Royal Mail Theft By Surcharge
- Thread starter Rob-Ed
- Start date
also if you take a good quality picture of their labels and zoom in on it - does quality of the barcode seem better or worse than your own label - for 6 that I have just checked here the Royal Printed one seem far worse than the labels I print. The module are not square, the black is inconsistent in-tone - you know all the reason they give me for rejecting some of my own labelsI make them 25mm by 25mm (I did use two rulers) but 26mm by 26mm is close enough to my measurement (maybe when I measure, I round down and others round up)
Upvote
0
They are worse than the ones we generated. We also had a return back to us last week where a customer had not collected the item from the sorting office. It had been over labelled and the quality of the barcode on the over label had inconsistencies, blurring and not super crisp like the ones we generate. Anyway we were able to scan said over label okay despite it not looking perfect.also if you take a good quality picture of their labels and zoom in on it - does quality of the barcode seem better or worse than your own label - for 6 that I have just checked here the Royal Printed one seem far worse than the labels I print. The module are not square, the black is inconsistent in-tone - you know all the reason they give me for rejecting some of my own labels
Upvote
0
Just received some returns.
One from the returns portal on Royal Mail's website and it's 22x22mm.
Another one has one of the 4x3 labels from a mobile printer on it and it measures 25x25mm. Interestingly it's not the same layout as a 4x3 label that I can get from the Shipping API. On the label printed by the postie the 1D barcode is below the 2D barcode meaning both can be larger. On 4x3 labels returned by the API they are next to each other and the 2D barcode is only 23mm.
When you guys check the document properties for your PDFs does it say generated with PDFsharp 6.0 on Ubuntu on Azure? Are all these "unreadable barcode" labels coming from the same servers? Do you have the useless "department reference" line at the bottom of the label eating up precious space?
Yes I have seen some terribly faded 4x3 labels on returned packages.
One from the returns portal on Royal Mail's website and it's 22x22mm.
Another one has one of the 4x3 labels from a mobile printer on it and it measures 25x25mm. Interestingly it's not the same layout as a 4x3 label that I can get from the Shipping API. On the label printed by the postie the 1D barcode is below the 2D barcode meaning both can be larger. On 4x3 labels returned by the API they are next to each other and the 2D barcode is only 23mm.
When you guys check the document properties for your PDFs does it say generated with PDFsharp 6.0 on Ubuntu on Azure? Are all these "unreadable barcode" labels coming from the same servers? Do you have the useless "department reference" line at the bottom of the label eating up precious space?
Yes I have seen some terribly faded 4x3 labels on returned packages.
Upvote
0
Another point on the returns portal.
A few weeks ago we got a £0 surcharge for "Parcel Collect TR48". I tried to ask Royal Mail about it but they ignored it and I'm not wasting energy on a £0 surcharge.
But maybe that was an unscannable returns label printed by a customer from the returns portal?
A few weeks ago we got a £0 surcharge for "Parcel Collect TR48". I tried to ask Royal Mail about it but they ignored it and I'm not wasting energy on a £0 surcharge.
But maybe that was an unscannable returns label printed by a customer from the returns portal?
Upvote
0
What are the quiet zones (white space) around the 2D barcodes you can measure?
Returns portal is 5mm on left and bottom but only 4.5mm on the top. So exactly the same as the Shipping API (even though the rest of the label doesn't look the same).
4x3 from postie = 2mm on the left, 3mm on the top of bottom. WAY below spec.
Potentially implies that the overall size of the data matrix is much more important than other things.
Returns portal is 5mm on left and bottom but only 4.5mm on the top. So exactly the same as the Shipping API (even though the rest of the label doesn't look the same).
4x3 from postie = 2mm on the left, 3mm on the top of bottom. WAY below spec.
Potentially implies that the overall size of the data matrix is much more important than other things.
Upvote
0
Account Manager and field manager came in today.
They checked our labels and printers and said all perfect. The only thing they said could be happening is if the packaging (we use poly bags) becomes creased in transit, this can cause the surface of the barcode to not be flat and thus cause it to not scan. Although this is with the above camera from the machine, they will of course scan with a hand held barcode scanner.
I mean if that is the case there is nothing we can do, the only suggestion by them was to use cardboard packaging. Basically, their machines aren't very good at handling non-ridged packaging and thus the blame is shifted onto the customer rather than acknowledging a limitation in the design of the machine.
They checked our labels and printers and said all perfect. The only thing they said could be happening is if the packaging (we use poly bags) becomes creased in transit, this can cause the surface of the barcode to not be flat and thus cause it to not scan. Although this is with the above camera from the machine, they will of course scan with a hand held barcode scanner.
I mean if that is the case there is nothing we can do, the only suggestion by them was to use cardboard packaging. Basically, their machines aren't very good at handling non-ridged packaging and thus the blame is shifted onto the customer rather than acknowledging a limitation in the design of the machine.
Upvote
0
The majority of the barcodes they've surcharged us on have been cardboard boxes and >A4 envelopes.
