Penalty Fare - tenant no longer at address

[tony_mac]

But you can inform them that they do not live there, merely send the unopened letter back stating as much. Whether they take notice or not isn't your issue.

It doesn't matter.
It is only an offence if you INTEND to act to their detriment.
If you open it so that you can inform the relevant authorities, there is no offence.

But to try (probably in vain) and get the thread back on-topic....
If I had a forwarding address, I would be minded to call them and pass it on!

 

[richw]

Does IRCAS, being a Debt collection agency fall under Financial Regulations? If so the regulation requires the company to send regulated letters to the last known address for that individual, until the individual notifies the company themselves of the new address,
It is also criminal offence to open post not addressed to you regardless of whether it is sent to your address (under data protection act). Debt collection agencies use trace agents to track their client when they get mail returned as "not known at this address". such as the example shown on the lewis group website http://www.lewisgroup.co.uk/services/trace/index.html
Often they will provide a "gone away" report with credit reporting agencies such as experian, which is quite a big negative mark on a credit report

 

[All Line Rover]

Not entirely sure of the offence in law, but the PF website states this:



Presumably an organisation such as that has an idea what they are talking about?

Oh, well that's helpful. :roll: My superhuman ability to read through paper will allow me to determine that I should OBVIOUSLY visit that website to find out that information.

 

[Darandio]

Look accept it is what it is and try not to be too difficult about being told that it is not an offence to open mail that comes to your house if the address is your address UNLESS you use it maliciously.

NO. I'll agree to disagree on it.

If an item of mail arrives at your house, addressed to someone else, there is no reason to open it other than being curious.

If there isnt a number related to the return address, what is that to you? You have no obligation to call them.

I'll leave it at that, its an opposite point of view, we are allowed that.

 

[Clip]

It is also criminal offence to open post not addressed to you regardless of whether it is sent to your address (under data protection act).

Could you please quote the relevant criminal offence that I am commiting should I recieve a letter to my home please that is not for me?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

NO. I'll agree to disagree on it.

If an item of mail arrives at your house, addressed to someone else, there is no reason to open it other than being curious.

If there isnt a number related to the return address, what is that to you? You have no obligation to call them.
I'll leave it at that, its an opposite point of view, we are allowed that.

Maybe because I dont want to recieve thousands of letters for someone else and then possibly have baliffs come knocking at my door causing me greif of an evening.

Maybe, just maybe that is why I and thousands of others do it when it occurs.

 

[Darandio]

Maybe because I dont want to recieve thousands of letters for someone else and then possibly have baliffs come knocking at my door causing me greif of an evening.

You are persistent.

If you ring them up, what difference does that make in them believing whether you are not doing the same as sending the mail back anonymously? You could still be the intended recipient, again trying to thrown off the scent.

 

[Bungle73]

NO. I'll agree to disagree on it.

If an item of mail arrives at your house, addressed to someone else, there is no reason to open it other than being curious.

If there isnt a number related to the return address, what is that to you? You have no obligation to call them.

I'll leave it at that, its an opposite point of view, we are allowed that.

So we should wait until the bailiffs turn up to do anything should we? Surely common sense should prevail. If a letter arrives with your address, but someone else's name and no contact details on the outside it should be reasonable to open it to determine what it is and and who it has come from. I highly doubt anyone has ever been prosecuted in such circumstances.

 

[theblackwatch]

Could you please quote the relevant criminal offence that I am commiting should I recieve a letter to my home please that is not for me?

See further up this page - it's on post 12.

 

[rdwarr]

One often overlooked (but crucial) argument in UK law is that, if you end your argument with "End of", you win by default :roll:

I have lived in the same house for 14 years. I still get mail to the previous occupier because he has not updated his records. If there's no return address the only way I can get this sorted is to open the mail and contact the sender.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

To be frank, trying to argue whether it is or isn't an offence from just the legislation is pointless. You need to look at the case law as well.

 

[Clip]

See further up this page - it's on post 12.

Indeed I know what it says but also as we keep pointing out to those who wiash to pay no attention, I have highlighted it again.

Postal Services Act 2000 S84 SS3
A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, .

Note without reasonable excuse. I have one. I dont want letters for someone else coming to my house anymore. That is reasonable excuse to open a letter that comes to my private home.

The second part which states

he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him

Is in reference to when sometimes letters that are not for the household nor the correct address are delivered and then opened. I.e If you lived at number 15 and you got mail for another numbered/named house which isnt yours. Then you have no right to open it.


People should realise the difference between ADDRESS and someones NAME. All letters that arrive with my address on them through my letterbox are ADDRESSED to me. Just because the name is different the ADDRESS is correct.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

There is so much wrong with that post i'm not sure where to start.

You need to read the case law before deciding one way or the other!


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Clip]

There is so much wrong with that post i'm not sure where to start.

You need to read the case law before deciding one way or the other!


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

Ok, could you please refer me to cases where persons have opened up mail at thier address to inform the sender that they do not live there anymore and have been prosecuted as such.

 

[jon0844]

As a sign off to this post, I'll leave Rupert and gang to draw the curtains...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...o-get-out-of-Britain-says-new-Sun-survey.html

I hope just half of them do actually leave - as it will make a huge difference to the overcrowded cities, roads, railways, hospitals and schools!

The BNP has got it the wrong way around. It needs to be helping pay for the Brits to leave, not the foreigners - but with a 'rose tinted spectacles' clause that says you aint getting back in once you notice the grass isn't always greener...

One often overlooked (but crucial) argument in UK law is that, if you end your argument with "End of", you win by default :roll:

If you also add 'Simples' then it shows you're a really cool and funny person.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Ok, could you please refer me to cases where persons have opened up mail at thier address to inform the sender that they do not live there anymore and have been prosecuted as such.

I'm not doing your research for you. If you want to make a point one way or another, then find some evidence to back it up. If there is no case law then look to the explanatory notes.

 

[Ascot]

I'm going to stick out like a sore thumb on this and just give advice what I would do.

You've opened the letter, I'd of done the same if it was red "final notice" over it. Crying over it won't change anything so I'll save the 5 seconds of worry.

I wouldn't write RTS on the letter as they probably get every clown doing that and it's almost certain to be system generated. Instead invest 60p in a 1st Class stamp, 10p for an envelope and £1 for a pack of 10 pens. Write back to the return address explaining he's gone, you're here and any forwarding addresses you may have. Don't bother with proof of residency for the initial level as they have no right for it but, if it was a mutual exchange then maybe throw in a copy with both parties for good measure.

Don't ring up as they most likely say write in since there's so many cases. Besides them 0845* numbers mount up if you've been on hold a while.

None of us get paid to study law (unless that's your profession) so just carry on with what you want to do about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[34D]

Is it possible please that a mod can move all the comments about post into a separate thread titled 'is one allowed to open mail delivered to ones address for persons not resident there' (perhaps on general discussion) and just link to it here.

 

[theblackwatch]

Is it possible please that a mod can move all the comments about post into a separate thread titled 'is one allowed to open mail delivered to ones address for persons not resident there' (perhaps on general discussion) and just link to it here.

There is no need, it is relevant and we know the answer.

 

[benk1342]

But there is absolutely no reason for you to know any of this, other than opening the mail, which is an offence regardless.

The law said "intending to act to the person's detriment". As the OP was not intending to act to the addressee's detriment, there's no offence. You have to apply the whole sentence.

 

[jkdd77]

Can we all agree that:
a) whether a criminal offence is committed in opening mail addressed to someone else depends on the precise circumstances and state of mind of the person who opens the mail; and
b) since it may potentially be a criminal offence, especially if done deliberately, it ought not, for the sake of prudence, to be encouraged on this forum?

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not doing your research for you. If you want to make a point one way or another, then find some evidence to back it up. If there is no case law then look to the explanatory notes.

Well you're the one telling us that we can't decide on the basis of the legislation alone so I would have said the onus is on you to actually provide some case law to further the discussion...

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Well you're the one telling us that we can't decide on the basis of the legislation alone so I would have said the onus is on you to actually provide some case law to further the discussion...

Why? You can't decide what is and isn't an offence without looking at the case law and the explanatory notes. I don't have side in this argument, and in any case, it's up to those making claims to back up them up.

 

[34D]

Can we all agree that:
a) whether a criminal offence is committed in opening mail addressed to someone else depends on the precise circumstances and state of mind of the person who opens the mail; and
b) since it may potentially be a criminal offence, especially if done deliberately, it ought not, for the sake of prudence, to be encouraged on this forum?

I don't think we can agree though. You 'holier than thou' people have obviously never had a debt collector banging on the door, and accusing you of lying when you say that Mr X doesn't live there any more. Far better to nip it in the bud before it gets that far.

 

[londonbridge]

One often overlooked (but crucial) argument in UK law is that, if you end your argument with "End of", you win by default :roll:

I have lived in the same house for 14 years. I still get mail to the previous occupier because he has not updated his records. If there's no return address the only way I can get this sorted is to open the mail and contact the sender.

No,that's not the only way,you can write "Not at this address" on it,put it back in the post and leave it to Royal Mail to open it and find an address for the sender.

 

[cuccir]

Replying to both issues:

1. For the original situation. I'd add return to sender/not known at this address to the envelope and pop it in the post. If you've destroyed the envelope, then stick it in a new one and take the hit of a 2nd class stamp. It's not your problem once you've done that.

2. On the legalities, the wording seems quite clear " intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse". I think that a letter to an unfamiliar name at your address is a reasonable excuse, for any range of reasons - checking its not been misnamed/seeing if you can find info on how to direct it properly being the main two. As ralphchadkirk says, though, evidence of cases would confirm or deny that.

 

[swj99]

I've had a quick look for some case law but so far, nothing.

All I could find so far was this - http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/criminal/other_crime_and_justice_topics/500355.html

 

[exile]

This is the advice from the Post Office - who should know:-
http://www.postoffice.co.uk/letters-parcels/receiving-letters-parcels/wrongly-delivered-mail

Regardless of the law, the last thing I want is to get mixed up in someone else's financial affairs so unless I know where the recipient now lives the mail's going back to the Post Office (or the sender if their address is on the envelope)

And as for Canada -" If you receive mail that's not yours, do one of the following and then mail the item:
If the mail has been delivered incorrectly, write "delivered to wrong address" on the envelope.
If addressed to someone not living at your address, write "not at this address." is the advice given by the Canadian Postal Service so that little anti-British rant was a bit pointless.

 

[34D]

Surely you are doing something "to a persons detriment" if you help IRCAS contact them

 

[exile]

Or help the bailiffs or HMRC trace them.... or a vengeful ex-spouse.... or a serial killer.....

 

[snail]

It is also criminal offence to open post not addressed to you regardless of whether it is sent to your address (under data protection act).

I wondered how long it would take for someone to mention the old DPA chestnut. It may be a wide ranging Act, but stopping people opening mail is absolutely not one of its powers!