Target Sent My Item as ATL and It Got Stolen

Recently bought a Lego set (Tyrannosaurus Rex - $399 retail price). Have bought from Target previously and they normally send signature on delivery which I like as I live in an area that is subject to parcel theft.

Anyways. For whatever reason target sent the item through Couriers Please, not Australia Post and sent it as authority to leave. And yes, the parcel got stolen.

I’ve contacted target and they investigated and provided proof of delivery, but I explained according to their own terms and conditions all parcels are sent signature on delivery. They selected ATL, not me.
I’ve even confirmed with Couriers Please it was booked as ATL. And I’ve provided Target with that email.

I paid through PayPal and submitted a claim but PayPal sided with Target as the item was delivered (All they had to do was provide a tracking and PayPal sided with them)

I’m at a loss (literally) as Target don’t respond to email or chat. And their phone number is outsourced and useless.

Any advice?

Does anyone have a phone number or email contact to an Australian customer service rep who might actually look into it properly.

Related Stores

Target Australia
Target Australia

Comments

      • -1

        Kind of.

        The RRP value may be $400, but for these circumstances, the insurance value is only the amount that you paid.

        If you paid $600 for the item, would you still claim that it was only valued at $400 because that's what RRP says?

        I do understand where you are coming from and I'd be completely devastated if this happened to me, but without additional insurance, this is one of the draw backs for online trading.

        As it stands, Target did supply the item. You asked them to supply it to a delivery service and they have done that.

        Target don't provide a delivery service, but they do offer to provide one on your behalf. The choice of that service is for the buyer. Where they don't nominate one that both parties agree to, if the buyer wants to continue with the contract, it means they've accepted whatever service the seller has nominated by default.

        Note seller does not have to agree to use the service nominated by buyer.

        Hence, target appear to have done exactly what you have asked them, and your issue is with the delivery service.

        At a very basic level, you generally can't be responsible for a product once it leaves your hands and/or what a third party does with it when it is no longer in your possession or under your control.

        And as far as contracts go, the choice of delivery service is a term of the contract and ultimately considered the choice made by the buyer. If buyer didn't like terms of sale contract, they either needed to negotiate or trade elsewhere with the contract terms they wanted.

        Unfortunately, target have proof that they sent the product. Apparently, they even have proof that the item was delivered to your address.

        That's ordinarily the extent of their obligation.

        By law, it is actually up to the buyer to choose the method of delivery. If none is nominated, then obviously the default goes to whomever the seller selected on the buyer's behalf.

        Of note, there is a slight grey area here for online contracts that offer "free delivery" as it is generally determined that the contract for delivery is separate to the sales contract and is between the delivery service and buyer.

        As for the delivery service, even if this loss was determined to be their fault, as the item was not insured, the maximum amount for which they are liable is whatever cost they charged for the service they were supposed to provide (ie postage/shipping charge) as that is the service they didn't provide.

      • -1

        I meant to add OP, that I once had success with PayPal for INR where the tracking said it was delivered.

        My argument was " package may have been delivered somewhere, but it wasn't delivered to my address".

        Can't remember any other details or why that argument worked, but it did and I got my refund.

        Might be why they take photos of delivery points these days.

  • +7

    Just as an update. The case is still under investigation by target. But I’m not hopeful of a positive outcome.

  • +1

    Sorry you're in this situation OP.

    What I don't get it is why would Target not ensure that 'signature on delivery' is required for such a high value item (or give the option to leave it unattended - not by default though)? IMO this would ensure that people can't cheat them (pretending that items were not delivered) and also make sure that customer's receive their products. Seems like a no brainer.

    • +3

      why would Target not ensure that 'signature on delivery' is required for such a high value item

      Because they don't care - the customer is going to eat it if the delivery gets stolen/lost - they have removed their responsibility in the T&Cs.

      • So a crooked delivery zombie could take a picture of an item at the doorstep, then take the item away. Keeps it for a week or 2 (just in case the address has cameras and submits a claim). Once the claim comes in and says no camera. Job done. That's Xmas sorted and nobody any the wiser.
        Would love to see the data of walking deliveries in 2025.

        OP maybe set up a fake pkg on yr doorstep. Make sure there's a few holes or crevices in it somewhere, and put a few plastic cups of very strong dye inside, (permanent dye that is really hard to wash off) so if it is the local thief, as they carry it off or shake it, they wear the spilled contents. Either that or the dog shit surprise parcel or both. The other option is the camera, and then if you get a clear enough image , enlarge,print and place it all over the neighbourhood.

