Incorrectly addressed mail

[HSP 2]

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/someone-has-used-my-address-for-dodging-a-fare.221646/

Technically with letters that are addressed to your house with the wrong name on them you should just write on them not known at this address and pop it in a post box and Royal Mail will return it to sender all free of charge.

 

[XAM2175]

To clarify the mail issue -

Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000:

(1) A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he—
(a) intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or
(b) intentionally opens a mail-bag.
...
(3) A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

Generally it's best to mark any incorrectly-received mail as "return to sender" and place it back in the post. Destroying mail that you have received incorrectly is inadvisable as it could be considered an intentional delay without reasonable excuse for the purposes of (1)(a).

However, it can be acceptable to open incorrectly-received mail as per (3) if you believe, for example, that the mail concerns your property more than it does the named addressee, or that by opening you might be able to resolve the addressing issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To further clarify, a "postal packet" put through the door of the address written on it has not been "incorrectly delivered". I suspect this is by precedent though I don't have time to research caselaw. However it's definitely come up in here before.

It would only have been "incorrectly delivered" if the address on it was not your address. This letter was correctly delivered to the address on it. That the sender incorrectly addressed it (in good faith) is an entirely different issue.

Therefore, opening mail with your address on it regardless of the name is not an offence. If however the address was wrong (e.g. the postman put next door's letter through your door by mistake) opening that would be.

 

[Western Sunset]

Once an address is in a system, it can be difficult to change. For some reason, when we get our Tesco Clubcard vouchers, there is "Bill's Fish Bar" as one of the lines of our address. All very weird...

 

[AndyPJG]

Maybe it's the what3words location app for your address?

 

[Western Sunset]

More like "Dad's Chauffeur Service"...

 

[duncombec]

Worth mentioning that "return to sender" isn't a guarantee that Royal Mail will actually return it - or if they do, that the firm it goes back to will change their database. I believe all returned mail in the UK goes through one centre (Belfast?), so there is ample opportunity for it to get "lost" on the return". By contrast, re-addressed mail seems to just go into the normal system.

I returned 9 letters (from a major credit card company) received for previous tenants whilst a student, and the firm claimed not to have received any of them when I eventually rang them chewed their ear off. We never heard from them again. Very recently I again received Union ballot papers for the previous previous owner of my flat, which I had Return to sendered in the past. Again, I had to email the union in question to get them to remove the details, which they claim to have now done.

After my student experiences (there were quite a few bills they didn't pay) I will check any letter I identifiably (e.g. by logo) receive twice that isn't addressed to me.

As others have said: contact the court in the first instance, Merseyrail in the second, and have it specifically confirmed you are not who they are seeking. I wouldn't just send it back in the post without taking that/those step(s) first.

 

[HSP 2]

Worth mentioning that "return to sender" isn't a guarantee that Royal Mail will actually return it - or if they do, that the firm it goes back to will change their database. I believe all returned mail in the UK goes through one centre (Belfast?), so there is ample opportunity for it to get "lost" on the return". By contrast, re-addressed mail seems to just go into the normal system.

Return to sender works in two ways with Royal Mail, if the letter has a return address on the back of front of the letter it will be redirected to that by the delivery office (all that is needed is the house / business number and the post code).

If the letter does not have a return address it is then sent to the dead letters branch at Belfast where it is opened to check for a return address (a return address can be obtained from a cheque via the issuing bank), if there is no return address the letter is destroyed.

If the letter contains money this will be donated to a charity (if the letter has no return address).

 

[XAM2175]

Worth mentioning that "return to sender" isn't a guarantee that Royal Mail will actually return it - or if they do, that the firm it goes back to will change their database. I believe all returned mail in the UK goes through one centre (Belfast?), so there is ample opportunity for it to get "lost" on the return". By contrast, re-addressed mail seems to just go into the normal system.

In the interest of accuracy: the National Returns Centre in Belfast handles undeliverable items - those that can neither be delivered to the addressee or returned to sender. Items with a discernible return address are returned through the normal mail stream. I can attest that the returns process works, from my experience with mail I've sent personally and also at a previous job. Unfortunately there are companies that don't update their information even after mail is returned to them, but that's not the fault of the postal system.

All of this is irrelevant to the original poster, mind. They have a reasonable excuse to have opened the letter, and by informing the court they will have done sufficient to avoid trouble. There's no need for a big fuss.

 

[londonbridge]

I temped with Royal Mail on several occasions, when sorting returned mail variations on "Not known at this address" included "Person not here", "Person doesn't live here", "no such person at this address", "This person does not live at this address", "Person gone", "not known", "not known here". Then you'd get ones with "moved", "moved away", or "moved left no address". One of the best ones I remember was a letter with "The Bloggs family haven't lived here since 1995, UPDATE YOUR FXXXXXG RECORDS!!!"

