We already know the deal with FedEx straight up stealing peoples cards but it looks like USPS can now be absolved of any and all responsibility even if they “intentionally don’t deliver”
I find this a little bit of a crazy stipulation because I’ve had 3 PSA 9 National Championship Charizards delivered to a wrong address before and it took a month and a ton of phone calls to get to the right person who basically said they were at fault but would not admit it via email/papertrail. But at least that got me an apology and some closure. This is crazy that a Postman can just legit intentionally not deliver something and there’s no lever for responsibility in a court of law.
It’s important to understand this within some context. The lawsuit was about malicious intent. There is already a law that prevents the USPS from getting sued. This decision extends that law’s reach regardless of intent (malicious or incompetence).
Although you can’t sue USPS, you can file grievances with the Office of Inspector General and USPS Postal Inspection Service. These systems are in place to hold criminals accountable, even those federally employed by USPS.
Regarding accountability - USPS may not have to answer to you in a court of law, but they do have to answer to Congress. They are mandated to investigate mail theft and criminal activities occurring through the mail system. This adds a layer of protection and trust to the system, whereas FedEX, UPS, DHL have no mandated accountability system or significant repercussions.
Good job at journalism Mark Sherman, you actual hack. At least provide the link to the case.
Here is the docket.
24-351 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE V. KONAN
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), ch. 753, 60 Stat. 842 (28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2671 et
seq.), generally waives the United States’ sovereign immunity for suits seeking damages “for
injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or
omission” of an employee of the federal government “under circumstances where the United
States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the
place where the act or omission occurred.” 28 U.S.C. 1346(b)(1). The FTCA, however, excepts
from that waiver of immunity “[a]ny claim arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent
transmission of letters or postal matter.” 28 U.S.C. 2680(b). The question presented is as
follows:
Whether a plaintiff’s claim that she and her tenants did not receive mail because Postal
Service employees intentionally did not deliver it to a designated address arises out of “the
loss” or “miscarriage” of letters or postal matter. 28 U.S.C. 2680(b).
I am still reading. But so far this journalist failed in his duty to accurately and faithfully describe the matter of the case in my estimation. And he has also not provided a direct link to the case itself for the reader to investigate.