Received parking fine- person no longer lives here

stacey4415c

I moved into a flat a month ago, last week i received a letter from parking eye, i think, saying that Mr X owes a certain amount and will be doubled if he doesn't pay within a certain amount of time.

I'm assuming it's the person who lived here before me, what should i do? If he never pays (which may be likely as he will never receive the letter, assuming he never changes details with DVLA etc), will someone come round? Bailiffs?

Thanks
Kind Regards
Stacey

pogofish

You have not recieved a parking fine then. Just a speculative invoice.

If you read the sticky, you will see PE's letter chain and know what to expect. Nothing beyond the letters will happen with these guys.

You won't do the previous occupant any favours bt sending it on, so rither just bin it or stick it back in the envelope and post it marked it "Not known at this address" Which is what you should do with all mail for a former occupier anyway.

Hadeon

What prompted you to open & read correspondence obviously addressed to & intended for another person in the first place?
Had you made any enquiries (eg landlord, letting agent) to determine if there is a forwarding address for the former occupant?

esmerobbo

As stated you should not open mail addressed to someone else. Simply write not at this address on any future mail and repost it! Don't contact Parking Eye as you opened the mail they will assume the person is there!

robredz

Yes send back unopened not at this address, and don't give them YOUR name, or Parking Eye will try to make YOU assume the imagined (as in a speculative unenforceable invoice) debt, then invoice YOU, they are that stupid and money hungry.

halibut2209

However, you should contact DVLA and inform them that the person no longer lives there as it's possible that in the future there will be real parking tickets sent there, from the council.

sarahg1969

esmerobbo wrote: »

As stated you should not open mail addressed to someone else.

The OP may have had good reason to open it, or not have noticed the name on it. She's not done anything wrong.

Sirdan

sarahg1969 wrote: »

The OP may have had good reason to open it, or not have noticed the name on it. She's not done anything wrong.

Maybe but maybe not ..it could be an offence but it is one of those offences where you have to prove intention to do harm, which is always tricky.

The actual wording of the offence is :

"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."

So the actual opening per se is not an offence ..it is the intent and lack of reasonable excuse that would make the offence proven.

st999

As stated you should not open mail addressed to someone else

Stated by whom?

sarahg1969

Sirdan wrote: »

Maybe but maybe not ..it could be an offence but it is one of those offences where you have to prove intention to do harm, which is always tricky.

The actual wording of the offence is :

"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."

So the actual opening per se is not an offence ..it is the intent and lack of reasonable excuse that would make the offence proven.

Yes, I'm aware of what constitues an offence, hence my comment. As she doesn't know who the person is, it's unlikely she will have opened it with the intention fo acting to his detriment.

Sirdan

sarahg1969 wrote: »

Yes, I'm aware of what constitues an offence, hence my comment. As she doesn't know who the person is, it's unlikely she will have opened it with the intention fo acting to his detriment.

It may be unlikely (and it's certainly almost impossible to prove) but it is still a possibility.
I can think of any number of examples where a person might open a letter not addressed to them and not knowing who the addressee is, with intent to act to that persons detriment ...the most obvious one is opening to see if it contains anything of value in order to steal said "valuable" item.

I am not for one moment suggesting that is what the OP has done ,merely pointing out that the offence exists.
Therefore the statement "she has done no wrong" may or may not be true...more than likely true in this case but not 100% certain.