Another Surprise Delivery!

Finally the Launceston Delivery Centre, as the allegedly responsible entity, deemed it appropriate to clarify the situation by stuffing a notice in the Gardener’s Cottage condemned mailing box on Stoke Street.

In their transparent tradition of upholding honesty and integrity in their impeccable service to the community the letter commences with a blatantly faux introduction.

“Earlier this month . . .” The letter is date 2 March! Is this yet an acknowledgement of another failed delivery only made the day before?

Presumably the unidentified alleged representative of the Launceston Delivery Centre is referring to their 11 February letter that was not “. . . sent out to all postal box users . . .” unless you consider the “. . . Branxholm area” to be the parts of Branxholm that deliveries are made to, rather than the Branxholm delivery area which includes all the properties serviced by the postal boxes.

This conundrum of whom the notification is intended for is clarified by reading between the lines of the following paragraphs. The intention is that the changes to the delivery service are intended to be “a smooth and positive experience for you and the whole community”. That community being within some Launcestion-based stranger’s undisclosed definition of what they mean by the “Branxholm area”.

For those other residents, as an afterthought, in a paragraph ominously parenthesised by unexplained asterisks, there is the thinly veiled threat: install cluster boxes at an undisclosed location . . . or else!!

Clearly the Launceston Delivery Centre believes such scum need to be enclosed by asterisks because they do not deserve to be part of the community or worthy of direct communication. Who knows? Perhaps the scum are worse than the Vandals? By way of explanation a map is provided to delineate the postal box owners whom Australia Post has deemed unworthy of consideration for basic human rights.

The map is something extracted from a schoolchild’s assignment indicating something with a doodling of red marker. The local garbage pickup, perhaps?

Red Hill and Warrentinna Roads are not named on the map. The Postal Boxes are not indicated. No proposed locations for clusters of replacement letter boxes are marked.

There are over two hundred candidate letter boxes to be relocated:

and only one place nominated. An intersection where truck trailers are often left nearby:

Using a standard free-standing letter box and providing access to each individual letter box could stretch 200 metres down Redhill Road or Warrentinna Road or Stoke Street impeding access to properties, maintenance of fencing and suppression of weeds.

This ragtag parade will be an eyesore that reinforces Australia Post’s often demonstrated ability to put the wrong mail in the wrong box. A conspiracy demonstrated by Australia Post’s plan that there is no particular order for the boxes of either street of house number.

Indeed, as there are multiple streets in the non-delvery area, the number on the letter box is not necessarily unique. This will make it difficult for the Vandals to target their reign of terror, beyond attacking every postal box, just in case one of them is their target.

Rather than try to contact the Launceston Delivery Centre to confirm their aptitude for ineptitude the pressure from the Gardener’s Cottage was directed elsewhere:

1. An online petition Preserve Australia Post deliveries to mailboxes in Branxholm was drafted to be tabled in Parliament. Once approved it will be distributed.
2. A request to the Minister of Communications to intervene and ensure delivery to the addresses impacted by this unexplained edict
3. A request to the Minister of Finance to ensure that this blatant failure of process is an isolated incident within the postal service and take actions to rectify the situation and ensure delivery

In order to clarify the alternative to delivery to an unspecified location on an unspecified corner, subscribing to a post box at a post office, Scottsdale PO provided advice on deliveries of parcels by companies that do not deliver to PO Boxes: “What you have to do is specify the Ringarooma CPA on King St Ringarooma, followed by your PO Box number at Scottsdale; so that the parcel is not returned to sender.”

This instruction raises the issue that an online buyer might not know whether their order specifying a PO Box address will be rejected after acceptance of the order because it contains a PO Box somewhere in the address.

However that scenario may be prevented, because addresses usually have to be selected in correct postal format from a search drop down. As Australia Post knows, because they facilitate the service to the shippers. So the buyer may not be able to purchase. Unless, of course, there is a courier available who delivers to the allegedly remote address.

Contemplation of this meaningless fluff revealed further ambiguity in what is contemplated by Australia Post’s commitment to serve communities throughout Australia. Where will items addressed to a PO Box in Scottsdale go?

The helpful descriptions on the Australia Post website indicate it will be a Scottsdale pickup not Ringarooma; so perhaps if it is allowed to be specified the mangled address to a Scottsdale PO box ‘care of Ringarooma’ should be used for all parcel deliveries?

If only it was known beforehand whether the item would not be considered small enough to be treated as a letter by Australia Post (like seeds and screws), because then the advised addressing might be considered as having an illegitimate letter address and the package returned to sender! Or could this ‘care of Ringarooma’ address be used to send both letters and packages to one location?

The Ringarooma CPA might have an opinion on being railroaded into providing additional services due to Australia Post’s decision to remove a few hundred functioning postal boxes in Branxholm.

Meanwhile back at the misnomer of the Australia Post Communication Centre what they chose the deem an “expression of interest only” has been escalated to a manager who telephoned to reveal their lack of understanding.

The upshot of the conversation was a new interpretation: 1366 Warrentinna is only in the delivery area because of the existence of the postal boxes that the manager was unaware existed despite all the correspondence. She undertook to get to the bottom of matters with the Launceston Delivery Centre.

The missive ended with a link to “CLOSE MY CASE”. It was the inevitable flick pass to the perpetrators of the debacle by a slick bureaucrat.

An extensive critique of the missive started with calling out the callous lie about there being two communications received. It continued by highlighting the total lack of a coherent explanation which amounted to acquiescence to a protection racket for whomever was responsible, and ended requesting escalation to senior management.

However the Australia Post Customer Servant was not to be dissuaded:

The flick pass was confirmed, but date no-one from Launceston has made any attempt at contact. Perhaps they don’t know where Branxholm is? or cutbacks mean there is no budget for travel to the areas they rule over? or they fear an attack by the Vandals of Branxholm?

In the meantime Australia Post reverted to a manager who is looking into the updated complaints which now includes a request for a proper assessment including a meeting in Branxholm with all affected.

Maybe the Vandals could attend?