In article ,
GB wrote:
On 16/01/2019 15:17, alan_m wrote:
On 16/01/2019 13:44, NY wrote:
Shame it doesn't also mandate a minimum height of the hole, to
accommodate thicker packages without the postman having to ring the
bell or take the package back to the sorting office for you to collect.

It doesn't seem to make much difference where I live. On multiple
occasions I've had the card instructing me to go to the distribution
centre to pick up a package that is too large. On collecting the
"package" I find that it is two or more packages held together with a
red rubber band and if removed they would have all individually fitted
through my letter box with ease.



There really ought to be a standard letterbox size. Much stuff could
then be packaged so as to fit through that size. There's no reason, in
principle, why say whisky bottles could not be shaped to go through a
letterbox.


If you're going to put whisky through a letterbox there will need to be a
"catcher" on the other side, there's a 4ft drop behind my letterbox.

But, there's no point doing that unless there's a standard
size AND many houses have that size.

Will this Bill require changing existing letterboxes? If so, it should
go the whole hog and mandate size, as well as height.

The has been a Post Office preferred size for a great many years =
certainly since before we moved into this house - and that was 41 years ago.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle