Written question asked by Rob Wilson (Conservative) on Tuesday, 13 December 2005, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Thursday, 15 December 2005. It was answered by Barry Gardiner (Labour) on Monday, 19 December 2005 on behalf of the Department of Trade and Industry.

Post Office

Question: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry for what reasons the Postal Services Act 2000 does not require the Post Office to compensate for the cost of the postage when a package is lost.

Answer: Section 89 of the Postal Services Act 2000 enables universal service providers (currently only Royal Mail) to make schemes setting out the terms and conditions for their provision of universal postal services. These schemes include provision for compensation payments for loss etc. Postcomm, the independent regulator, is responsible for enforcing such schemes (including on compensation) through the licensing regime also created by the Act.The powers required for Royal Mail to make such schemes were already in place under previous postal services legislation before the creation of the 2000 Act. Rather than introduce new arrangements, when adequate mechanisms already existed, the Postal Services Act 2000 merely mirrored previous arrangements updating them only to take into account the new framework and references for postal services envisaged by the 2000 Act (i.e. the potential for more universal service providers in addition to Royal Mail and the licensing regime).

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 38110; 440 c2329W
Session: 2005-06
Subjects: Compensation Costs Prices Postal services Postage stamps Standards Royal Mail
Link: View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk