Apart from an incident involving a horse and a parcel of feed supplement, and a few other ‘hitches’, Australia Post’s 12-month-old ‘Safe Drop’ program is working as intended, according to Postal Industry Ombudsman Professor John McMillan.

The Safe Drop program allows Australia Post to deliver parcels that do not fit safely into a mail box, even if no-one is home, as long as a signature is not required and the parcel can be left in a place that is out of view of the street, and safe from weather and pets.

Releasing the findings of his review of the program’s first year of operation, Professor McMillan today said that unfortunate incidents like the horse destroying the feed parcel could be prevented if Australia Post allowed customers with good cause to ‘opt out’ of the program.

‘Regrettably, Australia Post has rejected the suggestion that it allow customers to advise Australia Post that their properties are not suitable for Safe Drop, on the basis that this would add to delivery costs and affect parcel prices,’ the Ombudsman said.

‘I hold the contrary view that an opt out option could actually save Australia Post and its customers money in the long run, given the costs incurred when parcels are safe dropped inappropriately and lost or damaged.’

Professor McMillan said that in this era of internet and telephone shopping, it made good business sense for Australia Post to streamline its parcel delivery service.

‘However, there may be very good reasons that a property is unsuitable for safe dropped parcels. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to expect that Australia Post should record and act on a customer’s advice to that effect.’

He provided the example of a woman living in a block of 10 units who made an agreement with Australia Post, which was not honoured, to opt out of the program.

‘Strictly speaking, Australia Post complied with the conditions of the program when safe dropping her parcels, but they did not consider the fact that the parcels were on view to the occupants and visitors of the other nine units in the complex,’ Professor McMillan said.

In general, the Ombudsman was satisfied with the administration of the Safe Drop program, but suggested Australia Post could further improve it by:

Download the report: 03|2010 — Australia Post: ‘Safe Drop’ program—a review of the first year, March 2010

Media contact: Fiona Skivington, Director Public Affairs 0408 861 803

Date of release: 5 March 2010

05 Mar 2010: Forget dogs, Australia’s posties have horse problems

Apart from an incident involving a horse and a parcel of feed supplement, and a few other ‘hitches’, Australia Post’s 12-month-old ‘Safe Drop’ program is working as intended, according to Postal Industry Ombudsman Professor John McMillan.

The Safe Drop program allows Australia Post to deliver parcels that do not fit safely into a mail box, even if no-one is home, as long as a signature is not required and the parcel can be left in a place that is out of view of the street, and safe from weather and pets.

Releasing the findings of his review of the program’s first year of operation, Professor McMillan today said that unfortunate incidents like the horse destroying the feed parcel could be prevented if Australia Post allowed customers with good cause to ‘opt out’ of the program.

‘Regrettably, Australia Post has rejected the suggestion that it allow customers to advise Australia Post that their properties are not suitable for Safe Drop, on the basis that this would add to delivery costs and affect parcel prices,’ the Ombudsman said.

‘I hold the contrary view that an opt out option could actually save Australia Post and its customers money in the long run, given the costs incurred when parcels are safe dropped inappropriately and lost or damaged.’

Professor McMillan said that in this era of internet and telephone shopping, it made good business sense for Australia Post to streamline its parcel delivery service.

‘However, there may be very good reasons that a property is unsuitable for safe dropped parcels. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to expect that Australia Post should record and act on a customer’s advice to that effect.’

He provided the example of a woman living in a block of 10 units who made an agreement with Australia Post, which was not honoured, to opt out of the program.

‘Strictly speaking, Australia Post complied with the conditions of the program when safe dropping her parcels, but they did not consider the fact that the parcels were on view to the occupants and visitors of the other nine units in the complex,’ Professor McMillan said.

In general, the Ombudsman was satisfied with the administration of the Safe Drop program, but suggested Australia Post could further improve it by:

  • ensuring that delivery people receive appropriate training about the program
  • putting in place a process for people to advise Australia Post that their properties are unsuitable for Safe Drop
  • reviewing and updating its policy on Safe Drop delivery notification cards.

Download the report: 03|2010 — Australia Post: ‘Safe Drop’ program—a review of the first year, March 2010

Media contact: Fiona Skivington, Director Public Affairs 0408 861 803

Date of release: 5 March 2010