Royal Mail Recorded Delivery Signed For Naughty Postman...............

motch

dantheman2010 wrote: »

Hi all

I have received my post today and amongst it was something which was sent by recorded delivery and needed to be signed for.

Both myself and my partner were at work so I decided to use the tracking number to see who signed for it.

It was supposedly signed for by me although the signature is not mine. Now I assume the post man did this "forging" my signature, I appreciate I now dont have to go to the sorting office to collect the item but surely this is not legal?

I was tempted (I know I shouldnt) to claim the company that sent it that I havent received it and when they check the tracking prove that it is not my signature with driving licence/passport etc. Although I am not sure I can be bothered with that.

I was just shocked they had forged my signature.

So a lot of thought went into the above bit highlighted... I'm glad you didn't follow that through as apart from (if you did) that would make you a thief, and also that action would probably cost the postie his job.

Yes the postie shouldn't sign for you but in reality (as you've stated) he's saved you the time and hassle of going to pick it up, with no intention of any illgotten from forging your signature.

Honeydog

I haven't read the thread but I started one like it last year.

My postie (actually a woman!) didn't bother signing for it and just lobbed it through the open window.It fell 2 metres onto a tiled floor.

If you complain hard and persistently you will get a book of stamps. That's all. Royal Mail don't care how their employees deliver the post just that it gets to you.

HTH

System

Honeydog wrote: »

I haven't read the thread but I started one like it last year.

My postie (actually a woman!) didn't bother signing for it and just lobbed it through the open window.It fell 2 metres onto a tiled floor.

If you complain hard and persistently you will get a book of stamps. That's all. Royal Mail don't care how their employees deliver the post just that it gets to you.

HTH

What I like about this is not only are you still bitter about this incident but this is in fact an old thread where you've already previously referenced this story

Let it go!

pmduk

motch wrote: »

So a lot of thought went into the above bit highlighted... I'm glad you didn't follow that through as apart from (if you did) that would make you a thief, and also that action would probably cost the postie his job.

Actually what would have cost the postie his job would have been fraudulently signing for delivery of an item. I once did jury service for someone accused of falsifying company documents, I vaguely recall it's an offence against one of the fraud acts.

motch

pmduk wrote: »

Actually what would have cost the postie his job would have been fraudulently signing for delivery of an item. I once did jury service for someone accused of falsifying company documents, I vaguely recall it's an offence against one of the fraud acts.

When this person falsified company documents i'm guessing here it was for financial gain, hiding monies from taxman/VAT or similar?

A few of the posties I know often sign for recordeds, admittedly with their permission (but verbal, nothing in writing) not in the same league surely?

Lou67

Oh wow, interesting thread. It does seem wrong, in fact, it IS wrong really, for the postie to have signed for that package, but at the same time, it *was* delivered OK and got there safe and sound, and nobody had to go to the sorting office to get it or anything.

But yes, what if it *had* gone to the wrong house?

We got a package delivered to ours the other week from a courier, and we weren't in, so they left a card saying 'behind grey wheelie bin.' ANYone could have seen that, and nicked it. Luckily, we were only out 10 minutes!!!

But the package wasn't even for us! I noticed it was for 20 High Street and not 10 High Street, where we live; so it had gone on record as being delivered by the courier at number 20. I took it round to the people at number 20, and I don't even know them; I just smile and wave if I catch their eye...

She said 'oh thank you!!!' I told her it had 'her' address on it, but was left by *my* wheelie bin, with no evidence that it was left there, as it said 20 High Street (her address,) and it said her name (Miss Lewis) on the card they popped through. So the courier must have been stoned, because he obviously totally thought he was at number 20, (when he was at number 10.) The neighbour looked shocked. It was a 4th generation ipad worth £450!!! '

For the love of God, someone else could have kept that! I believe some people would have. She was very grateful to me, but said she was going to complain to the company about the courier service, because it would have been recorded that the package was left at her house, and as I said, some people would have kept that package.

So I think it is not the best idea for the postie or courier to just sign for it, and leave it at the property, because it *could* be open to abuse; like someone stealing it, or the package being delivered to the wrong house!

cockaleekee

pmduk wrote: »

Actually what would have cost the postie his job would have been fraudulently signing for delivery of an item. I once did jury service for someone accused of falsifying company documents, I vaguely recall it's an offence against one of the fraud acts.

In order for it to be an offence, there needs to be intent to deprive or to cause loss, which does not appear to apply in this situation.

motch

In this thread reading the first post it sounds like it was a Recorded letter or small package posted through the letter box into the house (and not a parcel left on a doorstep or someone elses)

In this case it sounds likely it's the regular postie who knows it was the correct address and correct person living there.

Posties often sign recorded deliveries for people (with their verbal permission) They shouldn't but it happens.

Lou67

cockaleekee wrote: »

In order for it to be an offence, there needs to be intent to deprive or to cause loss, which does not appear to apply in this situation.

Kind of agree. I think that the worst 'offence' committed was a bit of carelessness. In many ways, it's 'kind of' a good idea for him to post it through, but as I said in my post above, it could go wrong if it goes through the wrong letterbox, and the recipient is not honest. Like me

pmduk

cockaleekee wrote: »

In order for it to be an offence, there needs to be intent to deprive or to cause loss, which does not appear to apply in this situation.

That would be for a charge of theft. Falsifying a company document to show that you have completed an item of work that you haven't done is an offence. Although I suspect most employers would deal with by it by dismissal rather than prosecution, that doesn't mean it isn't a crime.

They are of course depriving the sender of the service that they have paid for, namely a signature of a recipient (nb not necessarily the addressee) at the destination.