        • Even if I had cameras, report to police. I can’t see a package theft as being number one crime. Nor should it be. A lot bigger crime issues out there.

          Target would still say item delivered.

          Yes lesson learnt on online ordering. But I’ve previously bought from target where it was Australia post and they take to nearest post office if no one home.

          The item wasn’t even that big so don’t know why target went couriers please (most likely cheaper for them)

          Still holding out hope that target fall on their sword and give me a refund or send me another item!

          • -2

            @MrMoneySmart: If you had proof it was stolen, you may be able to claim the theft on insurance.

            Target would still say item delivered.

            It was delivered. By the method that you agreed to. They even have proof.

        • I like the thought it could be an inside job but I don't think there would be much point producing the package after a claim shows you stealing it on camera. I don't think anyone is buying the story that you were doing a practice run and was always intending to bring the package back in a couple of weeks time 😂

          • @bp2000: Did you even read what I said? Apparently not. In ampongst the bit you skimmed over were 2 points you missed, including>
            Once the claim comes in and says no camera.

            • @Protractor: I did but what do you do if the claim comes it saying they caught you on camera stealing the package?!? "My bad, can't blame a guy for trying, here's your package "

              • @bp2000: Umm , claim comes in and states no CCTV at delivery address?

                "My bad I decided it wasn't safe after I took the confirmation picture, but forgot to drop the card in your letterbox" T/Rex eventually found hiding in my van."
                I'm not saying it happened, I'm saying it's possible.In anything , just because you'd have to be stupid to try, doesn't meant there isn't enough candidates.

                • @Protractor: yeah that could work, but think you'd get half a dozen times before they found you out. The more fullproof scam they are probably doing is to tell their mates of a couple potential mid valued items (not every package not exclusively high value packages) at places that don't seem to have cameras and let them collect later in the day. Either way if a claim comes in you keep your mouth shut.

        • So a crooked delivery zombie could take a picture of an item at the doorstep, then take the item away. Keeps it for a week or 2 (just in case the address has cameras and submits a claim). Once the claim comes in and says no camera. Job done. That's Xmas sorted and nobody any the wiser.

          They certainly could do that and there are many, many examples of where that does and has happened in the past.

          The miscreants generally get caught though when they do it on a regular basis and a collection of complaints indicates that they're not doing their job in the manner that they're supposed to.

          Perhaps that means additional training, perhaps that means disciplinary action and appropriate reporting.

    • Extra cost that most buyers unwilling to pay for? And too much of exception, perhaps.

      • I think Aus Post charges less than $3 and it would save Target a lot of headache and costs (their employees wasting time investigating) having to deal with these missing parcel issues (both legitimate or people trying to scam).

        • aus post

          Yeah, its $2.95 - but I've still been stitched up at my day job with this function too (as they just need A signature, postie doesnt need to verify who they are/they actually live there - but thats another story for another day).

          costs

          It probably cubed out in the Australia post cost calculator , so the other courier prob was selected as it would have been cheaper.

    • +1

      Signatures for a delivery will be required whenever a recipient is at home.

      Lol actually just saw in their Terms and Conditions that they require it only when someone is home (makes 0 sense to me haha)

  • +2

    Deliver to post office next time, lesson learned!

    • 100%.

      Unfortunately, a whole pile of companies won't ship to PO Box/Parcel Lockers. Sometimes because they don't necessarily use AusPost (or want the possibility of not using them), or because of their concern of being scammed.

      • +1

        It helps if you know who they use. With Aus Post you can ship to your home address, then once it’s sent, re-direct it in the app to a Post Office or Locker. Really good function.

  • This is the extract I’m reading from their terms and conditions.

    https://www.target.com.au/corporate/condition-of-use?srsltid…

    Please note that all parcels will require a signature upon delivery. If there's no authorised person at the delivery address to sign for the parcel, then the delivery driver will leave a card and the parcel will be returned to the nearest Australia Post office for you to collect. Please note that our carrier companies Delivery Policies or zone restrictions may apply to selected areas. Where street delivery is not always possible, you will receive notification or a calling card will be left.

    • +4

      i guess it comes down to target not going through their website then and ensuring conformity - seems weird they'd have two sets of t&c to even begin with.

      Good luck with your fight anyway op. Hoping for the best.
      Consider also upgrading your security I reckon.

