CONSUMER BEWARE - Huge postal rate differences... UPS vs. USPS & FEDEX
Mary Lou
dollars when mailing packages.
I was in for a shock today when I sent my husband to UPS to mail a 14 lb.
package containing Christmas gifts destined for Puerto Rico. He was informed
that Standard delivery service was not available and was charged $42.11 for
Expedited delivery service. Of course, I would have walked out right then
and there, but he went ahead and charged it.
After comparing rates, I discovered that mailing the same package would cost
much less using either FEDEX or US Postal Service. Rates are as follows:
USPS - $18.57 (parcel post) or $22.00 (priority mail-3 days)
FEDEX - $32.03 (international economy)
UPS - $42.11 (expedited service-2 days)
Of course we should have done our research before going to UPS, instead of
after the fact. It's so simple to compare rates now by visiting the
different mail carriers websites. I'm truly amazed at the price
difference. I seem to recall a time when UPS was my carrier of choice
because their rates would always be better than anyone elses. I guess times
& our economy have changed. I'm also pretty disgusted with myself for not
checking it out beforehand. I feel better writing this post in the hope
that it may help some unsuspecting consumer save some money.
--
Mary Lou
Email: bay...@world123.net
Anonymous
when compared to any of the other private carriers.
They've got all the business from the first class letter
mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
These lower rates have been around for as long
as the FedEx and UPS have been in business.
So there's nothing new here.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! ==-----
Derald Martin
>FEDEX - $32.03 (international economy)
>UPS - $42.11 (expedited service-2 days)
you checked compares to or competes directly with UPS "expedited". Check
USPS "priority" and, you'll notice that they make NO explicit delivery
guarantee. I use it all the time for domestic parcels (business use)
and, believe me, "two-to-three" days is ad copywriter's fiction. The
nearest USPS equivalent to UPS "expedited" is USPS "Express Mail",
which---regardless of what the teevee adverts imply---makes no delivery
guarantee _at all_ (yes, not even a guarantee of delivery), much less a
guarantee of timeliness! Denver-to-San Juan, sans confirmation,
insurance, etc. is $40.80, no bargain. It is important to note that the
United States Postal Service makes no guarantee at all whatsoever on any
of its services; it does not even guarantee to _deliver_ the parcel to
its destination!
Seems to me that UPS is doing itself and its customers a service by
discontinuing "standard" delivery service this time of year to
destinations where there is little hope of timely delivery by Christmas.
Otherwise, they'd be overwhelmed by bargain-hunters _insisting_ on
shipping the lowest-priced way and then later bitch-bitch-bitching, when
the parcel does not arrive "on time".
--
Derald
Karen Wheless
> when compared to any of the other private carriers.
> They've got all the business from the first class letter
> mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
I believe that the packages subsidize the first class mail, not the
other way around. The profit margin on packages is much, much higher
than the profit margin on letters.
USPS is not always cheaper. I mailed four packages last week, and I
used the web sites to compare prices. UPS was cheaper for three out of
the four. All four packages weighed 4-5 pounds.
The main difference is that USPS ships via a standard rate everywhere in
the United States, at least for packages under 5 pounds. If you ship a
package to Hawaii, it costs the same as if you shipped a package across
the street. I'm not sure if this applies to Puerto Rico. (Once you get
above 5 pounds, they start charging by distance.)
UPS, on the other hand, charges by zones. So a package sent across the
street costs a lot less than a package sent across the country. Three
of my four packages were sent from New York to Virginia. Those were
cheaper at UPS because they only went across one zone. The other
package was going to California, and it was cheaper at USPS.
One big problem with UPS is that they charge you extra for residential
addresses. If you're sending to a business, UPS is even cheaper, but
all of my packages were sent to home addresses. I've heard that this
extra fee is going up even more in the new year.
This is comparing UPS ground to USPS priority mail. If you aren't in a
hurry, you can send packages via USPS parcel post, which is even
cheaper, and no one can come close to those rates. And if the package
is books or CD's or videotapes, you can send them USPS media mail, which
is amazingly cheap. I just sent a 3 pound book via media mail, and it
cost $2.25. Incredible.
Karen
Bear
you gotta be kidding! I had other packages to mail, so I went to UPS<usually
much cheaper>. It was $34. The part that bothered me, was that both places
wanted everything in the box listed individually for customs. There are
probably 60 items, and 12 people in bad moods behind me........
I walked. Maybe we'll go to Windsor over the holidays.
Bear
"Mary Lou" wrote in message
Timothy J. Lee
Karen Wheless <karen....@verizon.net> wrote:
>One big problem with UPS is that they charge you extra for residential
>addresses.
From a recipient point of view, UPS' service definitely seems to be
better when delivering to businesses that are open during business
hours, compared to residences where people may be out during the day.
If your recipients can receive UPS-delivered packages at work during
business hours, that may be a better option.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
Melissa
I found that out the hard way when a Canadian buyer on an eBay auction asked
me to use UPS. He refused shipment because there was an addition $20 charge
on the package when he tried to accept it. From what I've read on eBay
related message boards, never use UPS when shipping to Canada from the US.
Melissa
"Bear" <bb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9vdeio$ehsgt$1...@ID-121161.news.dfncis.de...
Bob Ward
wrote:
How much is it worth to you for your family to receive their Christmas
presents BEFORE the holiday? Surface shipping to Puerto Rico wouldn't
make it, I'm afraid. Sounds to me like you waited til the last
minute, and are blaming UPS for your failure to plan. As you noted,
the rates for all the shipping services are available online - you
obviously have web access, so why are you doing your homework now?
--
This space left intentionally blank.
Bob Ward
>Shipping UPS to Canada causes a Tax or Charge to be levied on the receiver.
>I found that out the hard way when a Canadian buyer on an eBay auction asked
>me to use UPS. He refused shipment because there was an addition $20 charge
>on the package when he tried to accept it. From what I've read on eBay
>related message boards, never use UPS when shipping to Canada from the US.
>
>Melissa
Do you think UPS just makes this stuff up? If there are Customs
duties levied, they must be paid no matter how the package was
shipped. Sounds like your eBay customer had buyer's remorse and used
this for an excuse.
Melissa
the buyer hadn't bought from a US seller before. I read it over and over
again on the Auction Watch message boards to NOT use UPS shipping to Canada
due to the fee or tax or charge that was imposed on items shipped that way.
For some reason, using the Mail instead of UPS doesn't incure whatever
charges these are.
I don't live in Canada, so I don't understand all the details myself, but I
do know the next time I shipped something, I shipped via Mail and there were
no other duties levied on the package.
The speakers I shipped to Canada were sold for $40 I believe. The cost for
shipping itself was somewhere in the neighborhood of $15, and the brokerage
fee added another $16, and the buyer wouldn't pay it. USPS doesn't charge a
fee like this.
I believe it is some type of Brokerage fee after looking around on the web a
bit.
http://www.ups.com/canada/using/software/currentrates/engcustoms_rates.html
Melissa
Bob Ward <bob....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:7ukk1uo7q8ue9f0en...@4ax.com...
Derald Martin
>this for an excuse.
that UPS charges a somewhat high broker's or agent's fee for processing
the customs forms, or something like that. All I know is that the
Canookian eBay buyers aren't real thrilled with UPS as a general rule.
--
Derald
Kasper
wrote:
>In article <1f4eoik.1fn21ca17o8dj4N%karen....@verizon.net>,
>Karen Wheless <karen....@verizon.net> wrote:
>>One big problem with UPS is that they charge you extra for residential
>>addresses.
>
>From a recipient point of view, UPS' service definitely seems to be
>better when delivering to businesses that are open during business
>hours, compared to residences where people may be out during the day.
>If your recipients can receive UPS-delivered packages at work during
>business hours, that may be a better option.
To some extent it depends on where you live ... When I lived in Chicago
every piddly little package had to be signed for whereas where I live
now most of the parcels get tossed on the front porch with no signature.
Kasper
catlady
> From a recipient point of view, UPS' service definitely seems to be
> better when delivering to businesses that are open during business
> hours, compared to residences where people may be out during the day.
> If your recipients can receive UPS-delivered packages at work during
> business hours, that may be a better option.
I had a computer shipped to my business address last month, primarily
because of advice such as this. I figured it would be safer to have it
delivered to work. It was promptly stolen from the front office before I
ever had a chance to see it. (UPS has a signed receipt from the
receptionist.) Unless you have serious security at work, don't ship
anything there.
Fred A. Murphy
On 14-Dec-2001, Bob Ward <bob....@verizon.net> wrote:
> Do you think UPS just makes this stuff up? If there are Customs
> duties levied, they must be paid no matter how the package was
> shipped. Sounds like your eBay customer had buyer's remorse and used
> this for an excuse.
UPS levies a charge, as high as $35, to carry the item through customs.
AFAIK, USPS doesn't
--
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night. Set a man on fire
and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Discworld - Terry
Pratchett.
Kasper
There is a way to have UPS hold the delivery at their local facility ..
sure, you have to go pick it up but this beats what happened to you.
I hope you used a credit card that pays for items stolen in the first 30
days of ownership .. some cards have that benefit.
Kasper
ConsumerBot
You are comparing apples to oranges. You've listed different types of
service; of course there is a difference in price.
Steve Knight
>I was going to mail a package to Canada via USPS and it was $35. I thought
>you gotta be kidding! I had other packages to mail, so I went to UPS<usually
>much cheaper>. It was $34. The part that bothered me, was that both places
>wanted everything in the box listed individually for customs. There are
>probably 60 items, and 12 people in bad moods behind me........
>I walked. Maybe we'll go to Windsor over the holidays.
but the person on the other end will pay dearly for that UPS package.
--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com
For prices and ordering instructions.
To subscribe to my good deals/beta testing/seconds email list send a email to
gooddeal...@knight-toolworks.com
Subject: subscribe
Steve Knight
>Do you think UPS just makes this stuff up? If there are Customs
>duties levied, they must be paid no matter how the package was
>shipped. Sounds like your eBay customer had buyer's remorse and used
>this for an excuse.
it depends but usually UPS charges it's own fee's. if it is made in the up you
can ship it USPS and there is no charge.
a...@here.com
You husband deserves a kink in the cajones for being so gullible.
Jim Dompier
says...
UPS is high when shipping to/from Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico.
Within the continental U.S. its competitive.
UPS ground is very affordable, but its not available to any of these far
away places.
Jim Dompier
anon...@anonymous.anonymous says...
> The U.S. Postal service generally has the best rates
> when compared to any of the other private carriers.
> They've got all the business from the first class letter
> mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
This is true, but be advised, the postal service is NOT allowed to ship
any mail on commercial flights, since the anthrax B/S, so the post
office has to find commercial air freight carriers to carry all their
freight and its taking a lot longer to get packages. I waited almost 2
weeks for a package that should have taken 4 days to get here. THe
postal service used to have mail on almost every passenger plane flying,
not now.
Don Klipstein
>
>I had a computer shipped to my business address last month, primarily
>because of advice such as this. I figured it would be safer to have it
>delivered to work. It was promptly stolen from the front office before I
>ever had a chance to see it. (UPS has a signed receipt from the
>receptionist.) Unless you have serious security at work, don't ship
>anything there.
Where I work, the boss signs for stuff. Packages that are signed for
sit less than 4 feet behind where the boss works, and my boss knows
everyone!
Now, I surely think a decent receptionist can do the same. Any
receptionist who signs for a package addressed to a specific person at the
receptionist's workplace would call or buzz or leave voicemail to the
person the package is addressed to. And not let it go into the hands of
anyone else except as directed by the intended recipient! I think any
receptionist who fails in that area needs to be punished by spending the
next January and the first half of the following February working as a
bicycle messenger in Chicago, and I think nearly enough all receptionists
know how to handle and guard packages!
BTW: I did spend 2 years and 3 winters as a bicycle messenger in a
Rustbelt city, although not Chicago!
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Don Klipstein
>I was going to mail a package to Canada via USPS and it was $35. I thought
>you gotta be kidding! I had other packages to mail, so I went to UPS<usually
>much cheaper>. It was $34. The part that bothered me, was that both places
>wanted everything in the box listed individually for customs. There are
>probably 60 items, and 12 people in bad moods behind me........
Do you think any private carrier will make the customer and people in
line behind the customer spend time for the customer to fill out customs
forms unless that was absolutely legally required? Only someone without
competitors would dare to do such an irritation voluntarily!
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Vadim Rapp
> days of ownership .. some cards have that benefit.
actually, all platinum VISA cards have it, I think MC as well. However I bet
that you didn't actually use it - I did, and it's close to impossible to get
the money. This benefit is actually an insurance purchased by VISA from some
third class insurance agencies, and those are using the full arsenal of
tricks in order to deny any claim, starting with the long list of
unpublished "policies".
Vadim
Stan Brown
>The U.S. Postal service generally has the best rates
>when compared to any of the other private carriers.
Because you're comparing apples and oranges. The Postal Service
advertises a comparison of its NON-guaranteed (2 or 3 day average)
against the USPS and FedEx GUARANTEED 2-day delivery. So of course
the Postal Service comes out cheaper -- it's a lower level of
service. Perfectly adequate for the majority of cases, but still not
the same.
