levels of Clearance Fee, our lower fee currently at
£8 per item, is for Standard economy service and currently £13.50 for Express services
( similar to International Datapost, Scheduled or Euro 48 ). The Clearance Fee we charge
is to cover our cost for presenting the parcel to HM Revenue & Customs , opening and
repacking if necessary, paying the duties and taxes.

Parcelforce Worldwide as the parcel delivery business of Royal Mail Group Ltd, is tasked
by the British Government with fulfilling the government's obligations under the Universal
Postal Union. Postal Adminisrators which are authorised to clear items through Customs
on behalf of customers may charge customers a Customs clearance fee based on the
actual costs( extract from the UPU Parcel Post Manual Section J Customs Matters Article
18). Parcelforce Worldwide is authorised by HM Revenue & Customs to perform this function
and the collection of these fees is not illegal. The charging of such fees is widespread within
the parcel distribution industry and, therefore, Parcelforce Worldwide are not alone in persuing
this course.

The clearance fees charges are set out on Parcelforce website at http://www.parcelforce.com/
portal/pw in the section dealing with importing into the Uited Kingdom. They are also detailed
in the Successor Postal Services Company Overseas Parcelpost, as published in the London
Belfast and Edinburgh Gazettes.

Please contact the delivery depot on telehone number 08700844525 and select option 5 to speak to an advisor on the payment of charges.

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

Jokers! It's just impenetrable nonsense.

I could have been more stern and quoted more laws, though I didn't want to be so offensive to them that they destroyed or 'misplaced' my item! However, the scoundrels do need to be put in their place by as many members of the public as possible. I've also had more than my fair share of bank charges for going overdrawn, and have had enough of these organisations that are supposed to be a service ripping people off.

Rant over.

Any comments would be much appreciated.

Cheers,

Jim

Yes, same rubbish as usual, Jim. And of course it is illegal to delay delivery until you've paid. Why don't you try a complaint to your local police force? They are committing a criminal offence after all. A few of us have done this, and prosecution doesn't happen as "it's not in the public interest" (Huh!) but the more people who bring these complaints the better - maybe they will be prosecuted eventually. Also, why not have a go at writing the tale to BBC Watchdog? Same thing applies - if enough of us bring it to their attenttion, they may feature it....

Jim

Might I suggest you do what I did following the same situation? Write to your local MP. I did (see above posts) and received a reply recently that stated the following:

"Thank you for your recent email about the difficulties you are experiencing with Parcel Force and their policy of demanding the payment of VAT and a Parcelforce Clearance Fee before releasing parcels. I waned you to know that I have raised this issue with the Minister at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory reform, Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP, and when I receive his response I shall, of course, write to you again."

It'll be interesting to see where, if anywhere, this leads. Watch this space.

I'd also strongly recommend you contact the governments own advisory service "Consumer Direct" on 08454 04 05 06. They are fully aware of this situation but the more people that complain into them, the more they can report it to the regulatory authorities and, hopefully, the more weight will bare onto the issue.

Incidentally, after kicking up a LOT of fuss to Parcel Force myself, I eventually managed to get them to agree to let me pay the customs charges and they would then invoice me for their *cough* clearance fee charges. I've yet to receive such an invoice.

- CDM

Con't forget, CDM - it's not just ParcelFarce, but the whole Royal Mail group. If a parcel from overseas is small enough, it'll be the PO who do the ransom, illegally holding it and demanding their fee before they will deliver.

Jim

Hoorrah! Success people! :)

Thanks for your comments and suggestions Jim and CDM.

Thanks to your post CDM I managed to get ParcelFarce (PF) to let me pay the actual customs charge separately, they then released the package (which is currently sitting on my desk :) and shall send me an invoice for their clearance fee. Whether they will actually do this remains to be seen.

I didn't feel like ringing the police about the matter, or getting in touch with Watchdog. However, as CDM kindly suggested I rang Consumer Direct on 08454 04 05 06 and spoke to a very friendly and helpful man called Mike Bowles. He went through the issue with me and mentioned some laws that let delivery companies charge a fee for presenting items to HM Customs etc, and he also mentioned some laws that mean it's illegal for them to withhold the item once the customs is paid, and it's illegal for them to levy the VAT. I told him that there is no method on the phone or online to pay the charges separately. He said they think that this is a new tactic of PF, but that it is actually against the law to bundle the charges together - they must be on separate invoices.

So, friendly Mike also said that I am not the first or the only one to bring up this point, and that there is currently an Office of Fair Trading enquiry into the matter, and would I like my case to be added to the body of evidence? Of course I said yes and so he asked me for a few more details about my case.

