Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Royal Mail staff tampering with mail, can I sue?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2116 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all

 

For 18 months, Royal Mail has failed to deliver around 70% of my mail. In addition, my bank has written at least 4 times to say Royal Mail staff are returning my mail to sender claiming they cannot access my address and / or I have moved. Both are malicious lies.

 

I have made at least 10 complaints and they simply deny their staff are doing it - but have not asked to see the letters from my bank.

 

I reported it to Action Fraud who say there is nothing they can do - last letter from Action Fraud did not even reach me, like much of my mail.

 

For the past year, the delivery officer has been harassing me on the street in retaliation for making complaints. I reported him to the Met police but don't yet have enough for a prosecution to stick: it's his word against mine so I am filming him every time he harasses me, which as you can imagine is only fuelling his aggression (i am a small female so it's pretty intimidating).

 

The fall out from non del of mail has been considerable, missed hospital appointments, thrown off my medical consultants' lists for non attendance, mortgage problems, bank refusing to send documents to me because of the security risk, etc.

 

I want to take Royal Mail to court but am aware of their indemnity clause. I cannot sue under Goods and Services because I have no contract: the contract is with the sender. None of the senders are prepared to get involved.

 

On what premise could I sue them for interfering with my mail? The police say it is a civil matter even though it is technically a criminal offence as i understand it.

 

I may have screwed up by sending them a letter before action in which i quoted the Goods and Services Act; I now realise I cannot use that premise.

 

I would be immensely grateful for advice: essentially - on what premise can I sue for tampering with my mail?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to conclusively prove the mail is being tampered with.

 

Are they opening it or ate they just returning it as undeliverable.

 

If the latter then you need to force them to investigate. Take it out of the complaints departments hands and go higher. Including to the ombudsman.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interfering with post during the course of delivery is a criminal offence under the Communications (Postal Services) Act of 2011 (if my memory serves me correctly). If a complaint at local level has failed to resolve the issue you can raise the issue with the Postal Redress Service.

 

If the delivery person is harassing you and it is causing distress, then that too is a criminal offence, and one that the Police can and should deal with. Keep a record of each incident and record as much of it as you can. If the lower levels of the police refuse to investigate, insist on speaking to a higher ranking officer. Should that fail to trigger an investigation, try the IPCC.

 

In the meantime, do you have a friend or family that could act as a "care of" address ?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why, if what you say is true would be the reason for Royal Mail doing this ?

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

No i do not have a dog.

I am frankly surprised at some of the sexist "blame the victim" responses here:

 

I have no idea why I, a woman who lives alone, am being targeted

- you would have to ask royal mail staff.

 

I suspect for identity theft because everything "missing" is sensitive, eg bank account details, cards, NI number, etc.

 

I have been to POSTRS, they were useless;

they will only comment on Royal Mail's failure to follow its own complaints process correctly, nothing else.

 

As stated, I have reported the harassor to the Met.

I was advised to gather more evidence so am filming him when I see him.

This is making him more aggressive.

 

Met says they will not touch theft of mail and that it is a civil matter however I do believe it is a criminal matter.

 

Evidence:

I do not receive around 70% of my mail and one bank has written 4 x to say Royal Mail is claiming i no longer live here/that they cannot access the address,

another bank wrote once to say the same.

 

I cannot reasonably be expected to show they are opening the mail because I don't have access to any CCTV within the sorting office.

 

But I can certainly prove it on the balance of probabilities, which is the burden of proof required for a civil claim.

 

For a criminal claim, ie the harassment the burden of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" hence continuing to collect video evidence.

 

But as per my original post

- i don't know on what basis I can

- not the Provision of Goods and Services in any case.

 

I do not have anyone who I can have post redirected to, not locally anyway.

 

I have been to Royal Mail's security team too and they were not interested.

My sense was that unless any corrupt activity involves loss of revenue for them, they don't care.

 

I have now written to the chief exec who simply referred me back to the complaints dept - who simply send out generic responses to complaints without providing substantive answers.

 

It seems royal mail staff are untouchable and can do just as they please without fear of repercussions.

 

What are you suggesting? I am a 50 year old widow living alone. What else do you think is going on?

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

No i do not have a dog. I am frankly surprised at some of the sexist "blame the victim" responses here: I have no idea why I, a woman who lives alone, am being targeted - you would have to ask royal mail staff. I suspect for identity theft because everything "missing" is sensitive, eg bank account details, cards, NI number, etc.

 

I have been to Royal Mail's security team too and they were not interested. My sense was that unless any corrupt activity involves loss of revenue for them, they don't care.

 

Having reviewed the posts made in this thread, I don't see anything to suggest "blame the victim" or anything that could be misunderstood as being "sexist". If anything, the questions ask have been to identify if Royal Mail had any reasonable grounds for refusing to deliver to your property. Dangerous dogs are an occupational hazard for postmen/women, but as you do not have a dog, this can not be used as a reason to stop deliveries. If your house appears in the PAF database, then there is no technical reason for failing to deliver.

 

Royal Mail do take the issue of mail security very seriously, and I have seen people dismissed for tampering with letters. Finding the right person to talk to is going to be your first hurdle. Unfortunately, Royal Mail do not publish telephone numbers for their investigations officers.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you weren't referring to my question about do you own the dog when you complain about "sexist "blame the victim" responses here". It was a simple question to discover if that could have been the reason mail was being returned as "unable to gain access". That is precisely what the post office do if they believe there is a dog loose on the premises.

 

 

Have you been a victim of ID theft? If you are concerned that sensitive information from your bank is going missing can you arrange to collect it from your bank branch?

 

 

You say you can prove on balance of probabilities that your mail is being opened but from what you've posted I can't see you have any evidence that would stand up in court.

 

As for harassment, you say "so am filming [the postman] when I see him" and that is "making him more aggressive". You may be more at risk of arrest for harassment then he is if you continue doing that. It's one thing filming someone once they actually start harassing you, but that's not what you are doing, from what you say.

 

You could contact your MP and see if they could help.

 

Have you tried sending test letters to yourself with proof of posting? See how many arrive. Send some signed for and see if they arrive. Then you will at least have some evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am frankly surprised at some of the sexist "blame the victim" responses here:

.........

 

What else do you think is going on?

 

I haven’t seen any sexist responses. The only mention of sex/gender I can see is yours, made after the posts you are “frankly surprised” at.

If you kick off at those trying to help you, it’ll just put others off helping.

 

What else do I think is going on?

I don’t know for sure, but the sort of person who turns on those trying to help them, and makes baseless accusations of sexism certainly opens up possibilities that wouldn’t be likely to happen to a more reasonable person!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...