It is nice to know there is someone who cares in government!!
Dave in Oregon
----------
> From: Brad Kahler <brad.kahler@141.com>
> To: triumphs@autox.team.net
> Subject: *U(%^%) postoffice - the conclusion
> Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 2:01 PM
>
>
> For those of you following this thread I thought I would fill you in on
the
> final conclusion.
>
> Yesterday I had talked to I think four different people at three
different
> branches trying to locate my express mail package. Several had promised
> to return calls which did not happen. Finally this morning around 10:30
I
> called the main branch again and talked to someone in the express mail
> department. He said it would be about an hour before he could access the
> computers to try and locate the package. He also said he would be
calling
> me back around noon. So around 2:30 today after not getting any call
back
> I decided I'd had enough and called the main branch and asked to speak to
> the post master. I was intercepted by his secretary who said he was out
> and then asked if she could help. So I proceeded to tell the whole story
yet
> again. She also was baffled by the erroneous article (tracking) number
that
> was written on the slip. I also mentioned the lack of apparent concern
by
> the people I had talked to so far. She promised to look into it and
> mentioned that this could be "ugly".
>
> Well about 3:30 I got a call from the post master directly. Yes they did
find
> the package and he apologized about 4 or 5 times for the error and from
the
> tone of his voice he wasn't pleased with the overall sequence of events
that
> took place this past week. Apparently what happened is the driver on
> sunday left the package in the delivery vehicle and some how it managed
to
> find a nice little nook where it wasn't easily seen. So after my call at
2:30 I
> guess they did a thorough search of said vehicle and found the package.
> He couldn't explain the bad article number written down but he did
mention
> that he would see what he could do to try and see that this type of thing
> never happens again. He also mentioned that he was "expecting" me to
file
> a claim to be reimbursed for the delivery costs and also mentioned that
he
> didn't think "he" would have any trouble approving such claim. I did
> suggest that I didn't really need to file a claim and he told me he
really
> wished I would.
>
> Also it looks like I will get to meet the post master since he is
delivering the
> package to me personally sometime in the next hour or so!
>
> To be honest, the delay in receiving the package didn't bother me near as
> much as the thought of having possibly lost the package for good. I
> checked with the the place I bought the lights from and they are NOS
Lucas
> lights and NOT new reproduction like I had thought. These lights
> apparently are pretty rare. If anyone is interested in seeing which
lights I'm
> refering to, look in Bill Piggotts latest book Original Triumph
TR4/4A/5/6 on
> page 8 and on page 110. The lights in question are the backup lights
below
> the rear bumper.
>
> So alls well that ends well, however I must admit I'm glad the saga has
> finally ended!
>
>
> Brad (Lincoln Nebraska 402-464-1502)
> My Web Site Http://www.141.com/triumphs (updated 12/3/98)
>
> 1964 Spitfire4 BFC25720L -- 1973 Spitfire 1500 FM3353U
> 1962 TR4 CT288L -- 1965 TR4 CT38888LO parts car?
> 1959 TR3A TS41311L -- 1959 TR3A TS53523L parts car
> 1951 Dodge Truck B-3-B-108
|