Yes there are a few jiffy bags that obviously look crumpled in the photos so I can buy their excuse for a few. But there's so many large but flat (think large letters but too long or wide to actually be billed as letterboxable) parcels that they are saying are unreadable.
So my thinking is they have trouble with parcels that are laying low on the conveyor which comes back to data matrix size.
Yes there are a few jiffy bags that obviously look crumpled in the photos so I can buy their excuse for a few. But there's so many large but flat (think large letters but too long or wide to actually be billed as letterboxable) parcels that they are saying are unreadable.
So my thinking is they have trouble with parcels that are laying low on the conveyor which comes back to data matrix size.
Upvote
0
The data matrix in the photos post-over labelling appear to to be the same size as the original label, so only 22-23mm.
But the photos they sent me without the white lines are all of big flat A3 type parcels. Perhaps even the over label failed to scan and they had to take them out of the machine and manually scan them somewhere else hence the missing white lines...
But the photos they sent me without the white lines are all of big flat A3 type parcels. Perhaps even the over label failed to scan and they had to take them out of the machine and manually scan them somewhere else hence the missing white lines...
Upvote
0
Does anyone else use reinforced gummed tape? I wonder if the stripes of the reinforcements in the tape could confuse things in certain circumstances.
Does your packaging have manufacturer's barcodes or QR codes printed on them? Royal Mail only use Code 128 and Data Matrices so other stuff like Code 39, QR codes, etc shouldn't interfere with properly configured scanners but if things were working properly we wouldn't be here.
Does your packaging have manufacturer's barcodes or QR codes printed on them? Royal Mail only use Code 128 and Data Matrices so other stuff like Code 39, QR codes, etc shouldn't interfere with properly configured scanners but if things were working properly we wouldn't be here.
Upvote
0
Royal Mail's explanation for the lack of white lines on some photos is that it's a different type of machine at a different mail centre. The implication being that a package could scan fine at the collection depot, get damaged in transit to the next, then get over labelled and we're surcharged for that.
It's equally likely that customer support has no idea what they're talking about...
It's equally likely that customer support has no idea what they're talking about...
Upvote
0
The Click and Drop API, one I just checked was authored by "Royal Mail (Docyard - server)" and produced by the PDFKit. Same for one I just check on the Click and Drop website.
PDFSharp and PDFKit are good PDF libraries that I have used and they both produce good PDFs.
The PDF that Royal Mail produce in all cases should have vector for the Data Matrix barcode so no matter what size you print at, as long as you have no anti-aliasing - the barcode will be perfectly formed (you can see that by zooming in the PDF - if it was bitmap image it would get blurry at the black edges as you zoom in).
No gummed tape for us (self-sealing boxes, bukwrap, white padded envelopes, and large boxes sealed with brown tape) - the envelopes/boxes do sometime have other barcodes but the handful pictures I have been provided with do not have barcodes on the side where label was.
For me, there is nothing wrong with the PDFs. I can reprint old labels that Royal Mail have claimed to be "unreadable" and they are perfect.
I do not believe Royal Mail are getting the number of "unreadable" barcodes that they claim. If they are their scanning technology is at fault. As I have previously mentioned Data Matrix are very tolerate of damage and issues with printing (blurring, non square modules etc) - is covered in the standards for the barcode. If Royal Mail's scanners cannot read barcodes with such issues, it is an issue with Royal Mail scanning technology and their scanning technology is at fault and they should be taking that up with their supplier but this is Royal Mail and they have history of not believing customers (Horizon (Post Office was owned by Royal Mail when the issues started back in 1999) ,Postage Stamps etc).
Royal Mail currently provide no evidence for the barcodes they claim to be "unreadable".
Currently, I cannot prove that a number of our labels did have legitimate issues but I think it is extremely unlikely (multiple pack stations and types of packaging). If Royal Mail recorded the surcharges like normal surcharges and notified of the "unreadable" barcode sooner I would ask my customers to send a a picture of the Royal Label (and might even give them a postage label so they can cut it off and send it back to me so I can investigate check the actual label / with little heat Royal Mail new label should easily peel of with very little damage to the thermal label below) but they take weeks to provide me with the data. At present, I am still waiting for shipments from 26/05/2025 (despite chasing/requesting several time) - it clearly shows they are not the collecting data is sensible manner. Or maybe they are just fed of talking to me!
This week I have some 4K cameras arriving (to replace my older cams) - I am hoping they'll be high enough definition to capture our packed parcels so that when they claim there is a fault - I can prove it was correct when it left us (but at a height 1m from the bench, they might be too high to capture the barcode in sufficient detail) - I'll know once they arrive and I have performed some tests.
I have also just realised, I have ZD421D printer that I bought as spare so this evening one of pack-stations is going to have an upgrade. ZD421D can print at 300DPI
PDFSharp and PDFKit are good PDF libraries that I have used and they both produce good PDFs.
