Australia Post Legal Question

[*crikey*mate*]

Common Law provides us with a postal rule in Adams v Lindsell which says that once a letter of acceptance is posted that it is deemed accepted and not reliant on the acceptance being communicated to the offerror. (sic) (usually, acceptance must be communicated).

That being, it stands to reason that ownership of the letter must pass from the sender to the receiver at the point of postage.

Two questions arise from this;

1) Once posted (either lodged over counter or placed in a designated mail box), the sender should not be able to retrieve the letter/package, as they no longer own it.

What is the actual ruling on this? Can a sender retrieve a postal item after mailing it?

2) In eBayland, The buyer usually/technically pays for the postage, and the seller is merely the agent charged with performing the act. However, despite the buyer paying for the service to have an item that legally belongs to them delivered, why is it that Australia Post will not allow the buyer to make enquiries about that parcel if, for example, it gets lost in the post?

It is my understanding, that the seller must lodge any complaint/claim (which does make sense as they would have the paperwork), but then the buyer is reliant solely on communication from the seller.

So, why is it that the legal owner of the postal item, who paid for the delivery service is prevented from making enquiries or instigating investigations as to its whereabouts?

[smartway-2-buy]

I don't know about the legalities of what you are saying but I can assure you that a buyer has every right to lodge an enquiry with Australia Post regarding a missing item.  If they have the tracking number then they can even go on the Australia Post website and see the record of posting etc.  If an item goes missing you simply ring 131318 and lodge an enquiry in to the missing item and this will result in an  e-mail being sent to the last known position of the item to try and track it down.

Australia Post is forever getting parcels and letters with an incorrect address and this is usually the problem.

Either the buyer supplies incorrect information or the sender puts the wrong details down.

Another problem is buyers who have an item to pick up at an LPO often fail to do so and this results in the item being returned to sender PROVIDED there is a return address.

If not and the sender is impossible to trace then the item could be sold as lost property as a last resort.

Items are returned all the time simply because the buyer doesn't bother to go and collect it.

Then they deny getting any notification that the item is awaiting collection.

[thecatspjs]

Cut and paste from Postal Industry Ombudsman website explains it pretty well....

Generally speaking, the addressee is the one who claims for damage to a mail item. This includes where an item has arrived, but the contents are missing. Where the item is lost the sender is the one to claim.

The logic behind this approach is that where an item disappears, the sender is in the best position to confirm that it was indeed posted, and also the sender paid for the postage so it is the service they paid for that failed. The addressee may also have a right, in a commercial transaction, to require the sender to replace the item.

If the item is delivered, it may reasonably be considered to have become the responsibility of the addressee, so if it is damaged, the addressee can claim compensation.

The person with primary entitlement to claim compensation can usually transfer their right to claim to the other party in writing. For example, the addressee of a damaged item can transfer their right to claim to the sender. This is not the case for certain international mail services.

[thecatspjs]

A sender can give their authorisation to Aust Post over the phone, or by email, for an addressee to make enquiries about a lost parcel investigation. 

AP can't say no, it is in their overall terms and conditions - same as the discretionary $50 compensation is too

If you are getting Aust Post reps saying it is not so, just request to speak to a team leader, or the escalation team, that usually sorts it out.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@thecatspjs wrote:

Cut and paste from Postal Industry Ombudsman website explains it pretty well....

Generally speaking, the addressee is the one who claims for damage to a mail item. This includes where an item has arrived, but the contents are missing. Where the item is lost the sender is the one to claim.

The logic behind this approach is that where an item disappears, the sender is in the best position to confirm that it was indeed posted, that makes sense, as I said....and also the sender paid for the postage only physically, in most cases the buyer paid and the sender is merely the agent....so it is the service they paid for that failed. The addressee may also have a right, in a commercial transaction, to require the sender to replace the item. So, if Australia Post loses the parcel, the seller may be obliged to replace the item? That doesn't make sense.

If the item is delivered, it may reasonably be considered to have become the responsibility of the addressee, so if it is damaged, the addressee can claim compensation. So if the buyer gets it it and it is broken, the buyer instigates a claim for compensation. I didn't know that, but it of course makes sense.

The person with primary entitlement to claim compensation can usually transfer their right to claim to the other party in writing. For example, the addressee of a damaged item can transfer their right to claim to the sender. This is not the case for certain international mail services.

---

OK, thanks CatsPJ, see to me that contradicts of the guidelines of the law, I wonder when ownership is deemed to have exchanged hands?

If I borrow grandma's car and I pay Johnny to return it for me cos I'm a slack unappreciative grandaughter, and Johnny somehow loses the car on the way (stolen whilst he stopped at Maccas for a burger), then it is grandma who raises the claim with her insurers, not the person who sent it.

I know I'm missing an important point there, not sure what though....

The person who owns the item is the one who raises the claim.

[*crikey*mate*]

thanks so much for your really informative answer smartways. (Hello by the way, your post count tells me you are new here - the smileys really suck, but the rest of the place is pretty cool, so hope to see you around often 🙂 )

I never knew that AP sold lost property, but that makes sense I guess, as I know the police do.

[thecatspjs]

Ownership of goods is not always so straightforward either as under the AP Act there is a clause that indicates that in particular situations that AP will be considered to be the owner - I assume to support their power to confiscate goods LOL ...

101  Articles carried by post to be taken to be Australia Post’s property

For the purpose of any legal proceeding or action in relation to an article carried by post or under the control of Australia Post, the article shall be taken to be, while it is being carried by post or under the control of Australia Post, the property of Australia Post.

[thecatspjs]

The Sale of Goods Act provides direction on ownership transfer and freight.

Once sold - unless otherwise agreed, the seller is responsible for shipping goods to the owner in accordance with their instructions  - or in the absence of specific freight instructions, shipped in a manner that is appropriate to the type and value of goods being shipped. 

[*crikey*mate*]

Hey, I never knew there was an Australia Post Act!

Thanks for that!

*goes off to google*

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@thecatspjs wrote:

Ownership of goods is not always so straightforward either as under the AP Act there is a clause that indicates that in particular situations that AP will be considered to be the owner - I assume to support their power to confiscate goods LOL ...

101  Articles carried by post to be taken to be Australia Post’s property

For the purpose of any legal proceeding or action in relation to an article carried by post or under the control of Australia Post, the article shall be taken to be, while it is being carried by post or under the control of Australia Post, the property of Australia Post.

---

I think that answers one of my questions - it would seem from that, that whilst an item is in transit, it is deemed to be the property of Australia Post, therefore the sender cannot retrieve the item.