Man Claimed SingPost Didn’t Send Him SPF Notice Until 5 Months Later & Caused Him To Sell Beer Illegally

2019-02-01 , 6:32 pm

SingPost has been hitting the headlines for all the wrong reason.

From undelivered and unopened Government letters…

…to “cheating” the customer who paid them to deliver advertising leaflet…

…to note-delivering parcel postmen.

And now, another individual took to Facebook to complain about their service.

On 1 Feb 2019, Facebook user Daniel Goh took to Facebook to highlight a letter he’s just received from the Singapore Police Force.

Nothing special there, except it’s a notice for him to renew his store’s alcohol licence, and it was dated 6 Sep 2018.

And as you’ve noticed, it’s 1 Feb now. And the letter was only cleared on 30 Jan 2019 based on the stamp.

Yup, almost 5 months.

His stall was required to pay for the renewal of beer licence before 4 Dec 2018.

That means he’s been unknowingly selling beer illegally for the past month.

If the Singapore Police Force had conducted a spot check on his premises, his stall could’ve been shut down.

In fact, they may not be able to get a beer license anymore.

He claimed that when he attempted to reach the SPF via their hotline, he was unable to get through.

With such a juicy Facebook post, you can expect the ant hive that the comments section will become.

After all, SingPost hasn’t exactly shown a good track record of doing their jobs.

Some responded with their own experience with SingPost.

While others were impressed at what he had to say.

But there are some netizens who felt that he should have some responsibility for the beer licensing issue too.

And fellow netizens gave some advice on how he can stop this from happening in the future.

Causing someone to sell beer illegally is a big thing. Which explains why SingPost immediately responded to Daniel Goh’s post.

They indicated that according to the postmark date stamp, they’ve only processed the letter on 30 Jan 2019.

SingPost asked for Goh’s contact details to investigate the incident.

Another netizen immediately provided what the SingPost personnel might have been trying to say.

According to her, the postmark means the date of posting instead of the date of delivery or clearance.

She added that when she goes to the post office, they always postmark like this at the counter (i.e. when they received the letter).

So it could be someone from the SPF who missed out on sending the letter and not SingPost.

However, given SingPost’s recent track record, netizens aren’t so ready to believe that SingPost isn’t at fault this time.

What do you think?