The PDF that Royal Mail produce in all cases should have vector for the Data Matrix barcode so no matter what size you print at, as long as you have no anti-aliasing - the barcode will be perfectly formed (you can see that by zooming in the PDF - if it was bitmap image it would get blurry at the black edges as you zoom in).
No gummed tape for us (self-sealing boxes, bukwrap, white padded envelopes, and large boxes sealed with brown tape) - the envelopes/boxes do sometime have other barcodes but the handful pictures I have been provided with do not have barcodes on the side where label was.
For me, there is nothing wrong with the PDFs. I can reprint old labels that Royal Mail have claimed to be "unreadable" and they are perfect.
I do not believe Royal Mail are getting the number of "unreadable" barcodes that they claim. If they are their scanning technology is at fault. As I have previously mentioned Data Matrix are very tolerate of damage and issues with printing (blurring, non square modules etc) - is covered in the standards for the barcode. If Royal Mail's scanners cannot read barcodes with such issues, it is an issue with Royal Mail scanning technology and their scanning technology is at fault and they should be taking that up with their supplier but this is Royal Mail and they have history of not believing customers (Horizon (Post Office was owned by Royal Mail when the issues started back in 1999) ,Postage Stamps etc).
Royal Mail currently provide no evidence for the barcodes they claim to be "unreadable".
Currently, I cannot prove that a number of our labels did have legitimate issues but I think it is extremely unlikely (multiple pack stations and types of packaging). If Royal Mail recorded the surcharges like normal surcharges and notified of the "unreadable" barcode sooner I would ask my customers to send a a picture of the Royal Label (and might even give them a postage label so they can cut it off and send it back to me so I can investigate check the actual label / with little heat Royal Mail new label should easily peel of with very little damage to the thermal label below) but they take weeks to provide me with the data. At present, I am still waiting for shipments from 26/05/2025 (despite chasing/requesting several time) - it clearly shows they are not the collecting data is sensible manner. Or maybe they are just fed of talking to me!
This week I have some 4K cameras arriving (to replace my older cams) - I am hoping they'll be high enough definition to capture our packed parcels so that when they claim there is a fault - I can prove it was correct when it left us (but at a height 1m from the bench, they might be too high to capture the barcode in sufficient detail) - I'll know once they arrive and I have performed some tests.
I have also just realised, I have ZD421D printer that I bought as spare so this evening one of pack-stations is going to have an upgrade. ZD421D can print at 300DPI
Upvote
0
Correction: My ZD421 is actually a 203DPI, just like the other printers I have. The spec sheet says “300 dpi / 12 dots per mm (optional)”, which clearly didn't mean what I thought (presume it is hardware option some of them). Oh well, I’ll probably still upgrade one of my packing stations to the ZD421 since it's newer than my GK420D's.
Looking at Barcode Warehouse, I just can't justify the cost of a 300 DPI printer on the off-chance it would fix the issue. If I were confident it would solve the problem, I’d consider it. But when I know a 203 DPI printer is more than sufficient for printing Data Matrix barcodes and I firmly believe the issue lies with Royal Mail’s imaging scanners - it's impossible to justify the expense.
Looking at Barcode Warehouse, I just can't justify the cost of a 300 DPI printer on the off-chance it would fix the issue. If I were confident it would solve the problem, I’d consider it. But when I know a 203 DPI printer is more than sufficient for printing Data Matrix barcodes and I firmly believe the issue lies with Royal Mail’s imaging scanners - it's impossible to justify the expense.
Upvote
0
I was going to ask how you know the mail centre and I realised there is a column in the spreadsheet... sometimes. The spreadsheet without the white lines only has the barcode, event_date, AccountNumber, Account Name, and IPROL Charge columns.
Why are they sometimes sending me spreadsheets with columns missing and other times cropped photos? What aren't they showing me?
And one of the spreadsheets lists a few 1D barcodes at the bottom instead of 2D. So what does that even mean? Do both need to scan?
One has a £2.50 surcharge for "label applied incorrectly" and I can see the package in the Tracked delivery photo. Absolutely nothing wrong with it and they have crazily over labelled it vertically (i.e. running downwards covering part of the address).
Why are they sometimes sending me spreadsheets with columns missing and other times cropped photos? What aren't they showing me?
And one of the spreadsheets lists a few 1D barcodes at the bottom instead of 2D. So what does that even mean? Do both need to scan?
One has a £2.50 surcharge for "label applied incorrectly" and I can see the package in the Tracked delivery photo. Absolutely nothing wrong with it and they have crazily over labelled it vertically (i.e. running downwards covering part of the address).
Upvote
0
It has been inferred to me that if one barcode fails they try other - that is yet another reason why I believe it is the imaging scanners at fault! Code 128 barcode that long/not scanning seems pretty unlikely (and yes I know it could happen). The PCM also have OCR should be able to read the text - so it not just failure we are talking about.
Images being cropped (assuming they are) and it is not the scanner doing it, just seem very odd - data hiding does spring to mind.
