HL Deb 19 May 1977 vol 383 cc883-4

3.19 p.m.

Lord MONSON

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

Question was as follows:

ask Her Majesty's Government why, given that the fee for a recorded delivery letter has risen from the equivalent of 2½p 10 years ago to 8p today, the maximum compensation payable in the event of loss has remained static at £2 instead of being increased pro rata.

Lord WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the terms under which this service is provided are a matter for the Post Office.

Lord MONSON

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that somewhat unsatisfactory reply. Will be not agree that the original purpose of the recorded delivery system, when it was instituted in 1961, was to cover the sending of documents as opposed to money and other valuables, but that nowadays £2 will scarcely cover the cost of retyping even the most simple document if the orginal is lost?

Lord WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, the purpose of the recorded delivery service is more for those concerned about proof of delivery rather than for compensation for loss of a packet. If the level of compensation is what concerns the sender, he should use the registered letter service.

Lord AIREDALE

My Lords, in that case why have compensation at all? Is it not rather slovenly for a comfortable monopoly to be very ready to put up charges to keep pace with inflation, conveniently forgetting, however, to bother to put up the compensation to keep in line with inflation?

Lord WINTERBOTTOM

My Lords, compensation is one matter, but the cost of delivery for recorded delivery services rises with inflation. Thus, whereas one remains static, the other has been raised.