(original title: the man said that the express delivery worth more than 10000 yuan was lost. Baishi Huitong: if the price is not insured, it is willing to pay 15 yuan.)
Nearly a month after the express was sent, Mr. Chen, who was doing business in Zhejiang, received a call from the express staff of Baishi Huitong, saying that the express confirmed the loss.
"This is a custom-made mechanical gear, worth 13000 yuan, as evidenced by invoices and remittance records". Recently, Mr. Chen told surging news that Baishi Huitong was willing to pay 1500 yuan because it was not insured when it was sent by express, which made it unacceptable.
Mr. Chen complained about this matter to the postal consumer complaint center of Taizhou postal administration. The staff of the center said that the value certificates of goods such as invoices provided by Mr. Chen need to be recognized by the express enterprise. If the enterprise does not recognize them, the appeal center can only assist in mediation. It is suggested that Mr. Chen appeal through judicial channels to safeguard his own rights and interests.
The mailing list and the schematic diagram of the sent mechanical gear are provided by the respondents
It was sent out for more than a month to confirm the loss, and it was found briefly halfway
Mr. Chen said that his express was sent by a friend from Yuhuan, Taizhou, Zhejiang to Turpan on September 18. The goods are mechanical gears customized by customers, weighing tens of kilograms, divided into three groups of 9, with a freight of 660 yuan and cash on delivery.
Mr. Chen recalled that after the package was sent, he did not continue to pay attention to the logistics situation until he called his customized gear customer on October 9 to find out the problem. The logistics details page of Baishi Huitong shows that the logistics status of the package has been fixed on the Jinhua Xi'an route since September 19, and has not changed for 21 days. Mr. Chen complained about this situation to Zhejiang Baishi Huitong headquarters and Taizhou postal administration.
On October 14, the staff who claimed to be the Wenzhou Branch of Baishi express called Mr. Chen that the package had been found, and asked Mr. Chen to send photos of the goods for confirmation. The next day, the package was' back on the road ', and the logistics details showed that the package arrived in Xi'an on the same day and was being sent to Urumqi.
Mr. Chen said that he thought the matter would be solved satisfactorily. Unexpectedly, on October 21, the staff of Baishi Huitong called Mr. Chen again and said that the package was confirmed to be lost on the way from Xi'an to Urumqi.
On November 15, the staff of the front desk service center of Baishi Huitong headquarters also confirmed to surging news that after Mr. Chen complained to Taizhou postal administration on October 9, the staff recovered two mechanical gears on October 13, and the package weight was reduced from more than 40 kg to more than 20 kg, which was reissued on October 15. For the reason, another staff member said that according to the records, it can only be confirmed that the package has been lost on the way from Xi'an transfer center to Urumqi distribution center.
Mr. Chen said that he did not know that he had recovered only two gears and the weight of the package had been reduced to more than 20 kg. 'just tell me if I found it and ask me if I will continue to send it to Xinjiang'.
Logistics details page
Baishi Huitong is willing to pay 1500 yuan. Postal Administration: it is suggested to take the legal approach
After the parcels sent were lost twice in a row, Baishi Huitong put forward the corresponding compensation scheme, which was difficult for Mr. Chen to accept.
According to Mr. Chen's memory, on October 21, after the staff of Baishi Huitong informed him that the package was confirmed to be lost, Mr. Chen reported the situation to the postal consumer complaint center of Taizhou postal administration again. After mediation, Baishi Huitong expressed its willingness to compensate 1500 yuan on the 23rd of that month.
Mr. Chen couldn't accept it. He said that the value of his goods was 13000 yuan, which was evidenced by invoices and remittance records. It was a case that could prove the value of the mailed goods and should be compensated according to the actual loss.
On November 15, the staff of Baishi Huitong front desk service center told surging news that according to the current handling of Mr. Chen's package loss, Mr. Chen's package was not insured, and the value of the goods was too high to pay the original price. If the insured service of the company is purchased, the company will compensate the lower price according to the declared value and actual value of the goods.
According to the relevant provisions of the postal law of the people's Republic of China, if the insured vouchered mail is lost, damaged or the contents are short, the postal enterprise shall compensate according to the actual loss, but the maximum amount of compensation shall not exceed three times the tariff charged.
Surging news contacted the consumer complaint center of Taizhou postal administration. The staff said that the complaint center, as a mediation department, could not help users provide effective identification or proof of the value of goods. The value certificates of goods such as invoices provided by Mr. Chen need to be recognized by express enterprises. If the enterprises do not recognize them, the complaint center can only assist in mediation. As for the amount of compensation, the staff said that generally, they can only help consumers win compensation of up to 10 times the freight and up to 800 yuan. In view of Mr. Chen's situation, the staff suggested that when consumers think the value certificate is valid, they can retain the relevant value certificate, appeal through judicial channels and safeguard their own rights and interests.
On November 15, the staff of Bestway said that Mr. Chen's problem had been transferred to the compensation Commissioner of relevant departments for follow-up. As of press time, Mr. Chen has not received a call from the Commissioner.