Skip to main content

Beware of Pakmail

So, I've been shipping a few things over the past 2-3 weeks. A Great Aunt of mine requested that I order her a book of mine, sign it, mail it to her and she would fully reimburse me. The book (including shipping) cost about $15. The cost of shipping the book to her (Columbus, Ohio to St. Louis, Missouri) was $20, $5 more than the book itself! So, I began to get a little fishy. I was able to get lucky the next 2-3 times, as the company whom I sent the packages to covered all shipping costs. I then shipped a small package (in dimension and in weight at 3 lbs.) to my friend in Omaha (Columbus, Ohio to Omaha, Nebraska). How much did that cost? $26.73! Meanwhile, a much larger package (both in dimension and weight, at 22 lbs.) cost $26.11 to ship. Eh, what? When I checked the UPS site, it stated that the smaller package should have only cost $13.20 to ship and the larger package a little over $16. So, I spent about $53 when I should have only spent $29, close to doubling the cost! I've since e-mailed Pakmail and received what sounded like an automated response. I then decided to e-mail UPS, USPS, etc. to receive their quotes, which I assume will be far less than Pakmail's. If that is indeed the case, I shall be filing a complaint, because that's just ripping off the customers. So, if you're shipping a package, I recommend UPS, USPS, Fed Ex, pretty much anyone besides Pakmail!
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html
Post a Comment
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more