@joethenuts wrote:try asking canbe you the person you gave kutos to who has only been on ebay for 1 day who has never brought or sold on ebay ,who has agreed to terms and conditions on ebay , but dont worry why dont you also read the sopose lawer on ebay posting what was his namwe again,mr bearded one thats his id. and he will explain to you about for a start picking up goods from any seller. which one do you agree on mr beardedone or canbe ??????????????? only 1 can be right. stick to what you know [oranges]
Firstly, joe, it's not up to others to substantiate claims that you make.
You made the claims, I think it is incumbent upon you to back them up. Who I give kudos to has nothing to do with what I was seeking from you.
Furthermore, if you are now endorsing canbe4 on matters legal (by directing me to ask them my question) then you can't have it both ways by trying to discredit them because of their registration history. Additionally, as pointed out by you earlier this year, when you stated that you had been on these boards longer than padi, the date you refer to for canbe4 is only the registration date for that eBay ID. Whether canbe4 has a buying or selling history and the extent of that history is pure conjecture and only a distraction from the question I asked you.
Also, don't try to confuse the issue by asking about pickup items, I only asked for one thing from you . . . . to back up the statements you made regarding ownership of lodged post-stamped articles. If it is too hard then just say so, if you don't know where you read it just say so. Doing so will be more credible than deflecting and distracting from the question.
Finally joe, even though I have posted here to try to remain focused on trying to get an answer from you regarding the lodgement statements you have made, I can't let your "stick to what you know [oranges]" comment go with asking what it is you hope to achieve by including such a juvenile comment like that? You started a thread for members to discuss and then you revert to this kind of BS. If you want members to take you seriously then cut out the personal attacks and start acting like an adult.
@queenslander-one wrote:
K1ooo
Australian Postal Law is quite clear on the matter. Copy below.
Rule 101 Articles carried by post to be taken to be Australia Postโs property
Quote
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.
In Australia, the seller is not legally responsible for delivery, only postage, therefore proof of postage is what is required.
Thank you queenslander. I read that in the thread you started earlier this year. Now I know where joe got part of his information.
HOWEVER, taken in context, I do not believe that this information supports joe's statements.
What you have quoted from is the Australia Post Corporation Act 1989. This act does not appear to deal with the ins and outs of the day-to-day operating practices of Australia Post and, as pointed out by another poster earlier today, Rule 101 in context refers to "for the purpose of any legal proceeding or action". If Rule 101 was dealing with day-to-day operations one would expect it to be surrounded by a multitude of other 'rules' regarding posting and lodgment of articles and not tucked away in the "Miscellaneous" section of the act.
Here's a screengrab showing Rule 100, 101 and 102 that are bundled under the heading of "Miscellaneous" in the act.
There is no continuity of subject matter with these rules.
joe,
even if Rule 101 was applied to the day-to-day operations of Aust Post I think it is a bit of a stretch to now try to use Rule 101 of this act as evidence that it is against the law to photograph or even touch a post-stamped article at time of lodgement.
I can also understand privacy concerns of photographing articles that have nothing to an individual, but when you posted:
. . . . . . . . if you had an item sent to me joethenuts with my address on it. who is allowed to see for instance where i live , not you its there property.
that just doesn't make sense in the discussion about sellers photographing post-stamped articles. I mean, now you are saying that the seller, the person who addresses the item to you, someone who knows your address, is not even allowed to see the addressed item as it is now owned by Aust Post.
As far as photographing the article addressed to you goes, there are no privacy issues unless the seller uses the photos in a way that breaches your privacy, like uploading them (or links to them) to a public forum.
An example of breach of privacy laws would be if a seller was to upload courier connote numbers that let anybody see their buyer's Name, Address, Phone number and Signature . . . . . . now that would be a privacy law breach worthy of further discussion.
