Patdavies, as my initials are not M R, is was never addressed to me? Whether I open it of not, that's the crux of the mater, not interception of mail?

OK, for the sake of argument..... they might as well address the letter to "Mr Car Owner". If they addressing Legal letters to me, then surely they should be addressed to me?

A legitimate reason is fine, I'm all for that. My point being, a letter was addressed to M R E****, that's not me, I pointed it out to Waltham Forest council and they insist that's the name given by DVLA, quote "if you feel that any of these details are incorrect please contact the DVLA". I KNOW they are incorrect, have phoned DVLA today and they have confirmed the fact, so what do I do? Let them get a CCJ against M R E****, which obviously isn't me? I know it's pedantic, but it's not me who started it. Living and working in London, I get shed loads of dubious fines. Some warranted, some not. Sometimes, it's worth asking the question to see if there is precedent. Thanks

It's legal to open mail addressed to somebody else? Hope you can provide evidence to the fact? Give me 5 minutes, I'm sure I can prove otherwise.

Hi, thanks for your prompt response. I have responded every time they have written, by e-mail the same day. My initial gripe with them was the fact they would not correspond by e-mail. I have loads of photo's of what happened, and e-mail would have given me a defence. They state that "the Traffic Management 2004 requires that the Rejection of Representation is formally served by first class mail". I wasn't asking them for a qualification, just a means of stating it was an error or both trust and judgement. The issue here is not the original accusation (I guess that's standard?), just a point of Law, they have addressed correspondence to M R E****, and my name is R E****. I returned to sender, and now find myself in litigation in a Court 70 miles away from the original offence? That's obviously another gripe for another time

Hi. I received a PCN as parking bays were suspended street by street over a period of time, due to resurfacing on a Victorian housing estate in Leyton E10. The contractors were running way behind schedule, parking was at a premium due to the suspensions, and it was chaos. I asked a roadworker if they were actually going to be working on the road in question that day, and he assured me they were not, and it was fine to park. I received a PCN, took photo's, pre-empted the problems, and e-mailed Waltham Forest Council the same day. I keep getting a response in writing by snail mail, although I have asked for an e-mail response in correspondence, (they state it's a legal obligation to use snail mail?). Every 28 days the "fine" is going up by £65, but I haven't got a problem with anything, as I think they have made an error. My name has one initial then my surname R E****. I received a letter addressed to M R E**** and returned it to sender as it is illegal to open mail not addressed to oneself. Matters have progressed, and although the "offence" occurred in Waltham Forest, I have been advised a case is being handled by Northants County Court. My defence on this matter is that I have never received the "notice to owner" and even wrote to them stating their error. They wrote back to M R E****, stating that was the info given to them by DVLA, therefore if I have a problem to contact DVLA. I contacted DVLA today and they confirm the details held are for Mr E****. Do I ignore all proceedings as I am NOT "M R E****" as it surely cannot affect my credit rating etc? I have explained the situation to Waltham Forest Council, but they see it as my problem? Confused, and then some. Thanks in anticipation

Hi Your benefits office should be able to negotiate for you, there are linked departments between them and suppliers. The rate should be £3.00 p.w. as stated previously, so it should not be any hassle. I really don't like like idea of estimated reads on an accessible meter box. If I were you I would pursue this to the end, as that is what has created your problem. To me, that is "unbilled" as there is no reason why it shouldn't have been. This scenario is getting more typical of these bullying tactics, forcing people into debt where previously there wasn't any. Good Luck!

Hi The rate they are charging is what is known as a "deemed contract rate". They are charging this as you do not have a contract. The "deemed" part is that you have used the supply. People who sign a contract get preferential rates. I hope that makes sense! By entering a property and switching on a light, you are entering into an agreement. You choose to use it therefore you are obliged to pay. I bought my daughter an I-phone for Xmas and the label on the box states if you break the label, you are entering an 18 month contract!! Technology these days huh! However, there is light at the end of your particular tunnel due to the fact you were billed (therefore contracted) to British Gas, so you rightly assumed you were entitled to preferential rates. The simplest way of getting a standard rate for the debt amount is to agree an ongoing contract with E-on and having it backdated to the start of the period of supply. As long as their future rate is ok with yourselves i cannot see it being a problem. The one year rule applies for businesses too, but I would tread lightly first, be calm and pleasant! (You owe them money!). This is my first post, is there any way to private message on here? There are a few things I want to run by you, without any E-on employees, potentially getting a step ahead! Don't panic though as there are a million ways round this!