Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Re: Claiming statistics? (Albert Henderson) Birdie MacLennan 18 Jun 2002 11:04 UTC

Date:         Mon, 17 Jun 2002 23:55:09 -0400
From:         Albert Henderson <chessNIC@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Claiming statistics?

on Fri, 14 Jun 2002 Judith Koveleskie <> wrote:

> I would agree with Bill about the rate of success.  However, there are a
> few publishers who assume that if a label was produced, that the item was
> correctly mailed, and therefore the item was received.  This may be a
> good assumption if the label is printed directly on the journal, however
> I have received items with double labels glued on.  Just the other day I
> received a newspaper by mail with someone else's paper tucked inside
> which I sent back to the post office.  Even correctly labeled items are
> not always delivered correctly.  If all publishers took the positions
> that "I mailed it so you received it and lost it." how could we ever
> claim anything again?  Does anyone else have thoughts on this?

        Most publishers realize that errors occur in the
        distribution process. They will make good missing
        and damaged issues, even those lost or hurt in
        the postal system. However, many publishers have
        complained to me about library claims generated
        many months after mailing. We know libraries
        follow a check-in process for incoming serials
        intended to generate claims for damaged and
        missing numbers. Subscribers that have lost or
        damaged their issues should take responsibility.

        Best wishes,

Albert Henderson