‘My Tag Heuer watch went missing but Royal Mail says I’m to blame’

Dear reader,

You’re adamant that your watch was stolen, but Royal Mail seemed to be insinuating that your lazy packaging efforts might have caused the watch to fall out of its own accord and become lost somewhere within its vast system. 

I asked you for pictures of the opened package, as well as a video you had taken explaining how you packaged it up, and demonstrating how the watch could not have fallen out by itself. You had placed the watch, wrapped in bubble wrap, inside a cardboard envelope, which was sealed with lots of thick tape. 

It certainly didn’t seem like a parcel that should have come open by itself. The evidence seemed to point to you having securely packaged up the watch, and although we cannot be sure what happened to it, to me at least, deliberate theft seemed the most likely scenario. 

You feel Royal Mail has failed to address the issue of theft to suit its own purposes, and you might be right. Instead it has attempted to pin the blame on you for apparently failing to package the watch correctly, leading to its “loss”. 

Royal Mail’s gripe was with the fact that you placed the watch inside a cardboard envelope, despite the guidance on its website stating that padded envelopes should be used for parcels with “odd shapes”. 

So could your wrapped watch be classed as an “odd shape”? Quite possibly. 

However, the information on its website is merely “advice” to be taken or left. What really mattered were the terms and conditions of the insurance you purchased to cover the watch against loss or theft. 

They state that the policy will be void: “where the item is not packaged in accordance with the requirements of the relevant schemes made under the Postal Services Act”. 

A list of exclusions are then detailed, the last one being: “where the packaging does not comply with any other information published by Royal Mail in paper or electronic form on packing.” 

So when it came down to it, despite your evidence pointing to the likelihood of theft within its operation, Royal Mail was happy to rely on a vague exclusion in its T&Cs to avoid paying you. I felt this was a poor show, but it refused to change its stance, even after my involvement.

You put your case to Royal Mail’s review panel, which can take 30 days to make a decision, and you hoped for the best.

In the meantime I’d been talking to the Post Office where you dropped the watch off, asking why, if the parcel was incorrectly packaged, its staff hadn’t alerted you to this when you handed over the parcel. 

Eventually it came back with a statement which completely flew in the face of Royal Mail’s stance on the situation. 

A spokesman said: “We have looked at the video showing the packaging used. We believe that the item was appropriately packaged and sealed by the customer. The item, with enhanced insurance, was correctly sold to the customer. 

“The package was sealed when it left this Post Office for onward delivery by Royal Mail. A Special Delivery item is scanned when it leaves a Post Office and then rescanned at different stages of its journey with Royal Mail.”  

The day after I shared this with Royal Mail its review panel decided to reimburse you to the tune of £1,850, which is what your watch is worth. This was the right decision, but it’s shameful that it took the involvement of both myself and the Post Office to reach it. 

Royal Mail has now apologised and is actively searching for the watch. Of course, if it was stolen, it will be long gone by now. 

You thought you saw it up for auction at an online pawnbroker, but following a short investigation it turned out not to be yours. Although this heirloom piece can never be replaced, I hope you’ll find something similar you’ll enjoy wearing for years to come.