Brian Thomas, of Abbotskerswell, writes:

I wonder if readers are aware that Royal Mail is planning to adopt a formal Delivery to Neighbour scheme from late September, subject to Ofcom approval. This innocuous-looking proposal involves placing the responsibility for oversized parcel deliveries with people other than the recipient.

Royal Mail wants to leave oversized deliveries that won't fit through your letterbox with a neighbour if you are not at home, and for you to take your neighbour's similar parcels/packets to save customers from having to collect their parcel from the sorting office.

Those who do not want either to take in others' mail or have their mail left with a neighbour can 'opt out' by placing an official sticker on their door. However, applying this sticker means that any oversized mail being delivered to you when you are out is automatically returned to the sorting office – unless you have a safe place such as a bin or box on your premises which is secure. This option only applies if you have already asked the sender to direct your package to a specified place on your premises if you are out – and only when goods are ordered over the phone or via the Internet, a provision currently only available in conjunction with Royal Mail Tracked.

Surely, Royal Mail is contracted – at the very least by the amount it charges for its services – to ensure that mail of whatever size is delivered specifically to the person/location to whom/which it is addressed, not anyone else who happens to live on the same street, unless the recipient has a clear and unambiguous agreement with Royal Mail to redirect a parcel to an agreed, named individual at an alternative nearby address. Royal Mail is not only paid but insured to hold and carry people's mail; individual householders should not become unsecured, unofficial carriers/holders of UK mail.

It is not sufficient for Royal Mail to state that if a neighbour denies having received such an item, or it is lost or damaged, 'consumers will still be able to make a compensation claim in the normal way'. This course causes delays and difficulties, especially if the item is needed quickly, such as time-sensitive medicines.

A 2011 'trial' survey conducted by Royal Mail, which claims on a recent leaflet a 92 per cent 'really positive' response to Delivery to Neighbour, appears to be based on the views of just 360 people – 60 each from Edinburgh, Gatwick North, Hull, Norwich, Swansea East and Wigan/Bolton. And while the company claims to have informed 400,000 Royal Mail account customers of the proposal in 2011, only 'a small number of customers responded to this mailing'. Did they think it was just junk mail?

The same trial interestingly records that there were serious objections to the scheme from one local authority, a bank and an NHS trust, all concerned with the security or loss of important mail such as legal documents and credit cards along with potential breaches of confidentiality caused through delivering mail to a neighbour.

Why was this issue not aired fully by Royal Mail in the press and its flyer only delivered at the end of August? Perhaps readers might like to highlight what is in my opinion a flawed proposal to Ofcom, whose decision is close to publication, before it becomes a fait accompli?THIS AND OTHER LETTERS IN OUR DIGITAL EDITION