Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: JMH Jun 5 2009, 11:52 AM

It would seem that the lady who accidentally recieved highly confidential and sensitive information in error clearly took quite some time to read it all!

Posted by: Bill1 Jun 5 2009, 01:32 PM

My thoughts entirely

Posted by: GMR Jun 5 2009, 03:29 PM

How would you know it was sensitive unless you read it? It is only natural that people will read it.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Jun 5 2009, 03:34 PM

Notice how nobody ever seems to hand stuff back without going to the media first? Years ago, at the height of the Northern Ireland troubles, a briefcase was left on a train at a London terminus and handed in to rail staff, who took one look at the correspondence and saw several letters from the Northern Ireland Office marked as secret and confidential. They did no more than call the police who soon reunited the very embarrassed owner with his property after giving him 'suitable advice'. No news story there....

Posted by: GMR Jun 5 2009, 04:38 PM

If people went straight to the police, and not the press, then it would be all hushed up. We've got to expose this sort of incompetence.

Posted by: Darren Jun 6 2009, 09:43 AM

It didn't even have her name on it.

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Jun 6 2009, 12:41 PM

You really think this hapless Civil Servant did't get a rocket when it was reported? Dream on. Who exactly do you mean by 'we', BTW?

Posted by: GMR Jun 6 2009, 01:29 PM

You know what they say about curiosity?

Posted by: J C Jun 8 2009, 09:24 AM

Isn't it illegal to open mail that's not addressed to you?

Posted by: GMR Jun 8 2009, 06:49 PM

Not really; I've got letters that weren't addressed to me and opened them. I automatically open them without looking at the address. You can't help opening something that was put through your letter box.

Posted by: Andrea Jun 9 2009, 11:49 AM

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.

If you work for the Post service you could commit other offences under Section 83 triable either way (Magistrates or Crown court) and get a sentence of 2 years and or a fine.

It's ridiculous you don't check the name on the envelope before opening it. My mother who has lived at her address for 20 years still checks everything that is delivered to her, and on several occasions she still gets post not meant for her.

It is illegal and how would you feel if someone received a private letter meant for you and they opened it?

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Jun 9 2009, 04:12 PM

'We've got to expose this sort of incompetence.'

Posted by: GMR Jun 9 2009, 05:48 PM

yes - by somebody opening their mouth