And you fell into the same trap of illogic.
(That said, I'm surprised at the discrepancy between USPS and FedEx
that you quote. Are you positive that the two were for the same
level of service, or was one maybe "morning delivery" and the other
"daytime delivery"?)
>They've got all the business from the first class letter
>mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
No, this is not true. There used to be a moderate subsidy from first
class to third class (junk mail), but I suspect that's no longer the
case because Congress mandated that each class pay its own way.
The main reason the Postal Service prices are lower is that they
don't guarantee a delivery time. USPS and FedEx non-guaranteed
prices are substantially lower than guaranteed prices, too.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://oakroadsystems.com/
"What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?"
"My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters."
"The waters? What waters? We're in the desert."
"I was misinformed."
ConsumerBot
>Anonymous <anon...@anonymous.anonymous> wrote in misc.consumers:
>>The U.S. Postal service generally has the best rates
>>when compared to any of the other private carriers.
>
>Because you're comparing apples and oranges. The Postal Service
>advertises a comparison of its NON-guaranteed (2 or 3 day average)
>against the USPS and FedEx GUARANTEED 2-day delivery.
Thank you! Finally a normal post!
bear...@cruller.invalid
"Bear" <bb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was going to mail a package to Canada via USPS and it was $35. I thought
> you gotta be kidding! I had other packages to mail, so I went to UPS<usually
> much cheaper>. It was $34. The part that bothered me, was that both places
> wanted everything in the box listed individually for customs.
I think this is an anti-terrorism FAA regulation (that all customs forms
must be filled out completely _by the customer_ not the shipper).
Furthermore, I believe that many other nations' requirements regarding
international package transport are even more severe. Packages sent
internationally are subject to more scrutiny than domestic transports. I
expect it to get stricter everywhere, too.
I know that customs forms are available at USPS counters, and I would be
surprised if they weren't available at all other shippers. Grab a
handful to take with you. You can fill them out at home after preparing
the package for shipping instead of filling them out at the counter.
You're right, it is a PITN, but if it helps prevent airliners from
blowing up, it's worth it.
Dave C.
would have morals enough to fill out the customs forms completely and
honestly? -Dave
--
On linuxfreemail dot com, I am user "spamfilter".
<bearclaw> wrote in message
news:bearclaw-52E455...@corp.supernews.com...
Vadim Rapp
saying that it's ineligible because the item was left in a public space. The
"public space" was my own porch, but this was about $12, so I just dropped
it. Perhaps MC is better than VISA in this. However, VISA was good when I
exercised their extended warranty benefit - they reimbursed for the repairs
promptly and accurately.
Vadim
"krh" <ken97...@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:plim1ustbigt2jeff...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2001 07:38:01 GMT, "Vadim Rapp" <vadi...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >,#> I hope you used a credit card that pays for items stolen in the first
30
> >,#> days of ownership .. some cards have that benefit.
> >,#
> >,#actually, all platinum VISA cards have it, I think MC as well. However
I bet
> >,#that you didn't actually use it - I did, and it's close to impossible
to get
> >,#the money. This benefit is actually an insurance purchased by VISA from
some
> >,#third class insurance agencies, and those are using the full arsenal of
> >,#tricks in order to deny any claim, starting with the long list of
> >,#unpublished "policies".
> >,#
> >,#Vadim
>
>
> I've only had one experience using that benefit.
>
> I purchased a portable phone and left it in my locked trunk at a motel
> one night. The next morning the phone was gone along with a nice
> jacket as well. There was no visible signs of entry so the thief
> picked the lock on the vehicle and then pulled the lever to the left
> of the drivers seat to open the trunk. A police report was filed
> and, it along with receipt for the phone was forwarded to Master Card.
> The company paid the estimated value of the jacket as well as the
> receipted value of the phone. Total payment was a little over
> $200.00.
>
> krh
Mary Lou
It may seem like I'm comparing apples and oranges, but the different
carriers I mentioned to do not offer identical services so it's difficult to
make an exact comparison. Perhaps that's where they can justify charging
such different rates by claiming that their level of service is superior to
that of another carrier.
It also seems apparent that private carriers have a very different set of
standards and criteria for categorizing mail. For example, UPS and FEDEX
consider mail going anywhere outside the continental US as International
Mail and therefore charge more. Whereas USPS treats it as Domestic Mail if
the destination is anywhere within the continental US or any of its
territories.
