This is a sentence from a text book:
There's a parcel come for you.
I think it should be
There's a parcel has come for you.
Am I wrong?
EDIT 20 OCT
I know in some cases be-perfect is still used today, for example:
My first example will be grammatical, if be-perfect is permissible as Victor Bazarov suggested.
But, does it sound natural for native speakers?
EDIT 21 OCT
I've tried a google book search using "There's a parcel come for you". I got five hits. One of them, a playscript from Classworks Fiction and Poetry Year 4 By Eileen Jones published in 2004, seems to be in a modern situation.
LILY ROSE:[calling] Kate! Kate Ruggles! Kate! Mum wants you.
KATE: Com - ing, Lily Rose.
MUM: There's - a - parcel - come - for - you - wherever - have - you - been -to?
KATE: A parcel... for me?
LILY ROSE: Oh open it - go on - do - quick!
Maulik V and Kaz pointed out that "that (or which)" cannot be omitted in "There's a parcel (that) has come for you". It is mentioned in CGEL:
i It was my father [_did most of the talking]. [it-cleft]
ii There's someone at the door [_wants to talk to you]. [existential]
The status of [i-ii], where the relative clause functions within an it-cleft and existential construction respectively, is less certain: they fall at the boundary between very informal and non-standard.
But in A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language Longman 1985:
There's something (that) keeps upsetting him. [ 1 ]
It is interesting that the relative pronoun that in the 'annex' clause of [I] can be omitted (especially in informal usage) even when it is subject of the relative clause; something not permissible according to the normal rule for relative clause formation.