UPS story: To claim or not to claim?

[S. Stevenson]

Deleted.

[lleichtman]

Believe you're right. Your friend is SOL on this one.

[Victor Hong]

Filing an insurance claim for lost wine will mean a breach of either state liquor laws or federal contraband shipping laws, or both, especially if plane transport mode.
Stating that a vase was lost, when wine was actually lost, would also mean insurance fraud..... a state felony, at least.....and likely a federal felony if across state lines.

Otherwise, must be nice to be rich.

[Alan Rath]

From that message, it will be interesting to hear what UPS says. It sounds like someone stole the contents, and then got rid of the packaging. So, assuming they are not claiming they purposely destroyed the package because it was wine, what evidence is there that the contents wasn't a vase? Seems like it might be a $400 insurance claim.

[Victor Hong]

From that message, it will be interesting to hear what UPS says. It sounds like someone stole the contents, and then got rid of the packaging. So, assuming they are not claiming they purposely destroyed the package because it was wine, what evidence is there that the contents wasn't a vase? Seems like it might be a $400 insurance claim.

Be careful. A written representation which is counterfactual and intentional can be perilous. Indeed, this thread can be discoverable.

[PeterH]

I hope whoever got the wine really appreciates it.
UPS would undoubtedly deny the claim even if it was a vase, blaming the packaging. Probably the same if the wine were shipped legally, i.e., from a registered seller.

[Victor Hong]

You cannot insure a good which does not exist. A claim is even less valid.

[Nola Palomar]

Nope, count it as an early gift you enjoyed virtually, then forget it!!

[Craig G]

From that message, it will be interesting to hear what UPS says. It sounds like someone stole the contents, and then got rid of the packaging. So, assuming they are not claiming they purposely destroyed the package because it was wine, what evidence is there that the contents wasn't a vase? Seems like it might be a $400 insurance claim.

Be careful. A written representation which is counterfactual and intentional can be perilous. Indeed, this thread can be discoverable.

You never know when there might be whistleblowers around, too!

[Alan Rath]

From that message, it will be interesting to hear what UPS says. It sounds like someone stole the contents, and then got rid of the packaging. So, assuming they are not claiming they purposely destroyed the package because it was wine, what evidence is there that the contents wasn't a vase? Seems like it might be a $400 insurance claim.

Be careful. A written representation which is counterfactual and intentional can be perilous. Indeed, this thread can be discoverable.

What does your moral compass say about a UPS employee stealing wine and covering his tracks, vs. an individual attempting to exist within the corruptive framework of the 21st amendment?

[NED VALOIS]

Not !

[S. Stevenson]

deleted.

[Victor Hong]

Indeed, if the US Post Office were involved, the insurance claimant for lost "wine" could be chargeable with a False Claims Act violation (qui tam).
Even the cheapest person would not enjoy the taxpayer-provided housing, clothing, and food in exchange for $400.
Bonnes-Mares would turn into bon vonage on the SS Sing Sing.

[David Glasser]

Has anyone ever been sent to jail for shipping a case or less of wine via the USPS?

[Alan Rath]

The paranoia is strong with this thread. UPS isn't going after anyone beyond confiscating and destroying the wine. The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

[Markus S]

The paranoia is strong with this thread. UPS isn't going after anyone beyond confiscating and destroying the wine. The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Not sure about this. Just read in my local paper about the government going after and convicting someone of defrauding $1300 from welfare benefits they shouldn't have received. To put it in perspective, that's only 2 of these bottles!

[Victor Hong]

The paranoia is strong with this thread. UPS isn't going after anyone beyond confiscating and destroying the wine. The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Not sure about this. Just read in my local paper about the government going after and convicting someone of defrauding $1300 from welfare benefits they shouldn't have received. To put it in perspective, that's only 2 of these bottles!

Wholesalers would have the private economic incentive to push for "make-an-example" public enforcement. My understanding is the some delivery services have recently sent cease-and-desist letters to suspected unlicensed senders.

[Alan Rath]

My understanding is the some delivery services have recently sent cease-and-desist letters to suspected unlicensed senders.

That's somewhat different than "taxpayer-provided housing, clothing, and food", wouldn't you say?

About the worst that can happen to an individual shipping a bottle or two of wine is the shipper rejecting it before it gets very far, or destroying it later on. But frankly, once it's left the origin drop off, my experience is that it's smooth sailing. Worst case, I can imagine a shipper blacklisting someone if they get caught more than once or twice.

[Nola Palomar]

Has anyone ever been sent to jail for shipping a case or less of wine via the USPS?

I have never shipped wine or olive oil via USPS because you cannot ship liquids. It’s either UPS or Fed Ex.

[David Glasser]

Has anyone ever been sent to jail for shipping a case or less of wine via the USPS?

I have never shipped wine or olive oil via USPS because you cannot ship liquids. It’s either UPS or Fed Ex.

Interesting Nola. I never realized that all liquids were prohibited from shipping via USPS.

[Nola Palomar]

Has anyone ever been sent to jail for shipping a case or less of wine via the USPS?

I have never shipped wine or olive oil via USPS because you cannot ship liquids. It’s either UPS or Fed Ex.

Interesting Nola. I never realized that all liquids were prohibited from shipping via USPS.

When you go in to drop off a package they ask you if it contains liquids... Perhaps I am mistaken but that’s always been my go to.

[Gabe Berk]

On a related note...

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=164271&p=2830367#p2830367

[Victor Hong]

All the delivery companies ask if liquid or hazardous contents.

[Nathan Smyth]

The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Depends on who you are.

If you're the type who poses an existential threat to Bidness As Usual Inc, then the state & the feds will throw everything plus the kitchen sink at you.

And if they miss with the kitchen sink, then they'll walk over and pick the kitchen sink back up and keep throwing it at you until they smash your skull to smithereens.

[I don't know why I went to the trouble of typing this - anyone who bothered to glance at the headlines in the news everyday would be painfully aware of these unspeakably sordid aspects of our dilemma.]

[Victor Hong]

The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Depends on who you are.

If you're the type who poses an existential threat to Bidness As Usual Inc, then the state & the feds will throw everything plus the kitchen sink at you.

And if they miss with the kitchen sink, then they'll walk over and pick the kitchen sink back up and keep throwing it at you until they smash your skull to smithereens.

[I don't know why I went to the trouble of typing this - anyone who bothered to glance at the headlines in the news everyday would be painfully aware of these unspeakably sordid aspects of our dilemma.]

My trust in regulatory authorities has significantly waned, during the last few years and associated, embroiled dealings. Their primary concerns are self-preservation and self-validation, not consumer or taxpayer protection.

[Chuck Miller]

Nola, it is illegal to use USPS to ship alcohol. Other liquids like olive oil are legal AKAIK, but you must declare it as a liquid, have it properly packaged, and probably waive damages if broken.

[Nola Palomar]

Nola, it is illegal to use USPS to ship alcohol. Other liquids like olive oil are legal AKAIK, but you must declare it as a liquid, have it properly packaged, and probably waive damages if broken.

Awesome, good to know. Thanks for the clarity!!

[David Glasser]

The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Depends on who you are.

If you're the type who poses an existential threat to Bidness As Usual Inc, then the state & the feds will throw everything plus the kitchen sink at you.

And if they miss with the kitchen sink, then they'll walk over and pick the kitchen sink back up and keep throwing it at you until they smash your skull to smithereens.

[I don't know why I went to the trouble of typing this - anyone who bothered to glance at the headlines in the news everyday would be painfully aware of these unspeakably sordid aspects of our dilemma.]

An extra heavy-duty tinfoil helmet can protect against that.

[Nathan Smyth]

The state and feds are sure as hell not going to waste their time tracking down someone who shipped a bottle of wine.

Depends on who you are.

If you're the type who poses an existential threat to Bidness As Usual Inc, then the state & the feds will throw everything plus the kitchen sink at you.

And if they miss with the kitchen sink, then they'll walk over and pick the kitchen sink back up and keep throwing it at you until they smash your skull to smithereens.

[I don't know why I went to the trouble of typing this - anyone who bothered to glance at the headlines in the news everyday would be painfully aware of these unspeakably sordid aspects of our dilemma.]

My trust in regulatory authorities has significantly waned, during the last few years and associated, embroiled dealings. Their primary concerns are self-preservation and self-validation, not consumer or taxpayer protection.

The regulatory state is the Praetorian Guard of the billionaires, and exists solely to ensure that the rest of us remain serfs & slaves forever.

As above, if Bidness As Usual Inc senses that you, as an uppity serf or slave, pose an existential threat to bidness as usual, then woe be unto you.

You might be able to duck beneath that airborne kitchen sink the first few times they throw it at you, but it will take an herculean effort to dodge it forever.

[Al Osterheld]

Maybe several layers of extra heavy-duty tinfoil?

-Al

[Alan Rath]

Maybe several layers of extra heavy-duty tinfoil?

-Al

I’m thinking an upgrade to lead, at very least...

[Jason T]

Maybe several layers of extra heavy-duty tinfoil?

-Al

I’m thinking an upgrade to lead, at very least...

I think lead may be part of the problem, actually.