(06-11-2020, 05:41 AM)mothered Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:23 AM)Filament Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:16 AM)mothered Wrote: Thanks for clarifying It.

Carries record their delivery runs for each and every destination and enter the Information Into their systems at their depot, during, and before close of business. The only way I can see this failing, Is If an Investigation Is checked against the carrier's manifest and deemed delivered to the other address.

Do you know what information carriers give during investigation?

Generally speaking, but not limited to:

* Con note numbers.
* Date & time of delivery.
* Weights & dimensions.
* Tracking numbers.
* Signature(s) of receipt.
* Images of delivery confirmation.
* Damage reports raised.

Quote:cannot cross-check the physical delivery (package/envelope) against the carrier's records. That Is, given they've disposed of It, there's only one record- what's documented on the carrier's manifest, which Is not enough to deem any Investigation conclusive.

(06-11-2020, 05:56 AM)Filament Wrote: once I give them a tracking number (after they've disposed of the package), they'll carry out an investigation for the package via the tracking number, find the dimensions/weight of the package, and deem that I never sent the item.

(06-11-2020, 06:26 AM)mothered Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:56 AM)Filament Wrote: once I give them a tracking number (after they've disposed of the package), they'll carry out an investigation for the package via the tracking number, find the dimensions/weight of the package, and deem that I never sent the item.

How will they deem the Item wasn't sent, when they have no physical nor administrative records on the receiving end to cross-check the carrier's manifest? Irrespective of the weight on the carrier's end, they need to cross-check It against the package which obviously doesn't exist, both physically and Inventory-wise. That's the purpose of an Investigation- to liaise between carrier & company and vice-versa.

As said, the objective of this particular method, Is to show the tracking number delivered to the "correct address". If the receiving warehouse (seemingly) failed to do their part, by way of neglecting to scan It Into their Inventory on receipt and losing the package, then that falls on them and not the buyer (yourself). We lose packages "every day" at work, mark them as a write-off and Issue a refund/replacement (for low value Items) thereafter. The cost of our manpower to thoroughly check missing consignments, outweighs the cost of the Item.

Don't get me wrong, the FTID method Is far from perfect. In fact, Bob (or whatever his/her name Is) didn't even get the title right: "FTID"- "Fake Tracking ID". Since when Is the "Tracking ID" fake? Given he cannot title the method accordingly, Inconsistencies In his methodologies are expected. He's not exactly the sharpest tool In the shed, that's a given.

(06-11-2020, 05:24 PM)Filament Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 06:26 AM)mothered Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:56 AM)Filament Wrote: once I give them a tracking number (after they've disposed of the package), they'll carry out an investigation for the package via the tracking number, find the dimensions/weight of the package, and deem that I never sent the item.

How will they deem the Item wasn't sent, when they have no physical nor administrative records on the receiving end to cross-check the carrier's manifest? Irrespective of the weight on the carrier's end, they need to cross-check It against the package which obviously doesn't exist, both physically and Inventory-wise. That's the purpose of an Investigation- to liaise between carrier & company and vice-versa.

As said, the objective of this particular method, Is to show the tracking number delivered to the "correct address". If the receiving warehouse (seemingly) failed to do their part, by way of neglecting to scan It Into their Inventory on receipt and losing the package, then that falls on them and not the buyer (yourself). We lose packages "every day" at work, mark them as a write-off and Issue a refund/replacement (for low value Items) thereafter. The cost of our manpower to thoroughly check missing consignments, outweighs the cost of the Item.

Don't get me wrong, the FTID method Is far from perfect. In fact, Bob (or whatever his/her name Is) didn't even get the title right: "FTID"- "Fake Tracking ID". Since when Is the "Tracking ID" fake? Given he cannot title the method accordingly, Inconsistencies In his methodologies are expected. He's not exactly the sharpest tool In the shed, that's a given.

Thank you! I have a better idea of how to argue my case now.
I agree Bob's book definitely has lots of inconsistencies all around.

Out of curiosity, do you think there exists a perfect method?

(06-11-2020, 05:30 PM)Roadman Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:24 PM)Filament Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 06:26 AM)mothered Wrote: How will they deem the Item wasn't sent, when they have no physical nor administrative records on the receiving end to cross-check the carrier's manifest? Irrespective of the weight on the carrier's end, they need to cross-check It against the package which obviously doesn't exist, both physically and Inventory-wise. That's the purpose of an Investigation- to liaise between carrier & company and vice-versa.

As said, the objective of this particular method, Is to show the tracking number delivered to the "correct address". If the receiving warehouse (seemingly) failed to do their part, by way of neglecting to scan It Into their Inventory on receipt and losing the package, then that falls on them and not the buyer (yourself). We lose packages "every day" at work, mark them as a write-off and Issue a refund/replacement (for low value Items) thereafter. The cost of our manpower to thoroughly check missing consignments, outweighs the cost of the Item.

Don't get me wrong, the FTID method Is far from perfect. In fact, Bob (or whatever his/her name Is) didn't even get the title right: "FTID"- "Fake Tracking ID". Since when Is the "Tracking ID" fake? Given he cannot title the method accordingly, Inconsistencies In his methodologies are expected. He's not exactly the sharpest tool In the shed, that's a given.

Thank you! I have a better idea of how to argue my case now.
I agree Bob's book definitely has lots of inconsistencies all around.

Out of curiosity, do you think there exists a perfect method?

I saw somebody say they delivered their FTID to the correct returns address (not altered), they removed all identifiable details, but still the company managed to trace the order. The company in question even said the parcel received was an EB. What's your thoughts on this? @mothered

(06-11-2020, 05:37 PM)Filament Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:30 PM)Roadman Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:24 PM)Filament Wrote: Thank you! I have a better idea of how to argue my case now.
I agree Bob's book definitely has lots of inconsistencies all around.

Out of curiosity, do you think there exists a perfect method?

I saw somebody say they delivered their FTID to the correct returns address (not altered), they removed all identifiable details, but still the company managed to trace the order. The company in question even said the parcel received was an EB. What's your thoughts on this? @mothered

Do you have more details?
What company?
Maybe they didn't properly remove all details.
If they sent an empty box, that would raise some suspicion.
The company can scan the tracking barcode to find the actual barcode. Once customer tells the company the tracking #, they can find the package.
If it was a smaller company that isn't inundated with returns, I'm honestly not surprised at all.

(06-11-2020, 08:33 PM)Checkpoint Wrote: All things considered I think FTID it's a method that sometimes works simply because the company doesn't want to go really deep with the investigation.

(06-11-2020, 09:44 PM)Roadman Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:37 PM)Filament Wrote:

(06-11-2020, 05:30 PM)Roadman Wrote: I saw somebody say they delivered their FTID to the correct returns address (not altered), they removed all identifiable details, but still the company managed to trace the order. The company in question even said the parcel received was an EB. What's your thoughts on this? @mothered

Do you have more details?
What company?
Maybe they didn't properly remove all details.
If they sent an empty box, that would raise some suspicion.
The company can scan the tracking barcode to find the actual barcode. Once customer tells the company the tracking #, they can find the package.
If it was a smaller company that isn't inundated with returns, I'm honestly not surprised at all.

He didn't tell me the company, but the courier used was UPS. The company raised an investigation with UPS and it came back mentioning the unusual dimensions and weight. He confirmed to me he 100% removed identifiable details. So not only did the company scan the barcode themselves to find the original tracking number, they raised an investigation as well with the courier.

(06-11-2020, 05:30 PM)Roadman Wrote: I saw somebody say they delivered their FTID to the correct returns address (not altered), they removed all identifiable details, but still the company managed to trace the order.