Ex tenant letters

[Handson]

I've sent the ones I had back. It was something I normally do if I get post for someone else.

But if I get more in the future I may well have to consider opening them. If you don't send them back then how do people chasing money know they have moved on.

[Handson]

[B]The Postal Services act 2000 says this:

1 a - I would think that when the letter arrives at the house it has completed the course of it's transmission so you can open it.

Interesting. So whilst on route it's illegal but once dropped through letterbox you can as long as you're not acting to the detriment of the person.

Would anyone trace a tenant who deliberately not told you a forwarded address, just to forward their address to all the debt collection agencies.

[Handson]

Those are the ones with the weakest glue, in my experience.

But do you stick the flap back on after and RTS or write to the company on the letter?

[JK0]

But do you stick the flap back on after and RTS or write to the company on the letter?

I don't post them on. In some cases I keep them as evidence of wrongdoing.

[Berlingogirl]

I don't post them on. In some cases I keep them as evidence of wrongdoing.

Or you could photocopy them then post them onwards.

[jpkeates]

The reason it's best to return mail as undelivered is that the sender can deal with it.

From a sender's point of view, there's no difference between a letter that's been opened by the recipient, one that's been opened by someone else and one that's been chucked in the bin.
Best to confirm that the letter hasn't been read and ignored.

[Handson]

The reason it's best to return mail as undelivered is that the sender can deal with it.

From a sender's point of view, there's no difference between a letter that's been opened by the recipient, one that's been opened by someone else and one that's been chucked in the bin.
Best to confirm that the letter hasn't been read and ignored.

Sometimes it can many months of repeated letters, repeated RTS, even sending balliffs around on unsuspecting new tenants before message is received.

[jpkeates]

Sending the letters back is more effective at preventing bailiffs and repeat letters than opening them and then not doing anything.
None of my tenants has ever reported a bailiff turning up for a previous tenant.

[HantsAgent]

I often open things I think are of importance to the property/landlord; utility bills, debt collectors, etc.

Talking to these people and explaining what’s happened (tenant has left, they won’t get any joy by continuing to write to the property) is the best way of making it stop in my experience.

I’ll leave others to debate the legalities of opening mail addressed to someone else but I really don’t see it as a big deal. “I’m terribly sorry, but the addressee’s name was obscured inside the window of the envelope and I assumed it was for me.”

[jpkeates]

Opening someone else's post falls under the it's not legal but no one has ever heard of anyone ever getting into trouble for it category.

[ash72]

I will give final readings today. I didn't have access that's why situation has got where it has.

What I want to know is if somebody other than tenant assigned the bills to their own name but had no tenancy with me whose responsible. I have no forwarding address to speak of.

If I was in your situation, I would just call the Utility company which the sub-tenant has taken the contract out on and tell the company you know nothing about this person as you didn't have a contract or were aware of him/her living or using the address, it would be for them to chase any funds owed, after all they would have done a credit check (even basic) on the person and would have got some details.

[Handson]

I informed them about him. Changed it over to my name for the time being with closing meter readings. They said he had considerable debt.

[Slatzuk]

I opened mail from a former bad tenant mostly debt collection letters. I then tracked him down and physically handed all the opened mail to him. One of them being my default CCJ against him for outstanding rent.

He went to the police and complained I'd been opening post. When a sergeant rang me to say I was breaking the law and should stop I asked him what law and quoted the Postal Services act referenced above to him. The two points I highlighted were "reasonable excuse" and mail has been delivered to address so no longer covered by the legislation. Sergeant blustered a bit and said no further action.

A bit of instant karma followed. I asked the sergeant if the bad tenant was with him at the moment, he didn't answer but I suggested if he was he might ask how he got to the police station as one of the letters I'd opened was a notice that he had no insurance on his car.

I heard later that his car had been seized the same day for lack of insurance.

[JK0]

I heard later that his car had been seized the same day for lack of insurance.

That's funny.

Reminds me of my tenant in the Bambi flat...https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/fo...-in-your-flat=

After they left, a number of official letters fell open regarding T's husband driving without insurance, the court summons, the court verdict, and request for his driving licence to be endorsed. Finally one telling him that his licence was now suspended due to not having returned it. I can't imagine the trouble he got himself into with that.

[Lawcruncher]

Just because opening someone else's mail once delivered is not a crime under the Postal Services Act does not mean it is not a crime. The Theft Act 1968 springs to mind - see sections 1-6. As I see it, if someone else's mail comes into your possession and you hold onto it and do nothing with it you commit no crime. However, as soon as you perform an act which treats it as your own, such as throwing it away or opening it, you risk being guilty of theft.

Opening someone's else's mail is a tort.

All this talk about "Who will know?", "It fell open" and "You'll never get prosecuted" shows a gross disrepect for the rule of law.