With ransom letter at hand I then rang up the PF depot that held my item (Gatwick). I spoke to a front-line phone person there who said that on his screen infront of him he couldn't break down the charges. OK, he's just doing his job so I didn't have a go at him. I just said "it is against the law to bundle the charges together - they must be on separate invoices." He then said ok, I'll get my manager to ring you back before the end of the day. To my surprise, and to his credit, he (James Treble) actually did ring me back. I just said the above phrase again and he said right, I'll break down the charges - you can pay the customs amount on a card over the phone (I could have sent a cheque which I'd have felt more comfortable with, but my item has already been in the country for just over two weeks!), then he'd put the item in the post the next day and send an invoice for the remaining clearance fee. Success! He did not sound too happy on the phone as I was reducing his company's profit, but it made me feel better :)

There must be so many people that are frustrated by and also completely ignorant of the fact that they don't have to cave in to PF's way and charges. For me this was not too much of an ordeal. Just two phone calls and PF didn't get away with it this time. Let's hope that people out there can use this information to avoid these cowboy tactics in the future.

Once again, many thanks to CDM and Jim. I ought to give you guys some bounty pay!

People! Stop paying Clearance Fees!

Nice to see that people are having success in getting around PFs illegal tactics :-)

As previously menioned above, I was told by Lynn Gawthorpe from the Managing Director's office at Parcel Force Worldwide that I was misinformed by the depot when I was told I could only pay the join customs fee and clearance fee collectively (not separately). She told me that this was an error on their part AND she told me that she would inform the depot staff and all the other people involved so that there would not be any 'misundersandings' in the future. Judging by the above post, there still seems to be a problem - either thator she simply has no made good on her promise.

I urge anyone reading this that have been hit with the randsom note to conact Lynn Gawthorpe from the Managing Director's office at Parcel Force Worldwide and mention that she had previously promised to get this sorted out but clearly hasn't.

- CDM

We have been hit with a similar charge and are taking action similar to those above. We bought a laptop screen from the US and were hit with a VAT charge of £8.42 and a Parcelforce handling charge of £13.50. The parcel is being held at the Royal College Street, Camden, London, NW1, depot.

I phoned the depot yesterday, (Monday 11 May) and after I explained the situation the person I spoke to said he would get someone to call me back. This they duly did and I had a decent conversation with one of the managers there. He told me that he understood our predicament and was aware that Customs & Parcelforce were gathering a lot of complaints about the situation. He said that unfortunately they were unable to take payment for just the VAT over the phone as their system just doesn't allow it but that we could go in person to the depot and pay the VAT seperately there whereupon they would release the package and then invoice us. Obviously it would have been more convenient for us simply to pay the single fee over the phone and I'm still not sure why it cannot be done, but generally it seems a good enough outcome.

I think Parcelforce are actually put in an invidious position in having to pay our VAT for us and then re-charge us. It seems obvious to me that this is why they charge a fee, not for any 'handling' but the administration of VAT precedures, though £13.50 is a tad OTT.

Anyway, it seems Parcelforce are not being that unreasonable and if people continue to refuse the 'handling' charge something will have to change. Personally I think Customs should deal directly with the customer. All they have to do is attach an invoice to the packet and I'm sure the majority of people would pay. It's the double hit that seems unfair.

I'm glad you have arrived at a satisfactory outcome but I would respectfully disagree with you about PF doing the right thing here. Firstly, their self-determined 'fee' is ridiculously more than it should be and secondly, there is absolutely no reason why they cannot take separate payments over the phone. I know this from personal first-hand experience as I have made such a payment over the phone myself.

Lastly, I'd like to repeat what I said above in that it was explained to me by Lynn Gawthorpe from the Managing Director's office at Parcel Force Worldwide that it is NOT correct that customers are being led to believe that BOTH payments are required before the parcel can be released for delivery. Furthermore, she informed me in person (over the phone) that she would personally take steps to ensure that staff would be better educated and trained to ensure that customers are not misinformed in the future. As this continues to appear NOT to have happened, I must reluctantly conclude that Ms. Gawthorpe is NOT as good as her word. A pity, but not perhaps completely unexpected.

- CDM

CDM:

I'm glad you have arrived at a satisfactory outcome but I would respectfully disagree with you about PF doing the right thing here. Firstly, their self-determined 'fee' is ridiculously more than it should be and secondly, there is absolutely no reason why they cannot take separate payments over the phone. I know this from personal first-hand experience as I have made such a payment over the phone myself.

