RE: Burner and Scan

["Phil Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>]

Marks site had a news article about a "hippo" ... some sort of
lockable
delivery bin that such deliveries could be placed in and then locked safe
for you to retrieve when you return home.

See - occasionally I do read that obscure site!

Phil (Ducking)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian G. Reynolds [mailto:brian.g.reynolds@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 21 September 2001 09:32
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Burner and Scan
>
>
> Makes sense but does not explain why they can deliver to work from a
phone
> order but not from the web! if it was the first time (which it
> was) then OK
> but from then on why not the work address? by using the card details
they
> match with my name and address and the fact that I had the missed
delivery
> card, what more do they need!
>
> A while back BBC's Watchdog (spit) were instigating a policy for
delivery
> companies to adopt and a lot of the companies signed up to it as they
are
> well aware of the difficulties of not having out of hours deliveries
etc.
> not sure what stage the policy is now at but I noticed Watchdog
> is now back
> on the box.
>
> Time to email Watchdog.
>
> B.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Hetherington (egroups)
> > [mailto:mark.egroups@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 21 September 2001 00:31
> > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Burner and Scan
> >
> >
> > > I did send them an email suggesting that after the first
order
> > > maybe a second delivery address could be specified and given
the
> > > option in the web order form for delivery. Haven't had a
reply
> > > yet though. Maybe it's just the card company's rules
(although
> > > Ebuyer operate a similar policy).
> >
> > IME, credit card companies insist that mail order deliveries
> are only made
> > to the cardholder address as part of fraud prevention procedures.
It is
> > entirely the retailer's responsibility if this is not actually
followed.
> > However since Credit Card companies offer no protection to
> > retailers at all
> > in the event of fraud, I am surprised so many bother to follow
> the rule at
> > all. I do believe that they can revoke the merchant agreement,
> but rarely
> > enforce it since any fraudulent payments have to be repaid by
> the retailer
> > in addition to loss of the original goods.
> >
> > Where fraud insurance is available to a retailer, the insurance
> > company will
> > not cover claims where shipping is not made to the cardholder
> address, so
> > maybe companies refusing to deliver to alternate address do so
under the
> > terms of fraud protection insurance.
> >
> > Mark.
> >
> >
> >
> > For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> > Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
> > List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>



For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/