 

[gordonthemoron]

Point of order, if a letter was correctly addressed (i.e. it was put through the door of the address on it, the name doesn't matter) then it is legit, if perhaps a little rude, to open it.

indeed, if the recipient is not known then it should be returned to sender

 

[2192]

1. I wrote on one letter from a persistent garage "Why should I believe you can service a car when you can't even keep a mailing list up to date?" and addressed it to the directors. The letters stopped.
2. I opened one letter to someone I had never heard of (as there was no return address). It was a mortgage offer. I rang the sender, who said it was for a nearby house 100 metres away. So I was able to deliver it, and the sender corrected their records. I expect the recipient was glad to have their letter promptly.
3. A neighbour here did similarly with a letter intended for me with the wrong house number on but the sender's house number inside.

Otherwise I return letters marking them "not known here".

 

[Three_Counties]

Just a little tip re "Not Known At This Address: Return To Sender" with Royal Mail - make it as obvious as possible!

I have previously written on the envelope in a black biro, only to have that very same letter back through my letterbox 2-3 days later.

Since then I use a thick red felt tip and have not suffered repeated misdelivery since.

 

[Gloster]

I have used a normal biro, but put a big cross over the the address, written ‘Not Known at this Address’ on the front and drawn a line through any Royal Mail barcode on the front. None of them have come back.

Latterly, the main offender has been SAGA, which continued to intermittently send letters to the previous owner for fifteen years after I moved in. The house had been put on the market by his widow after he died. SAGA, of all organisations, should know better.

 

[WesternLancer]

Just a little tip re "Not Known At This Address: Return To Sender" with Royal Mail - make it as obvious as possible!

I have previously written on the envelope in a black biro, only to have that very same letter back through my letterbox 2-3 days later.

Since then I use a thick red felt tip and have not suffered repeated misdelivery since.

I've made a set of sticky labels for the task - I stick them over the address window! (if no window tho of course this would not help the sender find who needed removing from their database) - some orgs are clearly happy to spend money sending things to people who don't get them. Still, helps keep the postal service in business I guess.

 

[Journeyman]

I have used a normal biro, but put a big cross over the the address, written ‘Not Known at this Address’ on the front and drawn a line through any Royal Mail barcode on the front. None of them have come back.

Latterly, the main offender has been SAGA, which continued to intermittently send letters to the previous owner for fifteen years after I moved in. The house had been put on the market by his widow after he died. SAGA, of all organisations, should know better.

"This is just a saga now..."

 

[Deafdoggie]

Just a little tip re "Not Known At This Address: Return To Sender" with Royal Mail - make it as obvious as possible!

I have previously written on the envelope in a black biro, only to have that very same letter back through my letterbox 2-3 days later.

Since then I use a thick red felt tip and have not suffered repeated misdelivery since.

The key is to obscure the orange or blue (usually) barcodes that are read by the sorting machines. It doesn't matter how big the writing if no human sees it!

 

[Horizon22]

I used to work at a council and we dealt with a lot of written correspondence (for legal reasons in our department). It was always much more useful to get a "Return to Sender" / "Not Known at Address" because then we can start the formal process to get details amended/removed. If letters continue to be sent with no feedback then we'd have to try and visit which was time consuming and not always productive.

 

[OldNick]

At one flat I regularly received post for a previous occupant, some marked NHS, others from their bank. Despite always sending it back marked "Addressee no longer at this address" the bank persisted sending letters to the address.

After 5 or 6 the bank sent one to "The Occupant" which I opened. They said they were legally obliged to send correspondence to their account holder's last known address even if it was returned, and would I kindly complete the enclosed form with their forwarding details. Of course tenants at rented accommodation aren't normally given forwarding addresses of the previous occupant so all I could do was give them the letting agent's details, but they did stop sending out letters.

One of the worst is TV Licencing... they don't like to believe you, even if you are paying for a licence in your name at the same address for the same period. (I suppose they don't know if the building is split up into flat internally or something)

 

[al78]

Not just rude but also illegal. However, you don't know what a letter is until you open it, it could for example have been some very confidential medical information. That's why it's a bit rude to open it, just as it'd be a bit rude to open post for someone else in the same household unless they have said you can.

