Re-using stamps? Is this ok?

custardy

scottishminnie wrote: »

not worth the risk then. It's a pity RM penalises people who make mistakes and ignores those who defraud however it seems that's always the easiest option.

well what system would you have for that? its a mass system
write a letter of complaint to RM and no doubt you will get stamps as compensation
however how would you have a system where people can just tape any old stamp on?
where are they ignoring?
its a balance over time and staff
the machines can pull items out but from there its manual handling
then you have the public outcry every time a card is charged......

meritaten

The poster knows perfectly well that the stamp has been 'used'. to re-use that stamp is fraud. while its not a major crime in most peoples eyes - the courts take a dim view of defrauding the Post Office - its not worth the potential punishment.

Quentin

custardy wrote: »

a taped stamp is a charge right away....

Still you can't (won't!) help scottishminnie.

Why not just tell us not to use tape on the stamp?

My (far more) helpful suggestion is to replicate gum on the back of the stamp (eg egg white, or borrow a prit stick and wipe it over the back of the stamp). This should fool the tape searching detector machines.

custardy

Quentin wrote: »

Still you can't (won't!) help scottishminnie.

Why not just tell us not to use tape on the stamp?

My (far more) helpful suggestion is to replicate gum on the back of the stamp (eg egg white, or borrow a prit stick and wipe it over the back of the stamp). This should fool the tape searching detector machines.

sigh
the stamp has been removed
tape can be detected
glue under the stamp can be detected (this is from experience,not relying on what you heard)
I'm not going to offer advice that can lead to a charge item

Quentin

meritaten wrote: »

...the courts take a dim view of defrauding the Post Office - its not worth the potential punishment....

Please tell us what the punishment is, (and point us to these cases where a (despicable) stamp reuser has been caught and convicted)

dzug1

PROLIANT wrote: »

OK, I fully understand the semantics of this debate, however lets use another analogy;
I buy an all day bus pass and only use it for a few trips around town, then I give to somebody else to use, same thing no?

How about the parking ticket; I give somebody else a valid parking ticket to use, only one service paid for yet two people have used it.

Actually yes - precisely the same thing. Both those scenarios are normally fraud.

PROLIANT

dzug1 wrote: »

Actually yes - precisely the same thing. Both those scenarios are normally fraud.

Well I guess am certainly going to hell when I die then.........

adouglasmhor

custardy wrote: »

another one who see's no wrong
yet I doubt you bother to tell the sender of their failings
how many £1.01 cards do you get?

I get them here, about 5 a week, we get about 30 underpaid items a week which don't get stopped though. People apply for jobs in a large envelope with insufficient postage, how do you think they get on :rotfl:
We pay for the charged ones with a franked impression.
My old work used to just bin them – if somebody wanted to write to us they could either pay the correct postage or use our freepost handwritten business reply doodah.

cutestkids

PROLIANT wrote: »

If I re-use the spray bottles that my household cleaner comes in with my own 'home-brew' version, does that mean I am defrauding Proctor and Gamble out of potential revenue?

The weight of a first class letter in terms of routing and handling is insignificant if a recycled stamp is used, remember the truck, Van, Train, Aeroplane and postman are going there anyway so lets say 1 in 100 stamps were re-used then for every 100 letters handled do you think this will harm an organisation as large as the Royal Mail?

Don't think it will.

This is the stupidest thing I have read on this entire thread.
Considering that approx 70 million items are posted every day through Royal Mail then yes 1 in 100 items not being paid for to be delivered would have a huge impact over a year,

The van, truck, plane, train and postman may be going there anyway but how exactly do you think that the above are paid for, vans need to be bought and maintained, as do trucks, space on planes and trains need to be paid for, postmen need to be paid.

At the end of the day you buy a stamp and yes it belongs to you until you use it to post something, at the point that you post the item you are using the value of your stamp for a service that is to get the item from A to B not to be used as many times as you can get away with.

adouglasmhor

PROLIANT wrote: »

OK, I fully understand the semantics of this debate, however lets use another analogy;
I buy an all day bus pass and only use it for a few trips around town, then I give to somebody else to use, same thing no?That's actualy against the law http://www.thelawyer.com/tube-ticket-transfer-is-theft/101176.article

How about the parking ticket; I give somebody else a valid parking ticket to use, only one service paid for yet two people have used it.that possibly is too

It is a luck of the draw scenario, most letters are sent by business post, never seen a stamp in years so for the odd few that get through the net its fair game in my opinion.
I do understand your point Custardy and appreciate that you worked as a postman, just putting my spin on things that's all.

My opinion is it's not on.