However, the more I think about it, the more I think it operating errors and the parcel are been sent through the machine in manner not intended by SolyStic.
But that aside, I'm getting unbelievable frustrated that, despite me requesting on several occasion Royal Mail have still not provided me with the the list of parcel that were surcharged for later weeks - this is clear sign of them hiding information! I need the information so I can allocate cost correctly (and see which pack station they were printed on)! I'm so frustrated by them that I cc'd their CEO on my last email. I really dislike doing that as well - feels wrong - like breaking chain of command but I think she needs to be made aware!
Images being cropped (assuming they are) and it is not the scanner doing it, just seem very odd - data hiding does spring to mind.
However, the more I think about it, the more I think it operating errors and the parcel are been sent through the machine in manner not intended by SolyStic.
But that aside, I'm getting unbelievable frustrated that, despite me requesting on several occasion Royal Mail have still not provided me with the the list of parcel that were surcharged for later weeks - this is clear sign of them hiding information! I need the information so I can allocate cost correctly (and see which pack station they were printed on)! I'm so frustrated by them that I cc'd their CEO on my last email. I really dislike doing that as well - feels wrong - like breaking chain of command but I think she needs to be made aware!
Upvote
0
The lack of data is such a wind up. There is an established procedure already with the surcharge supplements and the contact finance form so why aren't they following it?
And their attitude of blaming the customer all the time when even in the last two years Royal Mail has done two major screw ups to us:
- For about a month they were falsely claiming whole shipments of parcels were underdeclared as large letters and charged us surcharges on them. We'd prove otherwise by providing the shipping labels clearly showing "parcel" and they'd issue a credit note only for them to hit us with another couple hundred surcharges on a new shipment. It got up to a few thousand £ in surcharges but fortunately they fixed it within 30 days so we never had to actually pay any of it.
- The API was down one night and we couldn't submit and got surcharged for failing to manifest. Revenue Protection said to talk to Finance who said to talk to IT who admitted fault and said to ask Finance for a credit who said to talk to Revenue Protection and round and round it went for a month or two.
And their attitude of blaming the customer all the time when even in the last two years Royal Mail has done two major screw ups to us:
- For about a month they were falsely claiming whole shipments of parcels were underdeclared as large letters and charged us surcharges on them. We'd prove otherwise by providing the shipping labels clearly showing "parcel" and they'd issue a credit note only for them to hit us with another couple hundred surcharges on a new shipment. It got up to a few thousand £ in surcharges but fortunately they fixed it within 30 days so we never had to actually pay any of it.
- The API was down one night and we couldn't submit and got surcharged for failing to manifest. Revenue Protection said to talk to Finance who said to talk to IT who admitted fault and said to ask Finance for a credit who said to talk to Revenue Protection and round and round it went for a month or two.
Upvote
0
I just noticed that the over labelled labels on the ones missing the white lines and missing spreadsheet columns are different.
They are missing the second barcode that appears to be the post code. In their place it instead says the hub name.
"Overlabelled at Midlands Hub"
So indeed, it appears if a label fails to scan at any mail centre we pay the price.
They are missing the second barcode that appears to be the post code. In their place it instead says the hub name.
"Overlabelled at Midlands Hub"
So indeed, it appears if a label fails to scan at any mail centre we pay the price.
Upvote
0
And other things about these 6 packages.
Differences:
- they were all packed and printed at different times so it's not like the printer hit a faulty patch on the thermal roll or something
- 5 were sent on one day, 1 was sent two days later
Similarities:
- they are all the same two products packed in similar ways in a large thin cardboard box
- we don't send too many parcels of this shape so it seems unlikely to be random selection
- they all got surcharged at Midlands hub which isn't even our collection hub
Royal Mail still blames our printers. They're not even considering the possibility of anything wrong on their end.
Differences:
- they were all packed and printed at different times so it's not like the printer hit a faulty patch on the thermal roll or something
- 5 were sent on one day, 1 was sent two days later
Similarities:
- they are all the same two products packed in similar ways in a large thin cardboard box
- we don't send too many parcels of this shape so it seems unlikely to be random selection
- they all got surcharged at Midlands hub which isn't even our collection hub
Royal Mail still blames our printers. They're not even considering the possibility of anything wrong on their end.
Upvote
0
Guys make sure that Reference1/2, EbayVtn etc you supply to any APIs are all uppercase. When you scan the data matrix make sure it only contains uppercase alphanumeric data.
I got in trouble for this with the COSS/Bespoke team however many years ago when eBay added VTNs because they are supplied lowercase by eBay.
The Shipping API has the same bug I did many years ago! It will transform Reference1/2 to uppercase but not EbayVtn which causes the entire data matrix to switch character sets back and forth and become much more dense.
Unfortunately it would only explain a very small minority of our packages but if you are primarily an eBay seller this could be a major issue.
I notice also in the few overlabelled data matrices that I can scan from the photos they have completely removed all customer references numbers from the data. I think I might try removing all reference numbers just to see if it makes any difference.
