§ 73. Mr. KILEY
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that, complaint having been made to the Treasury with regard to a parcel which arrived at Grimsby for Stewart McDonald, Glasgow, on 5th November, and had not reached the consignee before the middle of February, a letter was written from the Department to the complainants stating that the parcel had arrived on the 5th November, and that the usual notice of arrival was sent to the addressee on 12th November, but that the documents and remittance necessary for the clearance of the parcels not having reached Grimsby in response to that notice, a duplicate was sent on the 1st February; whether he is aware that the addressees allege that they did not receive the notice which is stated to have been posted on 12th November; and whether, in view of the congestion of such parcels, which has been admitted to exist at the arrival depots, he will see that arrangements are made for sending a second notice within reasonable time to the addressees and avoiding inconvenience in such eases?
§ Sir R. HORNE
I understand that the facts are as stated in the first and second parts of the question. As regards the third part, under existing arrangements a reminder is sent to addresses of post parcels when no reply is received to the first notice within a reasonable period, but the hon. Member will realise that the issue of such reminders must be subordinate to the need for sending out the first notices with the least possible delay.
§ Sir R. HORNE
No reply was sent to the first notice, but the fault does not lie with the Custom House.