hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
He could have already and been stonewalled by legal. FedEx isn't likely to help anyone out unless there is no risk and a solid payoff to be had.
He could have already and been stonewalled by legal. FedEx isn't likely to help anyone out unless there is no risk and a solid payoff to be had.
Guys I appreciate all the info...I realize that you are saying the obvious. Really need a simple declarant. I certainly can not fault somebody for NOT wanting to break anonymity but we can really use a simple signed paragraph or two. Believe it or not the residency case involves 8 figures. Happy to give info to whomever can or would like to discuss. Embarrassed even having to go to this board for help but frankly this is the best place to find retired Fed Exer's who could do a simple signed paragraph. It is important.
If anyone can help it will be treated confidentially of course.
Mr. Fed Ex, your idea on Craigs list is good. Thank you. Again, it's not something that puts anyone in any jeopardy, it's simply a two paragraph declaration saying in '1991 I recall the actual delivery routine to be....' that's it. I do agree that if someone is active Fed Ex no reason to get involved but outside of that it is NOT a big deal at all. We just need to find a former Fed Exer from that time period which is not easy to do. The case is NOT about Fed Ex and has NOTHING TO DO WITH FED EX. This is just a comment on showing that a package going to an address does not mean the addressee was in CA to receive the package. THAT'S ALL. I just need someone to tell how it goes. The case is 17 years old and fascinating. Happy to disclose case caption to anyone who is even interested. They will understand that it is about a landmark residency case and NOT ANYTHING to do with Fed Ex. Thanks in advance if anyone is interested. Let me know.
Mr. Fed Ex or Richochet1a?
And who 'said', "Meh"????
And just to make crystal clear...see my last post it has NOTHING to do with Fed Ex. This is about a millionaire who moved out of California. California in trying to prove that he was still a CA resident pointed to a Fed Ex package received at the client's old house with his name as addressee. Just looking to show...as Mr. Fed Ex and Richochet1a (and thank you for the guidance) have said, the recipient does not need to sign and it could have been signed for by anyone at address and Fed Ex does not check ID's...That's it.
Really can use the help.
...I highly suspect this inquiry has something to do with another issue altogether. If the supposed item were of extraordinary value, a claim would've been put in back when the shipment went 'missing' and would've progressed to civil litigation if the shipper thought they had some further option for relief. If the item were of nominal value, who in the hell in their right mind would be retaining an attorney 20+ years after the fact?
There is something that is motivating this 'inquiry' which hasn't been disclosed.
And just to make crystal clear...see my last post it has NOTHING to do with Fed Ex. This is about a millionaire who moved out of California. California in trying to prove that he was still a CA resident pointed to a Fed Ex package received at the client's old house with his name as addressee. Just looking to show...as Mr. Fed Ex and Richochet1a (and thank you for the guidance) have said, the recipient does not need to sign and it could have been signed for by anyone at address and Fed Ex does not check ID's...That's it.
Really can use the help.
State found doc for doc being delivered at the CA address from 1991. Obviously an old record but that is what they have. We acknowledge a package WAS delivered but that does not mean client was at his former CA residence. That what we are looking to show through policy. Just important to have someone in the know do a simple declaration about what everyone knows is the policy. 'Don't check id's,' and 'will deliver to anyone who looks over 18.' Really as simple as that.
That is my worry Mr. Fed Ex. Not easy finding ex-employees from that time frame. Hoping this forum would be a good place. Any thoughts?
Thanks for all your help Mr. Fed Ex. Actually I did have luck with Fed Ex Legal. They had a copy of a twenty year old service manual and also put in writing a lot of what we were looking for. So thank you. Again, we are only looking for people to say the truth. Client wants a couple of more letters. The one thing legal did not know about was 'did fed ex delivery people ask for id's and or verify signatures to id's.' Because it was 'silent' in the manual. Can you help? Pretty obvious to anybody that Fed Ex does not ask for id's or verify signatures. Let me know anyone.
Thanks for all your help Mr. Fed Ex. Actually I did have luck with Fed Ex Legal. They had a copy of a twenty year old service manual and also put in writing a lot of what we were looking for. So thank you. Again, we are only looking for people to say the truth. Client wants a couple of more letters. The one thing legal did not know about was 'did fed ex delivery people ask for id's and or verify signatures to id's.' Because it was 'silent' in the manual. Can you help? Pretty obvious to anybody that Fed Ex does not ask for id's or verify signatures. Let me know anyone.
If someone stops us on the street and asks for a pkg we are supposed to verify their identity. But when we go to the door of a residence and someone answers we don't care if they are the recipient or not as long as they are old enough. Awhile back I had an Adult Sig Req pkg that was signed for by a woman who walked up to me confidently at a residence in the country, smiling pleasantly and thanking me. Turned out to be some serious drugs and the recipient was the only person who lived there and he wasn't home. Had to answer a bunch of questions about that one.[/QUOTE
How is that lady signing for the package your problem? Sounds like she was an adult...and signed. Requirement met. I guess you should have administered an oath, asked for a blood and stool sample, and her passport.