I got in trouble for this with the COSS/Bespoke team however many years ago when eBay added VTNs because they are supplied lowercase by eBay.
The Shipping API has the same bug I did many years ago! It will transform Reference1/2 to uppercase but not EbayVtn which causes the entire data matrix to switch character sets back and forth and become much more dense.
Unfortunately it would only explain a very small minority of our packages but if you are primarily an eBay seller this could be a major issue.
I notice also in the few overlabelled data matrices that I can scan from the photos they have completely removed all customer references numbers from the data. I think I might try removing all reference numbers just to see if it makes any difference.
Upvote
0
You may already done this - but if you have a parcel that passed through a Mail Centre without issue and you can see that from events on the tracking. I would request them to provide all pictures taken of the parcel as it went through the first mail centre successfully (the PSM always takes pictures as parcel passes through and if it successfully scan - they be associated) and to provide all pictures from the Mail Centre where it passed though again (after being re-labelled).
Upvote
0
Good idea.
But fortunately/unfortunately all those 6 turned out to be eBay orders with 48x48 matrices instead of 44x44. To me that feels like "the explanation" so I don't think it's worth disputing those packages with them further.
I reported the bug to the Shipping Solutions team, maybe they'll admit a fault and fix it, but even if they do it's a nightmare getting IT/Finance/Revenue Protection to talk to each other and agree to credit surcharges caused by other departments. Finance can't credit charges added by RP without RP's permission and they won't give permission unless a problem and dates have been reported on the system by IT.
I did some number crunching and eBay packages account for 47% of surcharges that I've been provided spreadsheets for. That is a massive over representation compared to sales. Check for any lowercase data in your matrices, guys.
Upvote
0
I was not necessary meaning for you to dispute again but having the picture from two mail centre could highlight something.
Regardless of it being 48x48 or 44x44 they should scan (unless you have issues with your printout, if you scan on flat bed scanner at high resolution - you can easily see if the modules are square). On my printers, I can print the 44x44 at less than half the size and my scanner will still pick it up instantly. This tells me there is a lot of redundancy when it is printed at the full 203DPI and the Data Matrix is 22mm by 22mm. If they do increase it to be the 25mm by 25mm like I see on Royal Mail own labels, there would be even more.
Personally, I would be very suspicious, about ones that scanned correctly at one Mail Centre, and failed at a later one - for me the most likely reason is the label got damaged whilst en-route. I'd also very suspicious if they refused to supply them - would make me wonder what they are hiding.
Upvote
0
I have been receiving these IPROL surcharges and I now take photos of my original mail items for cross referencing.
My photos evidence that all barcodes are readable. I believe that Royal Mail is attempting to convince us all into thinking that this is our fault, similar to the Horizon scandal. Please do not get taken in by their explanations and check everything out for yourself.
One example:
For a recent surcharge, Royal Mail sent me the recipient details of the mail item in question. I found my original photo of this mail item and it scanned first time. The barcode was good quality and readable and it should not have incurred this surcharge.
An example of a cover up:
When queried further, Royal Mail attempted to convince me into believing that this was an issue with my printer. I knew it wasn't as I have had everything checked out. They sent me an example photo of a different mail item, stating that it was unreadable, to evidence their claim that this was all my fault. They explained it as this:
Looking at network images of your items the shipping labels appear to have module distortion within the 2d barcode matrix, evidenced by the non uniform shape and size of the square modules. Modules are the black-and-white squares in the data matrix. They need to be uniform in shape and colour. Note how the data modules appear to have jagged edges or shape. This is commonly an indication of dithering and or poor print resolution caused by printer speed, and unclean printer heads.
Our PSMs are built with advanced error detection technology that may be able to rebuild the data matrix even if it has issues. This will mean that the PSM may successfully sort some parcels even when issues are present in all of them.
I found the original image of this example mail item, taken shortly before dispatch, and it was also readable. The barcode in their photo matched mine, so I could rule out damage to barcode or item being bent.
Their explanation and highlighting of the faults within the barcode were very believable and I began to question myself, but this for me proves that there is something untoward going on here and it is being covered up by them, rather than being dealt with.
My photos evidence that all barcodes are readable. I believe that Royal Mail is attempting to convince us all into thinking that this is our fault, similar to the Horizon scandal. Please do not get taken in by their explanations and check everything out for yourself.
One example:
For a recent surcharge, Royal Mail sent me the recipient details of the mail item in question. I found my original photo of this mail item and it scanned first time. The barcode was good quality and readable and it should not have incurred this surcharge.
An example of a cover up:
When queried further, Royal Mail attempted to convince me into believing that this was an issue with my printer. I knew it wasn't as I have had everything checked out. They sent me an example photo of a different mail item, stating that it was unreadable, to evidence their claim that this was all my fault. They explained it as this:
Looking at network images of your items the shipping labels appear to have module distortion within the 2d barcode matrix, evidenced by the non uniform shape and size of the square modules. Modules are the black-and-white squares in the data matrix. They need to be uniform in shape and colour. Note how the data modules appear to have jagged edges or shape. This is commonly an indication of dithering and or poor print resolution caused by printer speed, and unclean printer heads.
