Royal International Movers - Vanpac Group Asia

3 Reviews: Add Review

1. Lied to about volume overcharged S$750.

   My experience with Vanpac Group Asia was good until I realized they lied to me about the volume of my items and as a result ended up paying S$750 more than I had to.
   
   Being over-charged S$750 sucks and it’s a significant amount but my primary motivation for trying to correct it was to communicate with the management of the company about the fact that one of its employees was lying to its customers.
   
   What became appalling to me, as I learned, was the lack of interest in the management that I had been lied to. I guess they took the position that I was no longer living in SG and therefore they could take advantage of me. Following are the bullet points of how things transpired:
   -- Original quote for 4 cubic meters (cbm).
   Items were picked up and I was told the actual volume was close to 5 cubic meters but would not be charged more.
   -- The following day, I decided to add my queen-size mattress to the shipment. Was told that would bring my volume to 6 cbm and would be charged an extra S$750. I felt this was too high for a single mattress, given the total cost of my move, which was less than S$4000, but was told it was not negotiable given the 6 cbm volume of my items. I reluctantly agreed and my mattress was picked up.
   -- When my items were about to arrive to the USA, I received an email from Schumacher (the shipping company) informing me of the status. I noticed the indicated volume on their email was for 4 cbm and I thought that was odd.
   -- I informed my contact at Vanpac Group Asia about this and he insisted it was a mistake on their part. I was a bit suspicious at the time but there was nothing I could do.
   -- The items were delivered to me in in the USA and the delivery document clearly stated that the volume being delivered was 4.22 cbm. I was told all my items were measured upon arrival into the USA.
   -- I sent an image of this document to my contact at Vanpac Group Asia and he told me a story about how the extra empty space was because it was sent via group-share. The purpose of sending items group-share is to avoid having to spend for empty space so I told him that his answer was not acceptable. Besides, if I was true that I was to pay for empty space, it had never been mentioned before. He insisted that I could not get a refund and I told him I wanted to speak with his manager.
   -- I informed his manager of the situation and he told me he was willing to give me a partial refund, S$300. Since the charge was based on the lie that my items were close to 6 cbm, and that the total volume was just above the 4 cbm that I had originally been quoted, I insisted on a full refund. Saying anything less was fraud and unexceptable.
   -- I mentioned to the manager that I was not satisfied with his response and he told me that he was sorry but that it was company policy. I responded by saying that I seriously doubt that it is company policy to overcharge customers and to act indifferent about it.
   -- I tried to escalate higher in the organization with no success. I even wrote to the Managing Director informing him of my interest to speak with him. When I received no response, I wrote him a detailed account of the situation asking for time to speak and that too was ignored.
   -- In my attempt to speak with someone of power in the organization, I called the USA and UK branches of the company and was told they were separate companies. During this research process, I spoke to someone from Vanpac in the UK who told me that what happened to me was not normal practice across the organization. He was shocked to learn what his counterparts in Singapore had done, was willing to help me connect with senior management in Singapore. But he was quickly told to back off and not to get involved.
   
   Like I said before, this is only my experience and I am sure many other people have had good experiences with this moving company.

   

2. Satisfied Customer.

   Just received my goods in Australia.
   All was in good order, except a slightly cracked plastic container.
   
   Thank you very much to both teams in Australia and Vietnam.
   They did what was necessary and it was very polite throughout.
   
   Have recommended to my colleagues.

3. Stolen items due to botched inventory at pickup.

   The quote from France to Vietnam was low and the company seemed reliable at the Vietnamese end.
   The partner they chose in France made a bad job at the inventory: I had drawn a full inventory and numbered the items, but the team who picked up the shipment put together a quick-and-dirty inventory. I noticed that it was wrong, but they reassured me that since all the contents went into the container, the shipment would arrive safely.
   There were fewer items on their list than in the shipment; at the Vietnamese end, someone stole boxes, but we could not complain because the number of items delivered was not lower than the number on the list.
   The stolen items were carefully selected, avoiding those that were on the list of insured items, for which we could have claimed a compensation. So I guess that the person(s) who stole the boxes had the inventory lists in hand, and the list of insured item; they knew that there was a good opportunity for mischief. (I think the team who picked up the stuff did not anticipate the theft, much less participate in its planning: they just did a sloppy job, and someone at the Vietnamese end took advantage of it.)
   When I pointed out that boxes were missing, Vanpac / Royal International Movers got in touch with their partner in France, who simply answered that their inventory was truthful. Vanpac did not give any compensation. Among the stolen boxes were items that were important for my job: not much $ value, but very valuable to me, and very difficult to replace.
   
   (Note: the drop-down menu on this form does not include Asia / Vietnam so I chose India as the closest.).