I have just received through the post, a French speeding fine, €68. It claimed I was doing 108 KMH in a 90kmh limit, in the commune of Aytré, in the Charente-Maritime department on the 31st march this year. Snapped by a French Speed camera.
Now as it happens I have been there for vacation, but that was ten years ago, I wasnt in France on that day. The fine is addressed to the people from whom we bought the house 13 years ago, and the car is a Citroën C3. I have never had one.
Questions. As the address details are woefully out of date
Is this a scam?
How did they associate this vehicle with this adress?
|
|
Was it addressed in your name, or the name of the previous inhabitant of your house?
|
|
The camera must have a picture of the reg plate ask for proof.
|
Got a reg?
Got any contact details for the previous residents?
If it was a scam specifically aimed at you then I don't see that they would mention the Citroen - that'd have to be a guess and a stupid one.
It may be that the previous residents have a C3, committed the speeding offence, and either they gave an old address, they had the old address on something like a driving licence, or someone checked them out on a out-of-date database.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 4 Oct 12 at 13:13
|
No reg number on the Fine. No contact details for the previous occupants.
Never had any previous indication they have registered a vehicle in the UK at my address.
***** PING *******
AHA
There is a registration on the fine, immatriculation CB-957-MV Its a French one.
The cheeky previous owner of my house *&^*(*%$£@£$%^&** has copped a fine in France and he has claimed the driver was in the UK, giving his Name, and my address. Probably his wife got it.
I was going to ignore it, but now I know what he has done I am going to fill out the form stating it was not me, just to drop in in the ****. He probably hoped I would ignore it.
|
|
Was the envelope addressed using your name, the former occupant's name, someone else's name or "The Occupier"?
|
Why not simply write on the envelope Return to Sender, not known at this address and shove it in the nearest post box!
Job done. Not your problem.
|
|
That's right. I'm wondering why Zero even opened it, it can't possibly have been addressed to him. If it was, well then the bloke who lived there before him should expect a visit from a very cross Zero.
|
>> Was the envelope addressed using your name, the former occupant's name, someone else's name or
>> "The Occupier"?
Addressed to the previous occupier by name. Nicole opened it. Now I know what the bloke has done I want to drop him in it big time.
|
But you've opened someone elses mail.
Its actually illegal - whether the Uk law streteches to include mail from overseas I can't say.
Save yourself a connery and just stick it back in the envelope.
|
|
its my mail, its addressed to my house.
|
I wonder how he managed to give them a false address without showing his driving licence to either a hire company or the Gendarmes? I wouldn't be surprised if he's never changed the address on his driving licence after moving.............
Oh, and tell Nicole (wife? daughter? domestic?) never to open mail addressed to someone else! ;-)
|
>> Oh, and tell Nicole (wife? daughter? domestic?)
Two out of three is not bad.
(I wont half pay for that if she reads this)
|
|
You Brute drop him in it, stuff that punch him on the nose.!
|
I think it more likely that the owner of the Citroen has received le NIP francais or equivalent and filled in the previous owner of Z's house & the address from an old list (christmas card list, customer list, whatever) and sent that back hoping the matter would disappear.
Returning it to les flics should put the owner of the car back in deep merde
|
|
Indeed, that is what I intend to do.
|
>>I want to drop him in it big time.
I'm not sure you can.
It wasn't in your name, so I'm guessing the guy admitted it was him? What he did was give a forwarding address. Presumably the ticket went to his house somewhere (France?) and they gave your address.
Pretty simple for him/her to just say, "oops sorry, what was I thinking, I meant to put my Mother's address" or similar.
Ultimately I think life is too short; Just send it back as not known at this address.
By the way, opening someone else's mail once it has been delivered to the correct address is not the same as interfering with mail before it is delivered.
If someone could show that you had opened with deliberate and malicious intent then there might be a civil case or if you did the wrong thing with it there might be a data protection issue, but not really.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 4 Oct 12 at 14:23
|
Each night I come in from work, I opena ny envelopes that are lying there. I never check who they are addressed to.
I am last in my house each night usually so any mail that is for others in the house should have been claimed by then!
|
|
I recall the envelope being unstuck your Worship and the contents were protruding.
|
|
That rego format looks Dutch to me?
|
|
The French have adopted a new style in the last few years
|
>> The French have adopted a new style in the last few years
>>
Haven't we all Darling.
|
Just send it back - 'unknown at this address'.
Don't let it bother you further.
|
|
I'm not bothered by it. I am however annoyed by it, and I want the perp to suffer. I hate him, based on the bodges he did in this place.
|
I'm guessing it was a hire car and that they've got your address becuase he produced a license with your address, though I'd have expected a x/check between licence address and billing addy for payment card.
Also, while I respect the law, if I got stuff addressed to long gone former owner I'd open it. The house we lived in from 90-98 was a repo. Several years before I stopped getting letters from debt collectors looking for Mr Smith.
A polite call advised them he'd gone and that they could verify my name on the electoral register if they had any doubts about veracity.
Never had an argument.
|
just for the record...
Interfering with mail - Postal Services Act 2000 Section 84
84 Interfering with the mail: general.E+W+S+N.I.(1)A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he—
(a)intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or
(b)intentionally opens a mail-bag.
(2)Subsections (2) to (5) of section 83 apply to subsection (1) above as they apply to subsection (1) of that section.
(3)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.
(4)Subsections (2) and (3) of section 83 (so far as they relate to the opening of postal packets) apply to subsection (3) above as they apply to subsection (1) of that section.
(5)A person who commits an offence under subsection (1) or (3) shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both.
The point is, if the correct recipient knows you opened his mail in order to establish what it is, then you go and forward it to him or provide the authorities with his address, he could be just as nasty and claim you interfered with his mail originally. You may feel smug dropping him in the 'merde', but he could do the same to you.
|
|
Nameless man, you are rather pedantically over-reacting to Z's opening of a letter delivered to his own address who evers name was on it. I think he is quite safe from having the SAS absailing down his wall and throwing stun grenades through the windows. Nobody will give a toss.
|
There is the reasonable excuse option. And I doubt very much whether any casual opener of mail is prosecuted.
(1) (a) and (b) are regularly used against postal workers.
That said I have been known to argue the other side, before John H brings up evidence of my inconsistency...
|
"There is the reasonable excuse option"
Surely the reasonable excuse is that Z opened the letter so that he could see who it was from and post it back to them?
Or maybe I am just being thick???
|
>> That said I have been known to argue the other side, before John H brings
>> up evidence of my inconsistency...
>>
You can relax, no need to worry. Being the extra-sensitive soul that I am, I now tread in here in fear of upsetting the sensitive souls who may be lurking to pounce on me.
As such, I shall be doing a semi-flounce and try to limit my contributions to only when I can be sure (if that is possible) that I am not offending someone or other.
Last edited by: John H on Thu 4 Oct 12 at 18:16
|
>> >> That said I have been known to argue the other side, before John H
>> brings
>> >> up evidence of my inconsistency...
>> >>
>>
>> You can relax, no need to worry. Being the extra-sensitive soul that I am, I
>> now tread in here in fear of upsetting the sensitive souls who may be lurking
>> to pounce on me.
>>
>> As such, I shall be doing a semi-flounce and try to limit my contributions to
>> only when I can be sure (if that is possible) that I am not offending
>> someone or other.
>>
>>
>>
Be like the majority of the sensible ones who don't give a fig...
|
You couldn't see your way clear to giving all of us your address could you? You could make a small business out of it. Just it'd be handy to have a centralised base for foreign speeding/ parking tickets...you might though need to change the name of your house to "Dunno Chief, search me" or something.
:-)
|
>>Interfering with mail - Postal Services Act 2000 Section 84
....refers to mail while it is within the control of the postal service.
Contact the Post Office, explain that the letter has been delivered to the correct address, ask them whether or not they feel the item is still within their control and still their responsibility. Because if they have discharged their duty, as tehy will probably feel that they have, then the Postal Services Act no longer applies.
The question, if its really worth this level of pedantry, is the definition of the word "delivered" as used in this context.
|
"The question, if its really worth this level of pedantry, is the definition of the word "delivered" as used in this context."
Certainly. You can't beat a bit of logomachistic argument.
|
You know his full name and that he may live in Charente-Maritime - Dept 17.
Look him up here:
www.pagesjaunes.fr/pagesblanches
It's the French phone book. Many people in France are content to be in the phone book unlike in UK.
|
>> You know his full name and that he may live in Charente-Maritime - Dept 17.
>>
>> Look him up here:
>>
>>
>> www.pagesjaunes.fr/pagesblanches
>>
>>
>> It's the French phone book. Many people in France are content to be in the
>> phone book unlike in UK.
Only two, the nearest is 200 miles away from the scene of the crime.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 4 Oct 12 at 23:02
|
>>You can't beat a bit of logomachistic argument.
I had to look that up. And to be honest I almost didn't assuming you'd made it up.
Oh well, to live is to learn.
I shall now seek an opportunity to use it.
|
|
Surely you don't think people make things up on this site do you? ;-)
|
>>Surely you don't think people make things up on this site do you? ;-)
As if.
|
|
Funny you should say that. Quiet on the Iffy front.
|
>> Quiet on the Iffy front.
Yes. Floods in Yorkshire, hip giving gyp? I hope he's all right. Indeed I would almost be chuffed if he had won countless millions from the lottery and was cavorting with dusky maidens somewhere or other with sunshine and no wifi.
Perhaps a moderator knows or can ask?
|
>> Perhaps a moderator knows or can ask?
>>
His absence was noted a week or two ago. One of the Mods, possibly RP, was going to email him.
|
What an excellent word, thank you for that. I too am looking for an opportunity to use it.
I am struggling to be certain of the pronunciation, I am assuming lo-GOM-a-chist, the ch being hard. Anybody certain?
|
>> www.howjsay.com/index.php?word=logomachist
>>
Well, the computer agrees with me. Maybe we're both wrong!
|
>> I'm not bothered by it. I am however annoyed by it, and I want the
>> perp to suffer. I hate him, based on the bodges he did in this place.
>>
No Survey then. Tch!
|
It doesn't really make sense: €68 isn't a standard speeding fine as far as I'm aware, it's €90 or €130 if paid late. And how did a speed camera come up with a UK address?
Seems as though this guy got a ticket through the post - that plate is a fairly recent issue - which is correct as the car must be registered to that address, then tried to offload it.
Stick it to him Z.
As for this interfering with the post business...when I worked at the Salisbury Journal years ago, post for the far-right polemical publication the Salisbury Review used to turn up at our address all the time. I never failed to bin it - if people couldn't get the address right it gave me the chance to do the civilised world a favour.
|
French Speeding Fine - Alanovich