Lastly, I'd like to repeat what I said above in that it was explained to me by Lynn Gawthorpe from the Managing Director's office at Parcel Force Worldwide that it is NOT correct that customers are being led to believe that BOTH payments are required before the parcel can be released for delivery. Furthermore, she informed me in person (over the phone) that she would personally take steps to ensure that staff would be better educated and trained to ensure that customers are not misinformed in the future. As this continues to appear NOT to have happened, I must reluctantly conclude that Ms. Gawthorpe is NOT as good as her word. A pity, but not perhaps completely unexpected.

- CDM

You're all losing sight of the REAL issue though, it's not this fee they (and the Post Office, not just ParcelFarce!) charge, disgraceful though it is, its the holding your package to ransom until you pay. THAT is the bit that's a breach of the <criminal> law. It's no victory until they stop sending the letters, and do what they are paid to do, i.e. deliver without delay to your premises, whereupon, like other couriers, they can ask for money on delivery, or send you an invoice.

Jim

Well I pretty much agree with what both of you are saying. I've waited ages for the parcel and it is more than unacceptable that they illegally hold it whilst demanding payment. That must change. Also there is no doubt that PF fee is extortionate. I guess my sympathy lies with PF workers who are put in the invidious position of having to apply a policy that brings them into conflict with their customers; they've been nothing but polite and helpful to me. I do think Customs should deal with us direct re collection of VAT and leave PF out of it, then PF would have no choice but to drop the handling charade.

Actually, PF are entitled to whithhold delivery of parcels until the Customs charges are paid. What they are NOT allowed to do is withhold delivery of the parcel pending payment of their fee - that's illegal. The essence of the problem is that their letters to customers clearly imply (although extremely carefully worded) that they are unable to deliver until payment of BOTH the customs charges AND their fee are paid.

- CDM

CDM:

Actually, PF are entitled to whithhold delivery of parcels until the Customs charges are paid. What they are NOT allowed to do is withhold delivery of the parcel pending payment of their fee - that's illegal. The essence of the problem is that their letters to customers clearly imply (although extremely carefully worded) that they are unable to deliver until payment of BOTH the customs charges AND their fee are paid.

- CDM

You're right - but you are not thinking, so you're wrong! ;-) What you are missing is that Customs charges ARE paid, just as with every other courier. They (PF and the PO) have paid them. (Hence their ripoff fee!) At that point your debt to HMRC is discharged, and you owe the money to PF/PO. That's a civil debt that does not have the same status afforded to duty and VAT due to HMRC. And the legislation is specific: Postal Services Act 2000, section 104 (2) para (d). says that a postal packet shall have immunity from "retention by virtue of a lien".

Jim

This is a very good point, Jim. It's very nearly what CDM is saying. "PF are entitled to whithhold delivery of parcels until the Customs charges are paid." Thing is, they've already paid them! This is a very silly predicament and I bet the people implementing this (not only PF) are making a lot of money out of it. I hope that they put it to good use. Why don't they make tubes to whizz parcels in like in Futurama? Then there'd be no need for ransom letters!

Errr.....yes, well.

How did you find this particular law, Jim?

JimineyCricket:

This is a very good point, Jim. It's very nearly what CDM is saying. "PF are entitled to whithhold delivery of parcels until the Customs charges are paid." Thing is, they've already paid them! This is a very silly predicament and I bet the people implementing this (not only PF) are making a lot of money out of it. I hope that they put it to good use. Why don't they make tubes to whizz parcels in like in Futurama? Then there'd be no need for ransom letters!

Errr.....yes, well.

How did you find this particular law, Jim?

Yup - as soon as HMRC release the goods, according to law, they should be delivered. However, that's when the ransom note process starts.

I found it by reading this same thread! :-) Then, on reading the law, it became obvious they were committing a criminal - not civil - offence. It's a very clear criminal act, in contravention of the Postal Services Act 2000, sections 83, 84, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2000/ukpga_20000026_en_8 and 104 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2000/ukpga_20000026_en_10 Note particularly 104 (2) paras. (c) and (d).

A solicitor confirmed to me that they were committing the offence.

Jim

I have just submitted this to BBC watchdog, feel free to do the same anyone as the chances of exposure would be much better.

OF com seem to be useless and basically said they cant help as it isnt Post and is de-regulated, which is mostly untrue.

Be nice if they took this up as it effects so many people and is criminal and unjust.

submit here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/gotastory/