How does UPS handle packages that are undeliverable due to customs issues?

1. What people are alleging and why it matters: a mounting disposal claim

NBC’s reporting documents specific instances and a broader pattern in which UPS reportedly disposed of U.S.-bound packages that could not be cleared through customs, with “thousands” of parcels accumulating at hubs and customers receiving mixed messages about outcomes. The reporting highlights customers told their packages were destroyed while later tracking updates indicated items were en route, illustrating both operational backlog and communication breakdowns that can leave shippers and recipients unable to recover goods or claim damages ^[1]. This matters because disposal without clear notice or accessible remediation pathways can produce unrecoverable financial and sentimental losses for consumers and businesses.

2. What UPS’s customer-facing guidance says—and where it’s silent

UPS’s official guidance emphasizes tracking, use of the UPS Virtual Assistant, and established processes for filing claims for lost or damaged shipments; it also provides general information on import fees and tariff changes. The corporate guidance details steps shippers should take to avoid customs delays—accurate documentation and compliance—but it does not explicitly describe routine disposal procedures for items undeliverable due to customs holds, leaving a policy gap between operational practice and public-facing guidance ^{[2] [3]}. That absence of clarity makes it difficult for shippers to understand timelines, notification rights, or how to retrieve or reclaim value from affected shipments.

3. The investigative account: patterns, examples, and dates

The investigative material published in October 2025 reports that UPS staff and customers encountered systematic backlogs at hubs and that the company stated it contacts shippers three times before disposing of a package, yet customers described conflicting tracking information and unexplained destructions. Those accounts show both a stated corporate process—multiple contact attempts—and real-world outcomes in which the process apparently failed to preserve packages or to produce consistent public tracking information, suggesting operational strain or inconsistent execution of policy across locations and shipments ^[1]. The October timeframe anchors these complaints to a recent surge of cases rather than isolated historical incidents.

4. Where the evidence conflicts and what that signals

The primary tension in the materials is between UPS’s stated customer-support tools and the investigative claims of disposal and chaotic tracking updates. UPS’s web resources focus on preventative compliance and claims filing, whereas reporting highlights disposal and ambiguous status messages that undermine those channels’ effectiveness for affected customers. The mixed messages in tracking updates—destruction followed by “in transit” updates—point to data or process inconsistencies, and the lack of a clear, published disposal policy in UPS guidance leaves third parties and regulators without an easy reference to adjudicate disputes ^{[1] [2]}. This divergence raises questions about internal procedures, auditing, and customer notification standards.

5. Bigger-picture implications and potential incentives at play

If UPS is disposing of packages after a fixed number of contacts, that creates an operational incentive to clear warehouse congestion but also introduces legal and reputational risk if disposals occur without adequate notice, recovery options, or documentation for claims. Shippers who fail to respond face losses, while recipients receive inconsistent tracking that can hinder claims processes; regulators and consumer advocates may scrutinize whether disposal practices comply with notice and due-diligence standards. The pattern of thousands of packages piling up at hubs, combined with unclear public policy, suggests pressures—logistical bottlenecks, staffing, or customs backlogs—could be driving more aggressive disposition practices ^{[1] [3]}.

6. Bottom line: what the available sources establish and what remains unknown

The assembled evidence establishes three facts: UPS states it attempts multiple contacts before disposition; investigative reporting in October 2025 documents instances where U.S.-bound packages were disposed of amid customs delays; and UPS’s public guidance does not clearly explain disposal procedures for customs-undeliverable shipments ^{[1] [2]}. Open questions remain about the exact thresholds and timelines UPS uses, the consistency of implementation across hubs, and legal compliance with consumer-notice requirements—areas that require additional disclosure from UPS or regulatory review to resolve.