    • You can threaten them with xCAT, but this will take 3-6 months and require several hours of your time to follow through. You're pursuing them for breach of contract, with those T&C forming part of the contract. If you do win, in some jurisdictions you can claim the cost of xCAT lodgement as a cost and have them pay that too.

    • -1

      It would be pretty hard for them to deny your claim if you can insist on quoting this policy condition.
      I'd be quoting it in an email with a link to those specific terms and conditions. Seeing as they left it in an unsafe location (proven by the fact that it was stolen) then they haven't complied with them so basically they are wrong and you are right.
      Good luck.

      • -1

        "Unsafe" is actually subjective.

        Unsafe from what?

        Fire? Flood? Rain? Dog/animal attack?

        Does anybody clarify or define?

        Keeping in mind, Signsture On Delivery can be anybody's signature. Even the person delivering the item.

        • Well, theft it would seem.

  • Leave a bad review on their website.
    Tell everyone how they now deliver with instructions for the couriers to leave packages Available To Larcenists.

  • +11

    Same thing happened to me once with a $400 parcel from Big W. Also with CouriersPlease.

    The curious thing is that I came home 8 minutes after the parcel was supposedly delivered and it wasn’t there. I have had parcels sit for a week in front of my door, visible from the street and didn’t get stolen. This one got stolen within 8 minutes and CouriersPlease had a picture of it being delivered.
    My guess is that it was the delivery person.

    Also Big W explicitly asks if it’s ok to leave unattended and I never tick that box.

    The other day I was expecting two parcels, a cheap one and a visibly expensive one. Delivery guy gave me the cheap one and asked me to sign the device. Only after I said I’m expecting two he got the second one from the van. Device said I’m signing for 2 items. Sure this might have been an honest mistake, but it made me think that some delivery guys might run a side business.

  • +2

    Credit card insurance covers theft of purchased items within first 60 days.

  • -1

    Happened to me before, not target tho, just ebay. Nothing you can do about as target only needed to prove they delivered it. The rest of risk is yours to carry. Move suburb or send to parcel box probably the only way

    • Target only needed to prove to who? OP can definitely argue the point.

  • Sounds like could be inside job from courier please even from some comments…

  • +2

    I bet amazon would’ve treated you better.

  • My advice , take the hit, next time for high value items , click and collect or have it delivered to a locker. Take it as a $399 lesson.

  • sometimes credit cards have purchase protection covering this exact scenario

    • They have cover, but I doubt they do for this "exact scenario". Would love to see a card that does. In fact it would be more like to be the opposite.

      Eg. Westpac Altitude:

      To the extent permitted by law we do not cover you for any loss, damage or expense caused by, arising directly or indirectly from or in any way related to:
      2. covered items or valuables being sent unaccompanied by you or under a freight contract;
      7. you not taking all reasonable precautions to safeguard your covered items or valuables.
      For example, you will not be taking reasonable precautions if you leave your belongings in a publicly accessible location:
      • at such a distance from you that you are unable to prevent them being taken
      14. your failure to take reasonable care.

      Eg 2. Amex

      1. An Eligible Item which is left Unattended in a Public Place and which is not subsequently recovered will not constitute theft unless You have no option other than to leave the Eligible Item Unattended due to an emergency medical, security or evacuation situation.

      Yes, I know these may not seem like they should apply since it's not the OPs fault - as if the insurance companies are going to agree with that!

  • Sorry this happened to you OP. I stopped shopping there a long time ago due to a bad experience. Seems the scales are tipping more and more towards large companies in these situations.

    My advice for future deliveries is to amend your details to include "NO ATL" as part of your name or address.

  • +5

    I'm still amazed that taking a photo of a parcel being left is considered ironclad proof of delivery.
    What's to stop the delivery person taking a photo and then taking the parcel away.

    • +1

      CCTV

      • I suppose but not everyone has cameras at their property.

    • +2

      What's to stop the delivery person taking a photo and then taking the parcel away.

      Nothing. With the kinds of people who deliver parcels these days it would not suprise me if that was a regular thing.

  • +1

    Target are the worst to deal with.
    I returned a jumper which had stitching that came off. They claimed it didn’t arrive. Tracking showed it arrived. Still no refund.

    I would threaten consumer affairs. Tell them there was no safe place and that their terms specify a signature is required. They have insurance for this.
    If you push enough they will refund. Tell them you want a replacement sent within 7 days and make it clear you will follow through with legal action if not received. Also get a Parcel locker for free and provide that address to them to resend.