In my situation, delivery of my package was not time sensitive. I didn't
care if it took 2 days or 10 days to arrive. So USPS Priority Mail would
definitely have been a better choice for me. It would have arrived in 3
days (give or take) at a cost of $22. That's almost a $20 savings over the
$42.11 that UPS charged me.
I did not mention in my original post (my faux pax) that USPS offers Express
Mail (overnight to most areas). In that case, the charge for my 15 lb
normal size package going to Puerto Rico would be $40.80.
"Mary Lou" <bay...@world123.net> wrote in message
news:3c19c...@news.starnetinc.com...
Bob Mann
(express and priority) shipments compared to the USPS. Been that way for
years, Thought everyone knew that.
Remenber the TV ads that USPS had on TV comparing the rates for express and
priority 4-5 years ago? Showed a delivery person from each of the big three
and he would hold up a express envelope with the rate. USPS was always 1/2
the cost and they were trying to get eveyone to know it. They were sued by
FedX and UPS and they won because by law they have to charge twice. The ads
were pulled and you don't hear anythig about it anymore. FedX and UPS are
bound to the express and priority rates and have to have them approved by US
Government.
Hows that for big brother?
Bob Ward
wrote:
>UPS and FEDX are required (by law) to charge about DOUBLE the rate for
>(express and priority) shipments compared to the USPS. Been that way for
>years, Thought everyone knew that.
>
>Remenber the TV ads that USPS had on TV comparing the rates for express and
>priority 4-5 years ago? Showed a delivery person from each of the big three
>and he would hold up a express envelope with the rate. USPS was always 1/2
>the cost and they were trying to get eveyone to know it. They were sued by
>FedX and UPS and they won because by law they have to charge twice. The ads
>were pulled and you don't hear anythig about it anymore. FedX and UPS are
>bound to the express and priority rates and have to have them approved by US
>Government.
>
>Hows that for big brother?
What law would that be, specifically? I was unable to find any
reference to such a statute, but I might not have been looking in the
right place. Since you sound so sure of your facts, perhaps you could
let us know.
Bob Ward
Is it part of her job description? If not, unless you have specific
authorization from your superiors to be diverting the attention of
support staff, I think you'll have to suck it up and deal with the
loss if your package disappears.
The Ranger
>UPS and FEDX are required (by law) to charge about DOUBLE
>the rate for (express and priority) shipments compared to the
>FedX and UPS are bound to the express and priority rates and have
>to have them approved by US Government.
Hmmm... That's an interesting [unknown heretofore] law. Can you please tell
me where I might find it? I'd love to read it.
The Ranger
ConsumerBot
>It may seem like I'm comparing apples and oranges, but the different
>carriers I mentioned to do not offer identical services so it's difficult to
>make an exact comparison. Perhaps that's where they can justify charging
>such different rates
Duh!
> by claiming that their level of service is superior to
>that of another carrier.
They are not "superior", they are DIFFERENT! The fact that UPS charges
more than USPS to Puerto Rico doesn't mean that you get better
service, you get what you pay for: faster service with a guaranteed
delivery date.
ConsumerBot
>UPS and FEDX are required (by law) to charge about DOUBLE the rate for
>(express and priority) shipments compared to the USPS. Been that way for
>years, Thought everyone knew that.
You're sure you didn't just pull this information out of thin air? If
it were true, Fedex and UPS would not charge $14 for an overnight
GUARANTEED letter delivery that USPS charges $11.50 for.
Bob Ward
wrote:
Playing word games today, eh?
If faster service is what you need or want, then the service that is
faster is, indeed better - for your needs at that time.
ConsumerBot
I admit that I didn't phrase my reply well to carry my point across.
The point was that you pay different amounts of money for different
*levels* of service. A faster service costs more. A guarantee of
delivery costs more. The poster I was replying to was suggesting that
the charges were higher due to the carrier's "claim" that the service
was "superior". It was simply a different level of service, that's it.
Gene Wirchenko
>The U.S. Postal service generally has the best rates
>when compared to any of the other private carriers.
>They've got all the business from the first class letter
>mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
When I was working as a Shipper/Receiver in Vancouver, British
Columbia, Canada, I found the same thing. Canada Post was cheapest.
Of course, it wasn't fastest.
One courier gotcha that I did NOT appreciate:
When I called Purolator for a quote, they'd give me one that
included insurance, and there is no way out of the insurance.
When I called Loomis for a quote, they'd give me one that did NOT
include the insurance, and the default on the waybill is to get
insurance.
I thought that was rather sleazy of Loomis. I merely disagreed
with Purolator.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Stanley Cline
wrote:
>UPS and FEDX are required (by law) to charge about DOUBLE the rate for
>(express and priority) shipments compared to the USPS. Been that way for
I've never heard of a law that requires that. The only law I know of
is the odd one that Equifax and other companies were "charged" with
breaking, where they sent "routine" correspondence via UPS/FedEx all
the time and were "fined" by the USPS for doing so. That law applies
to LETTERS AND CORRESPONDENCE only, NOT to packages of any kind.
AFAICT, he USPS is cheaper simply because of all the cross-subsidies
coming from first-class and bulk mail.
-SC
--
Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/
...
"Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might
be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune
Karen Wheless
> don't guarantee a delivery time. USPS and FedEx non-guaranteed
> prices are substantially lower than guaranteed prices, too.
Not necessarily, I've often found that USPS priority rates are lower
than UPS GROUND rates, and ground is not guaranteed. I've had UPS
ground shipments take 15 days to reach their destination (although it's
usually more like 6-7 business days cross contry), and they make
absolutely no guarantee of how long it will take to get there. USPS
priority isn't guaranteed either, but I've never had a package take that
long.
It really depends on the weight and the destination of the package,
sometimes UPS is cheaper, sometimes USPS is cheaper. A 1 pound package
mailed from New York to California will always be cheaper by USPS
priority than by UPS ground, and neither one is guaranteed. The UPS
package will probably take 6 days to arrive, the USPS 3-4.
Karen
Stanley Cline
Wheless) wrote:
>Not necessarily, I've often found that USPS priority rates are lower
>than UPS GROUND rates, and ground is not guaranteed. I've had UPS
UPS does guarantee delivery time for ground shipments -- but only
those to business addresses. :(
Bob Mann
Trying to hide behide the Lanham Act.
There are more from the actual suits available online, but YOU can spend
your time finding them if you want.
HTH
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 24
ELECTRONIC CITATION: 1998 FED App. 0231P (6th Cir.)
File Name: 98a0231p.06
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
_________________
Federal Express Corporation,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
United States Postal Service,
Defendant-Appellant.
>
No. 97-5793
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee at Memphis.
No. 96-03151--Bernice B. Donald, District Judge.
Argued: June 12, 1998
Decided and Filed: July 31, 1998
Before: KRUPANSKY, SILER, and COLE, Circuit Judges.
_________________
COUNSEL
ARGUED: Jeffrey Clair, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL DIVISION,
Washington, D.C., for Appellant. R. Larry Brown, FEDERAL EXPRESS
CORPORATION, Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Barbara C. Biddle,
John C. Hoyle, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL DIVISION, Washington, D.C.,
for Appellant. R. Larry Brown, Dwayne S. Byrd, FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION,
Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellee. L. Peter Farkas, FARKAS & MANELLI,
Washington, D.C., Kaethe B. Schumacher, SCHNADER, HARRISON, SEGAL & LEWIS,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, John E. McKeever, PIPER & MARBURY, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, for Amici Curiae.
_________________
OPINION
_________________
KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judge. The defendant-appellant United States Postal
Service ("the Postal Service" or "USPS"), on interlocutory appeal certified
under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), has attacked the district court's rejection of
its motion to dismiss, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the
complaint of plaintiff-appellee Federal Express Corporation ("FedEx"), which
alleged that the Postal Service had disseminated false and deceptive
commercial advertisements, to the damage of FedEx, in transgression of the
Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.. USPS has supported its motion with two
alternate jurisdictional theories, each of which presents a pure question of
law. First, USPS has proposed that, as an instrument of the national
sovereign, it is immunized against federal tort causes including Lanham Act
lawsuits by operation of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b) &
2671-80. Second, the Postal Service has argued that it is not subject to the
strictures of the Lanham Act because it allegedly is not a "person" within
that Act's definition. On review, the appellant has contested the trial
forum's adverse edict that the Postal Service may be directly sued for
alleged Lanham Act infractions because Congress statutorily waived the
Postal Service's traditional sovereign immunization against lawsuits
including federal tort actions, and thus, as a federal instrumentality
capable of being sued, USPS is a Lanham Act "person." See Federal Express
Corp. v. United States Postal Service, 959 F. Supp. 832 (W.D. Tenn. 1997).