Our PSMs are built with advanced error detection technology that may be able to rebuild the data matrix even if it has issues. This will mean that the PSM may successfully sort some parcels even when issues are present in all of them.
I found the original image of this example mail item, taken shortly before dispatch, and it was also readable. The barcode in their photo matched mine, so I could rule out damage to barcode or item being bent.
Their explanation and highlighting of the faults within the barcode were very believable and I began to question myself, but this for me proves that there is something untoward going on here and it is being covered up by them, rather than being dealt with.
Upvote
0
@laural85 - you may have already explored this yourself. If you have a flatbed scanner, take a scan of your label in a lossless image format (e.g. tiff). If you don't have flatbed scanner take a high resolution picture on your phone (try to keep the barcode perfectly level and square with your camera viewport) - be aware that JPEG is a lossy format and will introduce noise (moire effect) which is not actually present in the source label. A good magnifying glass is also useful for checking the label.
Open the image on your computer and zoom in - check if the modules seem consistent. If you have noise (i.e. black dots at the edge of each small black module with in) - that is an issue with the printing. But even that is unlikely to cause an issue with a scan. if there are larger inconsistencies, Data Matrix barcodes have high lever of data/error recover built in to them.
Do make sure your labels being printed at full size - the barcode should measure 22mm by 22mm at full size - the ones supplied by Click & Drop / Pro Shipping (Shipping API) are currently that size - I have requested them to increase them to 25mm by 25mm (inline with what Royal Mail seem to print on the return we get) but they'll probably ignore me.
The responses that Royal Mail give to me are scripted/boilerplate, they are also bordering on gaslighting. Module distortion is not normally an issue - if Royal Mail scanning technology cannot cope with that, the image scanners are FAULTY. Likewise, little bits of corruption to the label will not cause an issue. In particular, the occasion white line through Data Matrix will not prevent a Data Matrix barcode from scanning.
If you do request an FSM to come over to take a look at your printers/labels - make sure you take good pictures of them before you let them take them (in the images they supplied back to me, some of the images they took were skewed and taken at odd angles - seemingly another attempt to gaslight). All the example labels they took were all fine though and scanned fine.
If you do know other businesses who use Royal Mail, I would request them to check their own invoices for IPROL charges. They are hiding them in invoices and not reporting the surcharges in the normal way - most account/finance departments will not query an extra small charge like we were getting. I only became aware of the IPROL charges in May by accident (I was checking an invoice for another reason) - in reality we had been occasionally getting since the start of January (I was not aware of the older until today when I checked all the prior invoices!). The people who check invoices for me now know to check the invoices for such charges and alert me - I have also worked out I can see them sooner from OBA.
Open the image on your computer and zoom in - check if the modules seem consistent. If you have noise (i.e. black dots at the edge of each small black module with in) - that is an issue with the printing. But even that is unlikely to cause an issue with a scan. if there are larger inconsistencies, Data Matrix barcodes have high lever of data/error recover built in to them.
Do make sure your labels being printed at full size - the barcode should measure 22mm by 22mm at full size - the ones supplied by Click & Drop / Pro Shipping (Shipping API) are currently that size - I have requested them to increase them to 25mm by 25mm (inline with what Royal Mail seem to print on the return we get) but they'll probably ignore me.
The responses that Royal Mail give to me are scripted/boilerplate, they are also bordering on gaslighting. Module distortion is not normally an issue - if Royal Mail scanning technology cannot cope with that, the image scanners are FAULTY. Likewise, little bits of corruption to the label will not cause an issue. In particular, the occasion white line through Data Matrix will not prevent a Data Matrix barcode from scanning.
If you do request an FSM to come over to take a look at your printers/labels - make sure you take good pictures of them before you let them take them (in the images they supplied back to me, some of the images they took were skewed and taken at odd angles - seemingly another attempt to gaslight). All the example labels they took were all fine though and scanned fine.
If you do know other businesses who use Royal Mail, I would request them to check their own invoices for IPROL charges. They are hiding them in invoices and not reporting the surcharges in the normal way - most account/finance departments will not query an extra small charge like we were getting. I only became aware of the IPROL charges in May by accident (I was checking an invoice for another reason) - in reality we had been occasionally getting since the start of January (I was not aware of the older until today when I checked all the prior invoices!). The people who check invoices for me now know to check the invoices for such charges and alert me - I have also worked out I can see them sooner from OBA.
Upvote
0
I wish I could see a photo of this because while most of what they say could be true the part about dithering is not.
Print out an International Tracked label and notice the how the "Expres" logo in the top right is a bunch of dots. That is dithering. The "Expres" image that Royal Mail embed in their PDFs is greyscale rather than true black and white which means it has to be dithered. However the data matrices are true black and white so they will never be dithered unless something is seriously seriously wrong with your printer setup.