    • +1

      Tracking showed it arrived.

      Ah yes, but tracking is only relevant for items they send out - if it's items they have sent, tracking is God's word.

  • +1

    Should have bought CCTV instead of LEGO !

    • +2

      But what if my cctv delivery got stolen too?!

      • -1

        Insurance. It's a thing.

      • It wouldnt have been if you had gone to officeworks for cheap CCTV.

  • +1

    Yep Kmart did a similar thing to me, and they're owned by the same ppl. In my case though it was not ATL, signature was requested and the shtty courier from GoPeople who decided the public ground floor foyer of a 100+ apartment building was "safe" to leave without bothering to use intercom or call. It was stolen within 20 minutes of being left in front of the shared mailboxes. That they snapped as proof of delivery. I got a refund eventually but it was a hassle. Feel like Need to plaster signs everywhere. DO NOT LEAVE PARCELS HERE UNSAFE. (You absolute dumbfcks).
    All couriers suck. AusPost only pls. If it's not safe to leave thats definitely on the courier.

  • +1

    Thanks for the comments.
    1. I was expecting SoD as per previous items bought from target (and as I found is there policy in their own terms and conditions)
    https://www.target.com.au/corporate/condition-of-use?srsltid…

    1. I did not select ATL but have confirmed target booked it as ATL with couriers please.

    2. The actual price paid of the item was $289 on sale from $399.

    3. Issue is still under “investigation” by target and has been for over 2 weeks.

    4. Expensive lesson but I won’t be buying from target again and am looking at cameras, and a post locker.

    • It is my opinion that those T&C should definitely give you leverage.

      It seems they have two different T&C published.

      The only way that I think they might be able to defend themselves for not requiring a SOD is if

      A) they issued some notification of a change/update to those T&C - only available because of Google cache or similar maybe?

      B) the other T&C are dated after those T&C

      To me, at face value, it definitely looks like SOD was expected to be part of the contract you formed and something you could rely on.

      It seems this is supposed to apply to whatever courier they chose for delivery

      There was an exception for one pass users. Can't remember what this was though or even if it's applicable to you.

      I'd definitely be issuing a "please explain" about that though.

      Why the two policies and why this one doesn't apply to your purchases?

    • If they have good prices, just select click and collect in store. You can also pickup from Kmart as well.

  • I've had packages from Target left at my door without so much as a knock on the door and they clearly have signature on delivery written on the parcel.

  • +1

    I read it as target sent the item as all time low, made sense after reading the description.

  • +3

    Not sure why there are so many comments siding with Target. If the OP didnt provide or sign ATL then how is he at fault? The problem with back to back sourcing agreements (in this case between Target and the courier) is that they rarely have 100% matching SLAs or T&Cs. The companies signing (i.e. Target) take a commercial risk on costs and run the gaunlet on probabilities. For the majority of cases, the deliveries are OK and Target saves on delivery costs, in some cases, this happens and their process will do everything to ignore the mismatch in delivery instructions. Good luck OP~ but maybe install a camera (the solar powered Eufy is really cheap now and will give you peace of mind or something to prove that you are telling the truth).

    • Because he did agree to ATL be agreeing to the T&C at checkout.

      • It seems like they have two different policies published.

        One says they will do ATL (the first one), but the second one says they won't.

        OP needs explanation for why the second one isn't applicable to their purchase.

        • The one which says they will leave parcels in a safe place is titled Click & Collect, Delivery + Payment.

          The one which says all parcels require a signature is titled Conditions of use and:

          • It is referred to as the Terms and Conditions by Target.
          • It is prefaced with:
            "Please take few minutes to read the below information about the legal terms and conditions that apply to your use of the Target Australia Pty Ltd website and any services or products that you order from us. If you don't agree to these terms and conditions please do not use our website."

          • You are directed to this page after you select a payment method at checkout. The following message appears with the words "terms and conditions" linking to the Conditions Of Use page:
            "We collect personal information to process your order, generate insights and personalise your future experiences with us. Learn more in our privacy policy. By completing your order, you consent to this and have read, understand and accept our terms and conditions and returns policy."

          OP needs explanation for why the second one isn't applicable to their purchase.

          EDIT: Apologies, I misread that.^ (Thought you were asking OP to provide the explanation)

  • -1

    I thoroughly dislike your use of the initialism ATL for (presumably) "authority to leave", moreso because you didn't even define it. ATL typically means 'all time low'. You have created more work for the reader to decipher the atypical initialism as they read. End rant.

    • +2

      It depends upon the context of what's being read, and by whom. I send parcels from eBay sales and immediately thought 'ATL' means authority to leave. I personally have never seen 'ATL' being used as all time low myself.

  • +2

    I think OP has a very good case but needs to escalate in an appropriate / clear manner.

    This is the way to play it:

    At the basket stage conditions of use are presented to the consumer
    The front end information seems to clearly indicate a signature is required in all cases, however the last two words ("delivery process") link to additional information that contradicts and says it will be left in a safe place.
    OP should not contest the T&Cs nor what is deemed a "safe place". Instead the OP should attack the clarity of the purchase path messaging (which had a direct bearing on his purchasing decision).
    Suggest to Target they should take it on the chin and use this case to tighten their purchase path / customer experience . Failing that OP should threaten ACL action on the grounds of (systemic) deceptive & misleading conduct (which likely falls into unfair contract terms territory).
    Target formed the purchase path, its their job to make it unambiguous, and it is not reasonable to expect the consumer to follow a bouncing ball of contradicting information.

    Delivery:
    We will be using Australia Post, Couriers Please and Allied Express for all of our shipping needs and will only deliver to addresses within Australia. All orders will be shipped from our Online and Regional Warehouses or Stores within three to seven business days. Delivery lead time will vary depending on your location.

    Please note that all parcels will require a signature upon delivery. If there's no authorised person at the delivery address to sign for the parcel, then the delivery driver will leave a card and the parcel will be returned to the nearest Australia Post office for you to collect. Please note that our carrier companies Delivery Policies or zone restrictions may apply to selected areas. Where street delivery is not always possible, you will receive notification or a calling card will be left.

    We will make every attempt to deliver goods within the estimated timeframe however please beware that delays may occur due to unforeseen circumstances or factors that are beyond our control. Find out more about our delivery process.

    Further information obtain by clicking on "delivery process" :

    Receiving your order
    Home deliveries will be delivered to your nominated address. Signatures for a delivery will be required whenever a recipient is at home. But if they're not, and a safe place for the parcel is available, we'll leave it there so it's ready and waiting for them. We'll also take a photo of the parcel as proof that it was delivered safely. If there's no safe place.

  • +8

    By way of update.
    Target has refunded my money under “goodwill”

    Guess I dodged a bullet on this one.

    Case closed.

    • Someone else has the troublesome, not so free, T-Rex. Good work OP, and kudos to Target.
      Change the delivery method you use going fwd.

      • I don’t know what was the driver behind the refund.

        Was it the PayPal info I provided showing they breached terms and conditions.

        Or was it the fact I mentioned that legal recourse would be taken if resolution can not be provided.

        Or maybe it was target acting in good Will.
        Whatever the case

        Thank goodness..

      • +1

        Target choses the delivery method, not you the customer.

        • +1

          What I mean is, don't have it delivered to the home ( click & collect, choose signature only and nominate person -if possible) Or choose a carrier like AP and use Parcel Locker or Parcel Collect. If Target have no safe systems or options, and OP can't choose a better way, they need to ditch Target.

        • If customer doesn't like a term of the sales contract and they aren't successful negotiating terms they do like, it really is up to the customer to walk away from that contract.

          They aren't forced to proceed with contract terms that they find undesirable.

          In this case though, with the two different terms published, things did get confusing and complicated, but that isn't how things commonly happen.

    • It’s a good outcome, but I hope you learnt your lesson here. Everyone is to blame, the OP, Target, the delivery company, and LEGO. When you cheap out on shipping this is the outcome. Nothing will change though. It’s the cost of doing business, and as a result we all pay for it at the checkout.

      I’m sure the delivery person had a wonderful time building it.

      • Why is Lego to blame?

        • -2

          Because the brown Lego boxes contain the set number, and the name of the Lego box hiding inside.

          • @Repstar: Target should cover the box then.

            • +1

              @smartazz104: Target doesn't ship the expensive Lego sets. They come straight from the Lego distribution center.

    • +3

      Well now you can spend 399 on some Reolink cameras

    • +1

      That is sensational news!

      Hopefully you can sort out some way to protect future deliveries before you make the next purchase.

      It's one thing knowing it shouldn't happen, but it's disappointing, frustrating and inconvenient when it does.

Login or Join to leave a comment