We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Debt collectors - previous occupier
Comments
-
"1. intend to act to a person's detriment
AND
2. not have a reasonable excuse."
1. It is very difficult to prove either way that the OP has not opened the post to act to the addressee's detriment. Luckily criminal law in this country relies on proof of guilt not the other way round.
To be fair, I think it is quite clear that the OP hasn't opened the mail with any bad intentions. But my opinion may differ to that of the addressee or the sender of the post, my opinion clearly differs to several posters on this thread.
2. In these circumstances, there is no reasonable excuse to open another persons post, when you can clearly see it is addressed to another person. the reasonable excuse is it is coming to your house, you are also entitled to just put it in the bin unopened - you have no obligation to make an effort to resolve the situation
As you can clearly see that it is addressed to another person, I would argue that it is causing detriment to the addressee because they are simply not receiving post which has been sent to them.They were not going to receive it anyway as they are not there, so where is the detriment
There are guidelines available on what to do with post not addressed to yourself, and you are choosing to ignore them and open the post anyway. [ guidelines? Guidelines are called guidelines because they are not rules.
What reasonable excuse could there be for this? to resolve an ongoing problem which may have unwanted consequences.
As I said, I don't even want to argue about this, but as I have shown time and time again, I am not wrong.No you have not, you have shown time and time again you are a bit challenged in interpreting written language
So a lawyer and a professional working in the field say you are wrong. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I guess it’s a duck.The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
Well as I said before I will go with what Consumer Direct says.
Rather than personal opinions and interpretations of 2 random people, one who says they have a law degree from QUB, one who says they work in the field.
"If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I guess it’s a duck."
Unless it is a Platypus, but do they quack?0 -
Well as I said before I will go with what Consumer Direct says.
Rather than personal opinions and interpretations of 2 random people, one who says they have a law degree from QUB, one who says they work in the field.
"If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I guess it’s a duck."
Unless it is a Platypus, but do they quack?
No they make a screeching noise and clicks, do walk a little like a duck but a little like a moorhen too, give you a very nasty bite/peck though.
You go with what you like, but to try frightening people with poor advice is not what I call helpful in any way.The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
Golden_Anemone wrote: »It would be for the court to prove intent and I agree - this would be very difficult to do!
Wouldn't it be for the prosecution to prove and the court to decide?
That is some law degree you have.0 -
You kids better knock it off or there'll be no disneyland for anyone!
Back in the real world, the fuzz have much more important things to deal with than a householder opening a previous occupiers mail... You know, like solving crimes :rotfl:
OP i'm in a similar position in my house (although the previous occupiers didn't leave the cat!) i used to return everything not known at this address, but after 4yrs it just gets binned...
Don't waste your time or money trying to tell any creditors anything, they should have procedures in place for returned mail and your credit report shouldn't show anything untoward either.
If a bailiff or debt collector turns up on the doorstep, do not let them, in just explain the situation, show some ID and off they will go...
And count yourself lucky its not the police, who turned up banging on my door at 11.30pm six months after i moved in to arrest the previous occupant :eek: The curtain twitchers loooooved that lol
My ex biatchfriend who was living with me for a time ran up debt's at my address.I did have a debt collector come around looking for her after she had moved out.Shown him my army id & he left,I even told him where her father worked but he was'nt interested.
Probably would'nt get paid for extra leg work...mind you,that was back in 1993 before home computers & 'tinternet...(even mobile phones.....)0 -
adouglasmhor wrote: »You go with what you like, but to try frightening people with poor advice is not what I call helpful in any way.
My advice is almost exactly the same advice as given by consumer direct, if you don't agree with it fine.
But to say it is wrong because you don't agree with it, that is just petty.0 -
Consumer direct is wrong?
An official government website is wrong?
Why does that surprise you?
Frankly that website looks like the results of a focus group that was far more interested in the exact right shade for the background colour and the exact angles used in the arrows on the cute little logo than it was interested in legal advice.If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything0 -
Roberto, I see from your signature that you're a former bailiff. Did you deal with issues such as this and if so, is there a chance the debt companies will catch up with this woman and get what they're owed?0
-
Roberto, I see from your signature that you're a former bailiff. Did you deal with issues such as this and if so, is there a chance the debt companies will catch up with this woman and get what they're owed?
It's possible. Debt collectors know more about collecting debt than most people know about escaping it.
As for them harassing you, debt collectors and bailiffs go where they are instructed by the client hiring them, so if you know a debt is for, say, O2 then sending letters to O2 to tell them their debtor has moved may be more effective.If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything0 -
RobertoMoir wrote: »Why does that surprise you?
Frankly that website looks like the results of a focus group that was far more interested in the exact right shade for the background colour and the exact angles used in the arrows on the cute little logo than it was interested in legal advice.
As someone previously mentioned there seems to be no precedent about this.
But as Consumer Direct is a government website, in association with the OFT, which way do you think the courts are most likely to go, given the advice they give you?
Yes, the law is such that it can be argued either way, but the easiest solution and the advice given is to simply not open other peoples letters and return to sender.
If people would rather go with what some random person tells them, rather than an official website, who am I to argue with that?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards