From: Bill on
Typo: tried substituting 001 with GB and 01 with GB.

In article <20080629-115007.885.0(a)Bill.news.plus.net>,
billgates(a)megabucks.com says...
>
>
>You suggest
>
>>P/Force numbers should be in the form :
>
>PBLLNNNNNNN001GB (spaces removed)
>
>but..
>
>AA000100019GB is the example given on PF's T&T webpage
>PBLV83904NN001 is the number I've been given
>
>ParcelForce's example has 3 alphanumerics short of yours and one short
>of mine without the GB added to mine.
>
>I've tried sticking GB on the end of mine but same message. Have also
>tried knocking out the 001 and substituting GB, and substituting just
>001 with GB with the same result. Any further suggestions before I
>tell the seller the number is not recognised by the T&T?
>
>
>In article <BB6e7CrEozZIFwj5(a)nospam.demon.co.uk>,
>news(a)nospam.demon.co.uk says...
>>
>>P/Force numbers should be in the form :
>>
>>PB LL NNN NNNN 001 GB
>>
>>Try your number again, with GB on the end, assuming that the xxxxx in
>>your number is xx001.
>

From: Chris Lapthorn on

"News" <news(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BB6e7CrEozZIFwj5(a)nospam.demon.co.uk...
> In message <20080628-214446.391.0(a)Bill.news.plus.net>, Bill
> <billgates(a)megabucks.com> writes
>>Don't PF tracking numbers end in GB for GB internal parcels? I've been
>>given one from a seller posted early today which reads: PBLV83904xxxxx
>>where the last 5 x's are numbers. When I try tracking I get "We are
>>currently unable to confirm that (sic) status of your parcel. Please
>>check the number and try again."
>>
> P/Force numbers should be in the form :
>
> PB LL NNN NNNN 001 GB
>
> Try your number again, with GB on the end, assuming that the xxxxx in your
> number is xx001.
> --
> Geep

That's odd, when I do a track & trace on the web site I don't use GB on the
end and I usually get the information I'm after!

Chris


From: News on
In message <20080629-115007.885.0(a)Bill.news.plus.net>, Bill
<billgates(a)megabucks.com> writes

>PBLV83904NN001 is the number I've been given
>
> Any further suggestions before I
>tell the seller the number is not recognised by the T&T?

Apologies for the delay in responding - I trust your parcel has been
traced by now?

I would certainly expect a PF International parcel to be in the form PB
LL NNNN NNN 001, with, as Fran quite rightly pointed out, the 001
increasing by one, for each additional parcel within the consignment.
Your number, therefore, looks correct.

There are, though, several different PF International services, all with
different numbering systems, but I would still expect the format to
remain constant.
--
Geep
From: Bill on
Thanks for asking. Yes, I got the parcel. I had also experimented with the
number and found the reason for the difficulty in tracing it. It seems that
ParcelForce uses a t&t number AND a parcel number both based on the one number.
So PBLV83904xx001 is the parcel number, but to use t&t you have to strip off
the last 3 numbers and the first 2 letters!

In article <PaZtN2dULleIFwah(a)nospam.demon.co.uk>, news(a)nospam.demon.co.uk
says...
>
>In message <20080629-115007.885.0(a)Bill.news.plus.net>, Bill
><billgates(a)megabucks.com> writes
>
>>PBLV83904NN001 is the number I've been given
>>
>> Any further suggestions before I
>>tell the seller the number is not recognised by the T&T?
>
>Apologies for the delay in responding - I trust your parcel has been
>traced by now?
>
>I would certainly expect a PF International parcel to be in the form PB
>LL NNNN NNN 001, with, as Fran quite rightly pointed out, the 001
>increasing by one, for each additional parcel within the consignment.
>Your number, therefore, looks correct.
>
>There are, though, several different PF International services, all with
>different numbering systems, but I would still expect the format to
>remain constant.
>--
>Geep

From: News on
In message <fOKdnXPXy_7NtObV4p2dnAA(a)posted.metronet>, Bill
<billgates(a)megabucks.com> writes
>Thanks for asking. Yes, I got the parcel. I had also experimented with the
>number and found the reason for the difficulty in tracing it. It seems that
>ParcelForce uses a t&t number AND a parcel number both based on the one
>number.
>So PBLV83904xx001 is the parcel number, but to use t&t you have to strip off
>the last 3 numbers and the first 2 letters!

Well, yes, I can see that being entirely logical ...

:-)
--
Geep
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Have I gone too far?
Next: paypal - signing in