Yesterday I received a formal letter from DHL Vietnam regarding my shipment (AWB# 9666215495). Their response was… instructive.

In polite corporate language, it said three main things:

1. Not our contract — DHL insists my contract is with Pack & Send Australia, not with them. In other words: we carried it, but we don’t carry the blame.
2. Pre-clearance warnings — they emphasised that my goods haven’t actually been lodged with Customs yet. Instead, all their requests for documents and clarifications were “precautionary.”
3. Risk factors listed — they cited three risks:
   • the 30-day limit on unaccompanied luggage,
   • the prohibition on importing used consumer goods (like clothes and electronics),
   • and the “sensitivity” of certain personal items.

Finally, they presented me with two “options”:

• Submit to Customs and hope for the best, or
• Return to Origin at my expense.

Nowhere in their letter was there acknowledgment of the wrong paperwork DHL attached at origin, which Pack & Send already admitted. Nowhere was there recognition of the false claim that I had “confirmed” my shipment contained prohibited items. Nowhere was there an apology for the weeks of boilerplate, bouncing inboxes, and avoidance.

So, since DHL has written to me formally, here is my formal reply — one I share publicly so that others can see exactly how the dance plays out when a global corporation gets caught out.

Private Reply Email (Open Letter)

Subject: Response to DHL Vietnam — Shipment claim AWB# 9666215495

Dear Ms Trần Minh Hảo,

Thank you for your letter of 29 August 2025.

I note DHL Vietnam’s position that my contract is with Pack & Send Australia and that DHL provides only “logistics services.” With respect, this distinction is irrelevant to me as a paying customer whose shipment has been mishandled and now sits in limbo because of documented errors committed under DHL’s care.

Your letter makes three points which I must address directly:

1. Pre-clearance versus reality You state the shipment has not yet been submitted to Customs and that your repeated demands for documents were “precautionary.” Yet these demands included an impossible document (the airport-issued passenger declaration form) which you knew I could not provide. That is not precaution; it is entrapment.
2. Prohibited items narrative You suggest my shipment risks confiscation due to used consumer goods and “sensitive” items. What you do not acknowledge is that Pack & Send has already admitted DHL attached the wrong paperwork at origin. To then imply that I “confirmed prohibited items” — which I did not — is a serious misrepresentation.
3. Options offered You present me with a false choice: either gamble with Customs or pay to have the shipment returned. Neither option addresses DHL’s admitted errors. Neither restores trust. Neither recognises the customer’s right to expect accountability when a global carrier makes a mistake.

Accordingly, my position remains:

• DHL and Pack & Send must acknowledge the documentation error at origin.
• DHL must cease requiring unobtainable documents.
• The shipment must either be cleared at no further cost to me or returned at DHL/Pack & Send’s expense, not mine.
• A fair compensation process must be initiated.

Unless I receive written confirmation of these steps, this case will continue to be pursued publicly and formally through consumer channels. The reputational damage has already begun. It will not lessen through silence or avoidance.

Yours sincerely,

Lee Hopkins

AWB# 9666215495