In 1970, Congress dissolved the cabinet-level United States Post Office
Department, legislatively substituting, via the Postal Reorganization Act,
39 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. ("the PRA"), the newly-created United States Postal
Service. By statute, the Postal Service retained certain attributes of a
government agency. See, e.g., 39 U.S.C. § 201 (stating that USPS is "an
independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the
United States"). However, Congress concurrently invested this hybrid entity
with the "status of a private commercial enterprise." Loeffler v. Frank, 486
U.S. 549, 556 (1988) (citation omitted). The Supreme Court has invoked the
economically self-sustaining design of the USPS (see 39 U.S.C. § 3621), as
well as the legislative history of the PRA, as mirroring a congressional
intent that the Postal Service should "be run more like a business than had
its predecessor, the Post Office Department." Franchise Tax Board of
California v. United States Postal Service, 467 U.S. 512, 519-20 & n.13
(1984); Loeffler, 486 U.S. at 556-57.
Although the Postal Service, with exceptions, generally possesses a legal
monopoly over the commercial carriage of ordinary "letters," see 18 U.S.C.
§§ 1693-99, 39 U.S.C. §§ 601-06, 39 C.F.R. § 310.2, a postal regulation
authorized by 39 U.S.C. § 601(b) has, since 1979, permitted private couriers
such as FedEx,(1) subject to specified conditions, to carry "extremely
urgent letters" for hire. 39 C.F.R. § 320.6. In execution of its
congressionally-ordained competitive entrepreneurial mission, USPS has,
since approximately 1995, pursued an aggressive commercial advertisement
campaign targeted against its private sector rivals in the expedited letter
delivery market, including FedEx, in a bid to increase its share of that
traffic. FedEx has alleged in its instant complaint that certain of USPS's
public representations touting its "Priority Mail" and "Global Priority
Mail" delivery services, and its negative comparative characterization of
FedEx's competing "FedEx 2 Day" air courier service, constituted false
advertisement and unfair competition violative of the Lanham Act.(2)
FedEx has charged that the Postal Service has inaccurately and misleadingly
boasted that its priority mail services, though offered at lower cost, are
nonetheless comparable or superior in quality to the priority document
delivery services offered by FedEx. FedEx has averred that, to the contrary,
its express letter delivery system includes superior services and guarantees
which are absent from USPS's priority mail offerings. For instance, the
plaintiff has alleged that its "FedEx 2 Day" rush delivery service includes
tracking of packages throughout the shipment process, coupled with a
money-back guarantee of arrival at the final destination within two days;
whereas the Postal Service's "Priority Mail" and "Global Priority Mail"
services promise delivery within two or three days of dispatch but do not
guarantee arrival within any number of days, have never afforded cash
refunds to dissatisfied customers, and do not include package tracking. Via
its Lanham Act complaint, the plaintiff has sought an injunction forbidding
future misleading advertisements by USPS, monetary damages, and other
relief.
http://www.law.emory.edu/6circuit/july98/98a0231p.06.html
Bob Mann
ConsumerBot <consu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:u2gn1uon37gpdjrgu...@4ax.com...
> You're sure you didn't just pull this information out of thin air? If
> it were true, Fedex and UPS would not charge $14 for an overnight
> GUARANTEED letter delivery that USPS charges $11.50 for.
USPS Guarantee? That was part of the problem too. No Guarantee.
Did you know that Fed-X flys much of the USPS mail?
I thought not.
ConsumerBot
Stan Brown
>> The main reason the Postal Service prices are lower is that they
>> don't guarantee a delivery time. USPS and FedEx non-guaranteed
>> prices are substantially lower than guaranteed prices, too.
>
>Not necessarily, I've often found that USPS priority rates are lower
>than UPS GROUND rates, and ground is not guaranteed.
Did you read what I wrote, before typing your "not necessarily"? I
said non--guaranteed rates are lower than guaranteed rates, and you
compared two non-guaranteed rates to each other.
I'm not saying your facts are wrong, just that the "not necessarily"
is inappropriate because you're disagreeing with something I didn't
say.
Stanley Cline
wrote:
>Did you know that Fed-X flys much of the USPS mail?
I do -- and cargo and "express" carriers are getting more and more
mail now with the anthrax scare (AIUI, the USPS is NOT putting ANY
mail on passenger flights.)
-SC
--
Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/
...
"Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might
be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune
bear...@cruller.invalid
"Bob Mann" <isb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> USPS Guarantee? That was part of the problem too. No Guarantee.
> Did you know that Fed-X flys much of the USPS mail?
> I thought not.
Fedex also buys its planes from foreign nations. So what?
Fedex and USPS have a mutually agreeable arrangement each to handle an
aspect of the other's business; in exchange for space on Fedex planes,
the USPS allows Fedex coveted prominent space at the lobby doors of post
offices nationwide for Fedex collection boxes.
