Loss of donated materials**: The postal comment area sparked heated discussions.
The confiscation of donations has raised questions and controversies.
This is what happened to a shop owner named Yang in Sichuan. After Gansu University, Mr. Yang donated more than 100,000 clothes worth more than 100,000 yuan to the children in the affected areas, including coats, woolen sweaters, etc. She donates through China Post because she believes in the security provided by China Post and that every step of it is monitored by the Global Positioning System. However, she checked and found out that all but one of the goods was sent, and the other 16 goods were missing. She immediately contacted the post office, but they said that the rest was distributed in the form of charity, and there was no way to know where they were.
Ms. Yang couldn't believe this, thinking that the China Post Office had a GPS surveillance system that could track the location of the parcel. Ms. Yeung wondered about the whereabouts of the goods and why only one item was sent when the other goods were lost.
To solve this problem, we must first find out what causes the loss of emails. A report published in "Yangtze River**" pointed out that when Yang handed over the package to China Post, the package was not lost due to GPS and other security protection. But how did these things disappear from the post office? It is very likely that this is due to transport reasons, such as human causes, or other reasons for the loss of goods. In short, the accident reflects some problems in the logistics work of China's postal enterprises, which should be concerned and improved.
The question of the legitimacy of the action giving rise to the dispute and the question of compensation.
The legitimacy of donating love items with other people's property needs to be considered from the perspective of jurisprudence. According to the relevant provisions of China's Criminal Law, the crime of embezzlement is the act of taking another person's property for the purpose of illegal possession, and the amount is huge and not returned. In this case, the postal company regarded the things sent by Mrs. Yang as "things of love" and obviously had no legal rights. Although such an act does not necessarily establish the crime of theft, it needs to be reasonably explained and properly handled.
Secondly, since China Post failed to manage the customer's goods safely, resulting in serious economic damage to the customer, it should be fully liable for the loss of the goods. After investigation, the post office only agreed to pay 3408 yuan, that is, 7 times the postage, is it appropriate? After spending nearly 100,000 yuan on clothes, Granny Yang suffered a huge economic blow, and the children in ** did not receive any care. The amount of compensation proposed by the postal company appears to be too small, thus giving rise to arguments about liability and fairness.
Get to the bottom of the matter.
Miss Yang posted her experience on the Internet, which caused a lot of heated discussions. Although she has negotiated with the courier company, some netizens still expressed doubts. First, they questioned the issue of lost clothing. China Post says that every link is monitored by GPS, but why is only one parcel sent and all the rest lost? The jury is still out on this issue. Secondly, one of the questions that netizens are most concerned about is whether there is a legal basis for donating other people's things to others for public welfare? Is it illegal for the postal service to issue such a thing?
Eventually, Miss Yang announced on the Internet that she had signed a contract with the post office, but the details were not clear. Netizens questioned it, saying that it was the post office's fault. What they want is a tangible agreement and outcome that guarantees fairness and returns to the facts.
Although the matter has been put to rest, netizens have questioned the results of this investigation. They believe that the USPS should do its part to speed up the litigation process and ensure fairness and restoration of the facts. Only by dealing with it fairly can the public's concerns about the postal company be dispelled and similar problems will not occur again.
Overall, the accident reflected some problems in the logistics of China Post and the mishandling of the materials obtained. In order to ensure the efficiency and safety of logistics, it is necessary to pay enough attention to and improve this. On this basis, the postal company is responsible for the damages and does its best to deal with them in order to guarantee the fairness and justice of the case. I hope that there will be no more such accidents in the future, and that all of us can uphold the spirit of responsibility and public welfare, and actively participate in various social activities.