S $ 259 Pandamart order for S’pore children’s house not delivered, Foodpanda support insists pilot gave ‘proof of delivery’ – Mothership.SG
A total of 136 grocery items worth S $ 259.32 destined for a children’s home in Singapore have apparently gone missing.
The groceries were ordered by a customer who sought to donate them and placed the order through pandamart, which is foodpanda’s grocery delivery service.
However, the customer later discovered that the delivery had never been made.
Even though the customer managed to get in touch with the foodpanda representatives via email, their repeated response was that “upon checking out” they concluded that the order had been delivered successfully, as the rider had provided a “proof of delivery” in the form of a photo.
The customer was not happy with the explanation and the photo.
The image showed what appeared to be a single plastic bag hanging from the edge of a fence outside a building that was not the children’s home.
But when the customer requested further assistance through foodpanda’s live chat feature, she encountered what she called “condescending and empty promises.”
This led to a detailed account of the experience on the Complaint Singapore Facebook group, advising others to “think twice” before ordering from pandamart.
Order placed in advance with address and point of contact
The customer, who goes by the Facebook handle Estelle Liu, wrote that she placed the order on May 22, two days before the scheduled delivery on May 24.
She provided the delivery address and indicated the delivery time at 11am via the foodpanda app.
However, Liu said that the delivery did not arrive, and that “no footage of a Pandamart delivery” was “captured”, no goods depot was recorded by the multiple CCTV cameras of the children’s home.
“There is no reason for this package to be wrongly delivered or not located,” said Liu, who explained that she listed the name of the delivery location as Chen Su Lan Methodist Children’s. Home, along with its address, 202 Serangoon Way, Singapore 556057, as well as the details of a point of contact.
Problem with the given address
Commentators on her post pointed out that the correct address for the children’s home was 202 Serangoon Garden Way, not 202 Serangoon Way.
However, Liu replied that the runner could have relied on the postal code or called the telephone number provided.
Foodpanda’s apparent response to this, as shown in the screenshots of the emails Liu downloaded, was that the order was contactless delivery, and so, “the rider would immediately drop the order off at the drop-off point. “without notifying the sender.
Another screenshot from an email from foodpanda stated that the foodpanda rep apparently ended the conversation by saying that “we cannot continue with assistance since the rider has provided us with proof of delivery. . “
The subject of a refund was not mentioned in Liu’s message, nor in the screenshots of the emails sent by foodpanda to the customer.
The live chat ended because he was “not drawing any conclusions”
Liu then attempted to contact foodpanda through another means: their live chat feature in the app.
This too proved unsuccessful, as Liu did not receive any follow-up emails or calls after explaining his situation, despite the promise that foodpanda representatives would follow up on his issue.
In the middle of the conversation, a foodpanda rep made a pun, which understandably was not well received by the frustrated customer.
“Not only is the delivery a disappointment, but the level of customer service is even more appalling,” Liu said.
The discussion was then summarily ended by the representative of foodpanda who declared that “this does not lead to any conclusion”.
Could the delivery have been left in the wrong place?
Although foodpanda was unable to provide a satisfactory answer to Liu’s question about what happened to the grocery store, a commentator on the post apparently found it. a clue as to what may have happened.
The commentator observed that the building and fence seen in the “proof of delivery” image matched the appearance of a building just down the street from Chen Su Lan’s Methodist Children’s Home.
Further, the commentator showed that a search for “202 Serangoon Garden Way” on Google Maps did not show the children’s house, but the same part of the fence where the rider apparently took the photo of the “evidence. Delivery”.
The building in the photos is apparently the Ling Kwang Home for Senior Citizens, which has been marked on Google Maps with the same address and zip code (202 Serangoon Garden Way, Singapore 556057) as the Chen Su Lan Methodist Children’s Home – can -be mistakenly, like the real address of Ling Kwang Home, as indicated on its website, is 156 Serangoon Garden Way.
Given the incorrect address, the rider could have delivered the items to the Ling Kwang house, or at least brought them to the fence around him instead.
This, according to Liu, would not have been a problem:
Mothership has contacted foodpanda for comment and will update the article if it responds.
Top image via Google Maps Street View and via Estelle Liu on Facebook