Recently, a friend of the Internet posted that his own golden dog, Siri, had flown from Nanjing to Guiyang and had signed an air transport agreement for a shipment on the night of 7 July, arriving at approximately 23.55 p.m. According to the owner of the dog, the diversion caused Siri to die in the middle of the summer while the shipment was in transit, but the diversion had been concealed by the company and had not been notified as soon as the pet died. In response, the pet shipping company offered a solution of compensation for a golden fur dog or $6,000, which was difficult for the pet owner to accept. On 16 July, North Qing-Beijing headline journalists were informed by the Handong Market Regulatory Office of the Guangzhou Hanado Markets Regulatory Office of the Pet Shipment Company that it had first intervened after receiving a report from the pet owner and was still in the mediation process. The master said that the death of the dog was not only a loss of property for the owner, but also the loss of a family member, and she wanted justice for the dog.
Netizens have asked the courier to provide proof that the shipment was cancelled.
According to Wang Qing (alias), the owner of Siri, a golden dog, in order to return Siri, a 2-year-old, to Guiyang from Thailand, where she went to school, to advise her shipment, but she was told that the pets were overweight, and that she had approached the company Guangzhou Helping International Freight Forwarders Ltd., which was able to provide an air shipment of pets, and had entered into a shipping agreement with the company that agreed that the shipment would be by air, a flight at 21.15 p.m. on 7 July at 2355 p.m., and had arrived at the airport of Quyang Yongbok at 2355 p.m. for a fee of $2,600 and a deposit of $400.
On 5 July, Wang Qing, a staff member of the Petty Shipment Company, reported that the staff member ' s right back leg had recently been unable to rip his back leg because the ligament had been broken and had spent $20,000 not to undergo further surgery, and asked if he could see a dog at the airport and no response was forthcoming. On 6 July, staff members sent a video to Wang Qing for dogs to be placed in cages. Wang Qing indicated that the pet cage was a little small and that the dogs could not get down. According to the staff member, only such cages could be used on the aircraft and that shipping was not allowed at large airports. Upon learning that Wang Qing was only two hours on board, which should be fine, and again asking if he could see a dog at Nanjing Lokpo airport the following day, the staff said that it might be necessary to take up the silo and send her any video at that time.
In the early hours of 7 July, Wang Qing received a message from the cancellation of the flight and then asked the shipping company staff if the dog could be shipped, who said the pets were not affected. The flight's cancelled and the dog can be shipped? Wang Qing suspected that the dog had left the land ahead of schedule, did not fly by air as agreed, and after questioning the staff member, the staff member indicated that it had indeed taken off by air and promised to arrive on 7 days, when the pet owner could call the police if it was not possible to arrive or the dog died. Wang Qing has repeatedly requested evidence of the shipment of dogs by aircraft, and has indicated that his colleagues are not in a good position to make video recordings and that video access to the airport depends on the time before leaving the shop. "Today the dog will be able to arrive and the dog will be fine."
Wang Qing asked when the dog was in Guiyang and said it was close to 12 p.m. In response to Wang Qing ' s repeated reminders about the dog and requests to see the video, the shipping company staff indicated that the dog would be compensated for injuries, including refunds, no freight charges, etc. at night to witness the results. At more than 8 a.m. the other side said the dog was still in Nanjing's shop. As Wang Qing was not comfortable with seeing the relevant proof of air transport, she asked the other party to give her address and went to Nanjing to pick up the dog, which she said could not return and did not reply. Wangqing ' s subsequent inquiries were not answered.
The dog is dead when he arrives early.
At over 7 p.m. on 7 p.m., Wang Qing received a telephone call from Guiyang informing him of the withdrawal and of the death of the dog, but the staff member who informed him was not an airport staff member.
Subsequently, Wang Qing asked the staff what was used to transport the dog, which was dead, and the staff said that a solution was being negotiated. The staff then responded that the biggest mistake of the whole thing was theirs, but that there was a risk of any shipment, and it was indeed their responsibility to die. Wang Qing can buy another golden dog, or pay $6,000, and if the other party does not feel good enough, he can go to court. The staff has not responded positively to the manner in which dogs are shipped.
Wang Qing did not accept this solution from the shipping company. Wang Qing argued that it was impossible for the shipping company to pay $6,000 for the death of the dog because it did not fly the plane as contracted against the wishes of the dog owner. If the other party ' s performance under the contract resulted in this result, she would have been able to accept an award of $6,000, but now she is suffering more than economic losses as a result of the company ' s breach.
The owner refused the shipping company compensation program.
Wang Qing stated that she was a student, trying to earn money on a part-time basis in order to raise Siri, taking Siri to a better house, and spending most of the university time with her. Now that Siri is gone, she has been thinking about it in particular over the past few days, especially when she thinks of images of his limbs being stiff, spitting at his mouth and flying flies. She did not want money, but felt that such a shipping company was not responsible for the life of the pet. But for the pet owner, the pet is family, but the courier has so far failed to apologize to his dog, Siri, who only wants to get justice for him and to ring an alarm for other pet shipping companies. Wang Qing stated that she had reported to the relevant authorities and was actively collecting and collating materials to prosecute pet shipping companies.
During the last few days, Wang Qing posted his story online, and members of the Internet have denounced the pet shipping company, where a number of emotional netizens have come to the company's Internet store to insult the shop. In this regard, Wang Qing also reminds everyone to defend their rights rationally, not to insult each other and not to insult others.
On 16 July, North Qing-Beijing headline journalists made several telephone calls to pet consignment companies, all of which were off-line or unattended. At the same time, North Qing-Beijing headline journalists have been informed by the Handong Market Regulatory Office of the Guangzhou Handu District Market Control Office in their district that the Institute has been involved for the first time after receiving a report from the owner of the pet and is still in mediation. Staff members indicated that they were sympathetic to the dog and its owner after receiving the report, that they had first comforted the dog owner and that the matter had been followed up and processed expeditiously.