Insurance fraud?

Carrot007

Tarambor wrote: »

Is incorrect. It is an offence under the Postal Services Act 2000 to open mail not addressed to you unless you can show reasonable excuse. A letter sent to your address is not an excuse if it has someone else's name on.

The Postal Services Act 2000 is clear that an offence is created if anyone intentionally delays the post or intentionally opens a mail bag. The Act goes on to say: "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."

Balls!

Un the UK post is delivered to an adress not a person. If you live at the adress you are free to open it or whatever you want to do. What you are not allowed is to use it to get something over the indented recipiant.

Carrot007

Comms69 wrote: »

2: It wont affect you in the slightest

Also Balls.

The company and it's associates could blacklist you, It does not often happen as people can move but if a house has done it multiple times they will.

Companies are free to blacklist a property if they like.

Carrot007

triathlete3 wrote: »

Surely the insurers would be interested to know this guy is giving false info but it doesn't sound like it! I'd like to know how I can sever any ties he has with this address!? I shouldn't know what's in the letter but now I do what can I do about it?

It's a matter of procedure.

it is logical a company would only accept a change of address from their client.

However after a reasonable ammount of proof they should also stop sending thing to you. This can be hard to do if they are not set up for tbis and you may have to escalate a lot. WHich may be more effort than it's worth.

Comms69

Carrot007 wrote: »

Also Balls.

The company and it's associates could blacklist you, It does not often happen as people can move but if a house has done it multiple times they will.

Companies are free to blacklist a property if they like.

That seems unlikely on the basis of what the OP has written

Car_54

Carrot007 wrote: »

Balls!

Un the UK post is delivered to an adress not a person. If you live at the adress you are free to open it or whatever you want to do. What you are not allowed is to use it to get something over the indented recipiant.

Read the law again." ... incorrectly delivered to him" not "to his address".

UK mail is indeed delivered to a person, not an address. If you were right, Royal Mail would not provide a redirection service.

custardy

Car_54 wrote: »

Read the law again." ... incorrectly delivered to him" not "to his address".

UK mail is indeed delivered to a person, not an address. If you were right, Royal Mail would not provide a redirection service.

An item of mail delivered to an address is regarded as delivered.
Regardless of who receives the mail.

Robisere

Something similar happened to me, basics recorded here a couple of years ago. The AA continued to send me letters addressed to someone with my address. I returned 5 letters over a period of about 15 months as "Not known at this address in XX years of living here". When the 6th letter arrived, I began to look into it.
*the street name was slightly misspelled and the postcode was slightly incorrect.
*I looked for similar streets and found one with the same spelling apart from one letter.
*I found this street in a nearby town
*it was a new-build street, proposed development (3x) groups of 3 houses, numbered 1 to 3, 4 to 6 and 7 to 9.
*No's 4 to 6 did not exist: it was an empty and overgrown lot. A conversation with a resident demonstrated his disgust with the developers.
*one of the numbers 4 to 6, is the same as my door number.

I opened the letter at home and wrote to the CEO of the AA, enclosing the opened letter, stating why I did that and enclosing the facts I had discovered. After a few months without reply, I received a letter with apologies, thanks for the letter and advising me that the information had begun an investigation which resulted in a case for fraud and misrepresentation.

I later learned that the 6 remaning homes built and sold, are subject to an investigation into the developer. Residents have described shoddy build issues, electrical faults and water ingress. Whether it is connected to the AA fraud investigation, I have no idea: but the original Insurance case was for both building and vehicle insurance. I keep my eyes open for later events.

arcon5

Just bin it. Everyone stop being so dramatic