Address or Addressee

[philalliband]

I have a dispute at work.
I have personal mail sent to my work from time to time as do other employess.

Can my employer withhold post addressed to me at their address but not addressed to the company name?
I also recieved a mail item from the postman addressed to me and not the company at the building enterance. (I have kept the evidence)
Was I within my rights to accept my post?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

If you need proper legal advice its better to get a solicitor as we can only offer Advice suggestions or opinions.
Here are mine>

I have a dispute at work.
I have personal mail sent to my work from time to time as do other employess.

Did you, do they have permission.

Can my employer withhold post addressed to me at their address but not addressed to the company name?

Again opinion but I would think they can as they would be the registered business for that address. We deliver to the address not the business or the individuals what the business/person does with the mail after that is up to them.

I also received a mail item from the postman addressed to me and not the company at the building entrance. (I have kept the evidence)

The postie should not have given you the mail. It could be a sacking matter in the worst case.

Was I within my rights to accept my post?

No, unless you accepted all the post on behalf of the business.
It all comes down to whether you had permission to get mail delivered to the businesses address, and the reason they are withholding the mail.

[philalliband]

Hi Thanks for tyhe reply.

I did have permission to accept mail at work until I entewred into dispute with them.
I am the previous owner of the company and also the landlord.

It is interesting that you say the postie should not have handed over my post as my solicitor is of the opinion that I acted legally.

The question that I need answered is:

Is post the property of the addressee or the address.
Imagine the scenario of a house (such as student accomadation) with four different addressee's but only one address.
Surely the addressee has the legal right to the post?

thanks ....

[fishtank]

Is post the property of the addressee or the address.

It's a little more complicated than that.
It belongs to the addressee but it could be argued that the business address is the correct address and that would be "reasonable excuse" to open it under the Postal Services Act 2000 as long as there was no detriment to the addressee.

If you are arguing on pure ownership grounds then the addressee would win every time.

If your employer is arguing that you had no right to intercept the mail they would have to
satisfy a court that they suffered detriment and you had no "reasonable excuse" to believe it was yours.

Interfering with mail - Postal Services Act 2000 Section 84

Triable Summarily (Magistrates court)
6 Months and or a fine (Max)

A person commits an offence if they without reasonable excuse intentionally delay or open a postal packet in the course of transmission by post or intentionally opens a mail bag.

A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person's detriment and without reasonable excuse, opens a postal packet which they know or suspect to have been delivered incorrectly.

[coxie]

We deliver to the address not the addressee, if you're not authorised to take mail at your work then I'd advise you set up a redirection so that any letters with your name on get redirected to your home address.

[aposter]

We deliver to the address not the addressee,.

BUT he claims to own the address, ie he is the landlord, so, imo, he is totally entitled to accept, and open, any mail addressed to him at his own address.

[philalliband]

Many thanks for all your help.
The conclusion is that I was expecting the mail I recieved and have proof of the order.
Also they are not allowed to hold onto mail that belongs to me.
I except that they had the right to open it, but under no circumstances hold onto it once they knew they wee not the intended receipients.

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

Many thanks for all your help.
The conclusion is that I was expecting the mail I recieved and have proof of the order.
Also they are not allowed to hold onto mail that belongs to me.
I except that they had the right to open it, but under no circumstances hold onto it once they knew they wee not the intended receipients.

not quite right, after delivery to the address the item is no longer in transmission under the postal services act and as such is no longer covered under it unless it was delivered to the incorrect address so they are not breaking the postal services act if they open it and retain it (may be they are breaking some other act but not the postal services act)