If the modules are skewed then that could be a problem with the speed being too high or the roller being dirty or something but it's not dithering.
Royal Mail customer support are throwing around terms they don't understand.
Upvote
0
An if anyone is curious the Click and Drop team in my response to my query if they can increase the barcode size to be 25mm by 25mm (like Royal Mail other labels) replies with:
"Good afternoon Kevin
Thank you for your email.
The labels from Click and Drop do meet the size requirement for the barcodes to be readable via machinery, the barcode size is the same for all accounts and this is a default that could not be changed.
Please can I ask that you log a surcharge enquiry with the finance team concerning the surcharges applied to the account. I have included a link below the surcharge team should be able to provide further details of why the barcode could not be read.
**** CONRTACT FINANCE URL ***
Kind regards
*** REMOVED ***
Royal Mail Click and Drop"
As if I have not already disputed the surcharges
"Good afternoon Kevin
Thank you for your email.
The labels from Click and Drop do meet the size requirement for the barcodes to be readable via machinery, the barcode size is the same for all accounts and this is a default that could not be changed.
Please can I ask that you log a surcharge enquiry with the finance team concerning the surcharges applied to the account. I have included a link below the surcharge team should be able to provide further details of why the barcode could not be read.
**** CONRTACT FINANCE URL ***
Kind regards
*** REMOVED ***
Royal Mail Click and Drop"
As if I have not already disputed the surcharges
Upvote
0
Hello, this is an ongoing error with the new barcode scanning machine (Horizon?) and a problem that I also encounter with incorrect surcharge supplements.
Quite a number of large letter items are attracting surcharges for alleged incorrect weights. This is clearly false as regular items are being sent of the same weight and size / box daily.
Royal Mail will know about this issue, but there is a bug in the system.
I photograph items on the scale and also a picture of a calibration weight on the scale to prove weight. Some of my challenges have been successful, others not.
Quite a number of large letter items are attracting surcharges for alleged incorrect weights. This is clearly false as regular items are being sent of the same weight and size / box daily.
Royal Mail will know about this issue, but there is a bug in the system.
I photograph items on the scale and also a picture of a calibration weight on the scale to prove weight. Some of my challenges have been successful, others not.
Upvote
0
Horizon is a Post Office system - it not used by Royal Mail. But the Royal Mail did own/run the Post Office when the first Horizon issue reports started (30 years ago) and Royal Mail does still have some managers that were involved with Horizon. For me Royal Mail current lack of trust of their customers very much mirrors the Horizon scandal - but I don't think this will get to the same levels.
We have never had incorrect weights - presume you are weighing packed items (along time ago, we did used have someone who thought the packaging didn't count!).
Upvote
0
Has anyone received a reply from Royal Mail recently? I request barcodes and photos for surcharges on every invoice but they are now 3 invoices (i.e. 3 weeks) behind in responding.
I was getting somewhere with the Shipping Support team and the bug with lowercase data in the data matrix. They asked me to send over data showing that it is a real problem with real consequences so I told them about the surcharges and forwarded the photos of packages being over labelled at the Midlands hub. Now they responded saying I should contact Finance and dispute the charges instead!! So I guess the bug will never get fixed because nobody at Royal Mail will take responsibility for it. Why did I even try...
I was getting somewhere with the Shipping Support team and the bug with lowercase data in the data matrix. They asked me to send over data showing that it is a real problem with real consequences so I told them about the surcharges and forwarded the photos of packages being over labelled at the Midlands hub. Now they responded saying I should contact Finance and dispute the charges instead!! So I guess the bug will never get fixed because nobody at Royal Mail will take responsibility for it. Why did I even try...
Upvote
0
Royal Mail's Business Customer Service and Account team have been taking weeks to get back to me about anything - I did wonder if I had upset them.
However, I received an email confirming ALL of the IPROL surcharges, have now been credited (they even did the weeks were there were only one or two). Going forward, I will be keeping a very close eye on future IPROL surcharges.
I will advise that the Click & Drop team were very clear that I should dispute any such charges.
So if you are confident that your labels are correct, I would advise you escalate your issues to your account manager or contact the customer resolution team.
I will reiterate, if the barcode scans correctly on your own imaging scanner (not a phone) - Royal Mail imaging technology is at fault. Data Matrix barcode are very tolerate, and the PSM should be able to cope with barcodes that have minor damage. If you items are tracked the machine has to fail reading both barcodes - it was easy for me to prove that our printed labels have no issues.
I do not know if that means, they will review other companies who been affected by excessive / false surcharges. But if they cannot provide evidence of the barcodes that they claim to be bad, they have no legal basis to charge - I will also say without that evidence it gives no opportunity for the problem to be identified/rectified.
I wish you the best of luck in resolving your issues with Royal Mail.
However, I received an email confirming ALL of the IPROL surcharges, have now been credited (they even did the weeks were there were only one or two). Going forward, I will be keeping a very close eye on future IPROL surcharges.