A bit rude if it deliberate, but I accidentaly opened mail in an NHS envelope which was clearly related to COVID vaccination around the time I had booked one online. Since every letter over the last decade that has come through my letter box has been addressed to me and I live alone, I automatically opened it without checking the name assuming it was something to do with my vaccination appointment, but when I read it and it was inviting me to book a jab when I had already booked, it didn't make sense, and it was then I saw it was addressed to someone else but at my address. I put the contents back in the envelope, resealed it, ticked the "not known at this address" box and reposted it.

 

[BanburyBlue]

At one flat I regularly received post for a previous occupant, some marked NHS, others from their bank. Despite always sending it back marked "Addressee no longer at this address" the bank persisted sending letters to the address.

After 5 or 6 the bank sent one to "The Occupant" which I opened. They said they were legally obliged to send correspondence to their account holder's last known address even if it was returned, and would I kindly complete the enclosed form with their forwarding details. Of course tenants at rented accommodation aren't normally given forwarding addresses of the previous occupant so all I could do was give them the letting agent's details, but they did stop sending out letters.

One of the worst is TV Licencing... they don't like to believe you, even if you are paying for a licence in your name at the same address for the same period. (I suppose they don't know if the building is split up into flat internally or something)

Agree with this - TV Licencing are relentless. Quite threatening too.

 

[Deerfold]

I temped with Royal Mail on several occasions, when sorting returned mail variations on "Not known at this address" included "Person not here", "Person doesn't live here", "no such person at this address", "This person does not live at this address", "Person gone", "not known", "not known here". Then you'd get ones with "moved", "moved away", or "moved left no address". One of the best ones I remember was a letter with "The Bloggs family haven't lived here since 1995, UPDATE YOUR FXXXXXG RECORDS!!!"

I did a slightly politer version of that. We started getting post from a gambling website every month for 2 years to an unknown name. The previous addressees lived here for at least 10 years before us. All were returned. The one with a short paragraph on it did the trick. BT got a similar paragraph after a couple of years of returning post before I opened one and contacted them about the account separately - that did the trick. Given we'd taken over the BT line for a while before changing provider, I'm not sure why they thought he was still at our address.

 

[thejuggler]

Far better to put, "Not known at 'insert the address on the envelope'" rather than 'at this address' as that could mean the letter has been sent to a different property altogether.

Inserting the address confirms it has been delivered correctly, but the recipient is unknown.

Due to the vagaries of our street numbering, with some properties having letters, incorrect post is a fact of life for us, especially if address databases can't handle letters in the house number field. The letters can get truncated.

Over the years I've had a threat of repossession from Northern Rock for a house three away from me (went to formal complaint and the Northern Rock had records of all the post I had returned, but did nothing about updating their records).

A visit from a Court officer enquiring about child maintenance. Incorrect address due to missing letter on the house number.

A bailiff visit and phone call again because the letter on the house number had been truncated when the original offence was recorded.

 

[Deafdoggie]

If you get persistent mail from the same company it is worth putting it in an envelope with their return address on but no stamp. The company then has to pay to get it back. They soon stop sending them as they effectively get a bill each time.

 

[bluenoxid]

If you get persistent mail from the same company it is worth putting it in an envelope with their return address on but no stamp. The company then has to pay to get it back. They soon stop sending them as they effectively get a bill each time.

And if you’re really frustrated, making it as big as possible by adding a number of magazines to the envelope.

 

[WesternLancer]

And if you’re really frustrated, making it as big as possible by adding a number of magazines to the envelope.

no need to stop there - a roofing tile or brick will add to the weight and thus their costs....

 

[skyhigh]

If you get persistent mail from the same company it is worth putting it in an envelope with their return address on but no stamp. The company then has to pay to get it back. They soon stop sending them as they effectively get a bill each time.

In my experience they just won't bother paying to get it.

 

[Gloster]

In my experience they just won't bother paying to get it.

Agreed. That is my experience.

 

[WesternLancer]

In my experience they just won't bother paying to get it.

I think @Deafdoggie means use their freepost envelopes to send stuff back in - which Royal Mail then charge them for delivering back to the sender (they don't get a choice not to pay)

I often do this for junk mail correctly sent to me - helps keep the post office delivering to every house if they get the income form it - and if the junk mail senders don't want to pay for it they can stop sending junk mail (even when it is correctly addressed to me)

 

[bearhugger]

I think @Deafdoggie means use their freepost envelopes to send stuff back in - which Royal Mail then charge them for delivering back to the sender (they don't get a choice not to pay)

I often do this for junk mail correctly sent to me - helps keep the post office delivering to every house if they get the income form it - and if the junk mail senders don't want to pay for it they can stop sending junk mail (even when it is correctly addressed to me)

I quite often send the freepost envelopes that you get with all the junk mail and credit card applications back empty. Just stuck down and in my pocket for when I go to work.