BTW, Express Mail *is* guaranteed. I and other mailers I know have
gotten our money back after delivery times were not met.
bear...@cruller.invalid
"Bob Mann" <isb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Here's part of the aftermath where the USPS appealed and lost.
> Trying to hide behide the Lanham Act.
I must have missed something. Aftermath of what? Nowhere in that opinion
did I read that Fedex must charge twice as much as USPS for the same
service.
Karen Wheless
> >> don't guarantee a delivery time. USPS and FedEx non-guaranteed
> >> prices are substantially lower than guaranteed prices, too.
> >
> >Not necessarily, I've often found that USPS priority rates are lower
> >than UPS GROUND rates, and ground is not guaranteed.
>
> Did you read what I wrote, before typing your "not necessarily"? I
> said non--guaranteed rates are lower than guaranteed rates, and you
> compared two non-guaranteed rates to each other.
>
> I'm not saying your facts are wrong, just that the "not necessarily"
> is inappropriate because you're disagreeing with something I didn't
> say.
I guess I misunderstood, from your post I thought you were saying that
UPS was less expensive than USPS when you compared the same kind of
service, guaranteed to guaranteed or nonguaranteed to nonguaranteed.
Karen
Mike Berger
which opens them up, reseals them, and then charges $ 20-$50
for the service. No customs are due on most items, and in fact
the brokers fee is higher than the customs payments would be if
they WERE required.
Bob Ward wrote:
> Do you think UPS just makes this stuff up? If there are Customs
> duties levied, they must be paid no matter how the package was
> shipped. Sounds like your eBay customer had buyer's remorse and used
> this for an excuse.
Mike Berger
at your expense, no matter what's listed. Postal Service is
much better.
Melissa wrote:
>
> Shipping UPS to Canada causes a Tax or Charge to be levied on the receiver.
> I found that out the hard way when a Canadian buyer on an eBay auction asked
> me to use UPS. He refused shipment because there was an addition $20 charge
> on the package when he tried to accept it. From what I've read on eBay
> related message boards, never use UPS when shipping to Canada from the US.
>
Mike Berger
any reimbursement, only the shipper can, and only under certain
narrow circumstances. So it's a pretty worthless guarantee.
Neil
> The U.S. Postal service generally has the best rates
> when compared to any of the other private carriers.
> They've got all the business from the first class letter
> mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
Maybe so, although I wouldn't think 34 cents per letter allows much of
a subsidy for anything. However, I did read that for 2001, due to
competition from e-mail and the anthrax scare (which in turn has moved
more people to e-mail), the USPS will lose quite a bit of $$$ this
year.
(snip)
Yeepers
expensive to drive that brown UPS truck through the water than to fly a USPS
plane over there. : )
Dave
Hash: SHA1
"Stan Brown" <bra...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1685311e3...@news.mindspring.com...
> Anonymous <anon...@anonymous.anonymous> wrote in misc.consumers:
> >They've got all the business from the first class letter
> >mailings to subsidize lower rates for heavier items.
>
> No, this is not true. There used to be a moderate subsidy from first
> class to third class (junk mail), but I suspect that's no longer the
> case because Congress mandated that each class pay its own way.
>
> The main reason the Postal Service prices are lower is that they
> don't guarantee a delivery time. USPS and FedEx non-guaranteed
> prices are substantially lower than guaranteed prices, too.
Subsidy from the 1st-class monopoly or no, the USPS enjoys another unfair
advantage: it pays no taxes whatever. UPS, FedEx, etc., OTOH, do pay thru
the nose to Uncle Sam -- a cost that, like every other, is passed on to
the customer.
Dave
- --
ROT13 the "reply-to" for actual e-mail address.
TANSTAAFL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: Without privacy, there can be no liberty.
iQA/AwUBPCCMnk6QdcRkUwgxEQI1+gCg8CQK6OZO17C4o2zwpN08LibXUi0AoMrD
1xdZwJo+uq7TVyhqjOa1+NPy
=j5P/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
bear...@cruller.invalid
"Dave" <xrlzn...@rneguyvax.arg> wrote:
> Subsidy from the 1st-class monopoly or no, the USPS enjoys another unfair
> advantage: it pays no taxes whatever.
Horribly unfair. I think to level the playing field, we should prevent
UPS and Fedex and all other carriers from making a profit, and regulate
their every business function to provide for the public good. Then they
wouldn't have to pay taxes, either.