I will advise that the Click & Drop team were very clear that I should dispute any such charges.
So if you are confident that your labels are correct, I would advise you escalate your issues to your account manager or contact the customer resolution team.
I will reiterate, if the barcode scans correctly on your own imaging scanner (not a phone) - Royal Mail imaging technology is at fault. Data Matrix barcode are very tolerate, and the PSM should be able to cope with barcodes that have minor damage. If you items are tracked the machine has to fail reading both barcodes - it was easy for me to prove that our printed labels have no issues.
I do not know if that means, they will review other companies who been affected by excessive / false surcharges. But if they cannot provide evidence of the barcodes that they claim to be bad, they have no legal basis to charge - I will also say without that evidence it gives no opportunity for the problem to be identified/rectified.
I wish you the best of luck in resolving your issues with Royal Mail.
Upvote
0
Are you implying that you are lucky enough to have an account manager that actually replies to you
Do you chase them on the phone or email them?
Upvote
0
I emailed - my account manager is always busy and it can take a few days for them to get back to me but mine always does - it always helps when your account manager cares though. Our account manager is one of the good ones, but I have had ones in the past who seemed to ignore emails,Are you implying that you are lucky enough to have an account manager that actually replies to you
Do you chase them on the phone or email them?
You could also contact customer resolution team or go to the Royal Mail CEO (you should be work that out from google)
Upvote
0
I'm just jealous you have an account manager! I have been asking for one for months but unable to get one, I imagine we are not hitting the numbers need but they don't clarify what is needed to have an account manager - we are sending around 600 parcels a week.
Upvote
0
Today they they sent me 2 photos each for 3 parcels. They didn't explain why it's 2 photos but one is always of the bottom of the parcel and the other is the normal over-labelled photo.
Is there any explanation for why the machines would be taking photos of the bottom of parcels, other than parcels are being placed on the conveyor upside down?
Is there any explanation for why the machines would be taking photos of the bottom of parcels, other than parcels are being placed on the conveyor upside down?
Upvote
0
Royal Mail now claims that when a package is first ejected for "unreadable barcode" a human checks that the package is suitable for the machine and will either send it through a second time better aligned or immediately take it to the "rectification area" for over-labelling. If it fails the to scan on the conveyor a second time it's also taken to the "rectification area".
Isn't this a different story than what they've told some of you guys?
If what they told me is true then it seems like we're actually at the mercy of random staff rather than the machines. This would explain why the surcharges come in batches - it's down to whether or not the staff on duty can actually be bothered to properly place items on the conveyors that day.
Isn't this a different story than what they've told some of you guys?
If what they told me is true then it seems like we're actually at the mercy of random staff rather than the machines. This would explain why the surcharges come in batches - it's down to whether or not the staff on duty can actually be bothered to properly place items on the conveyors that day.
Upvote
0
I know how my barcodes are and I have always maintained it is either a staff training issue or a a machine fault. But Royal Mail have frequently change their story to me on multiple occasions - I believe they are gaslighting!
As I have mentioned before, if they cannot provide evidence of the bad barcode - I will not accept the charge.
Royal Mail need to update their process so they
1) take a photo at the point they re-label
2) report the surcharge in the normal way (i.e. not just hide in the invoice - where many companies will not notice it)
As they are either keying (or scanning) the parcel number to get the new over-label - it would trivial for Royal Mail to put taking a photo into their process.
As I have mentioned before, if they cannot provide evidence of the bad barcode - I will not accept the charge.
Royal Mail need to update their process so they
1) take a photo at the point they re-label
2) report the surcharge in the normal way (i.e. not just hide in the invoice - where many companies will not notice it)
As they are either keying (or scanning) the parcel number to get the new over-label - it would trivial for Royal Mail to put taking a photo into their process.
Upvote
0
As "evidence" against our labels Royal Mail is now saying that the Royal Mail logo in the top right of our labels shows bleeding and that the words "Royal Mail" should be fully white.
This is despite the fact that there is a thin line inside the words "Royal Mail" everywhere their logo is displayed.
They're actually gaslighting me now. Anyone sane can see those lines are there inside the logo.
This is despite the fact that there is a thin line inside the words "Royal Mail" everywhere their logo is displayed.
They're actually gaslighting me now. Anyone sane can see those lines are there inside the logo.
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
The Most Dangerous Moment in Business Is When Everything Is Going WellThey Saw It Coming. They Did Nothing. The Lessons Every Business Owner...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
AI and Your Business: Useful Tool, Not a Magic WandThere is no shortage of noise around artificial intelligence right now...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Companies House WebFiling security incident: what happened, what to check, and what to do nextCompanies House has confirmed that its WebFiling service suffered a...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Spring Budget 2026: A Quiet Update for UK BusinessesChancellor Rachel Reeves delivered the UK’s Spring Statement on 3 March...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Practical Ways to Make Your Small Business More Resilient (Especially When the Unexpected Happens)Running a business means juggling plenty of things you can plan for and...- UKBF Editor
- Updated:
