Property Tax - Incorrect addressee letter

limklad

The the property charge over the last year or so, there was a lot of letters address to people with the property charge who was either dead or move house (i.e sold) or left the state (emigration) or houses that the banks took over and not address to them.

If revenue failed like the property charge to get the property owner name right for the property tax what consequences for House owners who do not get the letter address to them. I know it is against the Law for people to open letters address to other persons. If the property letter is address to others then they will breach the law for opening that letter and if they reply to that department it will give proof that you breach the law.

You also breach the Law for failing to reply or pay the Tax in which you cannot reply with the form that revenue provided with the incorrect addressee letter.

Revenue do not have the right or power or force to ask people to break the law to open those incorrectly addressee letters.

Does anybody have a way around this problem that the revenue have unfairly put these people into?

d9oiu2wk07blr5

Just return to sender with "ADDRESSEE NOT KNOWN AT THIS ADDRESS" plastered on the envelope!

limklad

Gunnar Deep Wig wrote: »

Just return to sender with "ADDRESSEE NOT KNOWN AT THIS ADDRESS" plastered on the envelope!

How do you get around the not paying the property tax? You will get punish for not paying.

Grolschevik

I think I heard a spokesman from the Revenue say on radio the other day that, if you don't receive a letter, you're obliged to contact the Revenue yourself.

valleyoftheunos

Gunnar Deep Wig wrote: »

Just return to sender with "ADDRESSEE NOT KNOWN AT THIS ADDRESS" plastered on the envelope!

limklad wrote: »

How do you get around the not paying the property tax? You will get punish for not paying.

You aren't getting around anything, they will most likely send out another letter with your name on it.

Kosseegan

limklad wrote: »

How do you get around the not paying the property tax? You will get punish for not paying.

You hardly think anyone is going to post a dodge on a public forum? If they did it would be closed up straight away. The clever people will use the dodge until it is closed (and keep it a secret) and the schmucks will pay. Like always.

limklad

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

You aren't getting around anything, they will most likely send out another letter with your name on it.

I am talking about all the people they sent letter with incorrect names who break the law by opening the letters.

Not everybody have internet!!! Old people are mostly effected.. An old women hard of hear trying to contact revenue. It a disaster waiting to happen.

By the way if revenue is sending me a letter to pay property tax then they need their head examined. I do not own a house and they know it!!!!

Kosseegan

limklad wrote: »

I am talking about all the people they sent letter with incorrect names who break the law by opening the letters.

!!!

They can be prosecuted under the Post Office Act 1908.

valleyoftheunos

limklad wrote: »

I am talking about all the people they sent letter with incorrect names who break the law by opening the letters.

Not everybody have internet!!! Old people are mostly effected.. An old women hard of hear trying to contact revenue. It a disaster waiting to happen.

By the way if revenue is sending me a letter to pay property tax then they need their head examined. I do not own a house and they know it!!!!

I sincerely doubt anyone will be prosecuted but why would anyone open a letter that isn't addressed to them?

limklad

Kosseegan wrote: »

You hardly think anyone is going to post a dodge on a public forum? If they did it would be closed up straight away. The clever people will use the dodge until it is closed (and keep it a secret) and the schmucks will pay. Like always.

As stated in my other comments, not every body have access to internet and many old age pensioners are not in the internet age and not with it with the latest news and some have been abandoned by family members. Revenue have upset a lot of penisioners when household charge when they address the charge to their dead love ones.

So get off your public forum band wagon and look up from that computer and see the real world. There is consequences to every action no matter how good you intentions are. Old age pensions do not have to pay for their TV licence. When the household charge was brought in Revenue said they be using all public databases social welfare, An Post, etc to get addresses, yet the revenue sent letter to dead people despite having this information, upsetting a lot of people who inadvertently broke the law when opening the letter is not address to them unless their were they are the executor of the deceased person estate. The person is an legal entity created by the state agency which issues your birth certificate.

The revenue told gave similar statements when the household charge, yet they screwed up massively. I believe they will screw up again and people will inadvertently break the law when open the letter to another person that is not address to them.

When I was in accommodation a numbers of year ago. I had to ask the landlord to get the bill change to his name as they were in someone else's name. I had it as a condition in the contract that I can only open bills in his name once written permission is given. This is so I can pay the bill. He signed the contract. Later after the contract signing and I paid the deposit and two months rent, I ask him to change the bills to his name as I was looking at the bills which were opened outside the envelope, which also was not paid. I told him I am taking the reading of the meters to make sure they match the reading of the contact and not paying the other person bill. He taught I was pulling the other one. I told him to ask his friend "the lawyer" as he said If I ever do anything to his house he will get his friend "the lawyer" to go after me. I told him I will pay my bills but not other peoples bills since the bills are not in his name. I told him as the conditions of the contract that I pay his bills of this house in which he owned to the amount of the bill. I told him I cannot pay other people bills as it was not his bill as I cannot find out what money is owned therefore I cannot pay the bills as they are not his bills therefore not in breach of the contract. I told him on one of his conditions in the contract is that I comply with the Laws and not create damage in the house. The law states, I cannot open a letter that not in my name or without permission by the addressee. Another condition is that I will not change any bills to my name or any name or change providers unless I have written permission form the landlord.

Within a week he got every bill change to his name and paid them fully and gave me written permission to open the bills with his name. His wife told me and she was laughing that his solicitor friend told him over dinner that I was right and it made him mad that I would be in breach of the law and breach of the contract by opening any letter that not in my name unless I had permission by the addressee. He nearly choke on his steak. She was still hysterical laughing about it as she was telling me. Also after reading the contract his friend also told him by me breaching the contract, I can walk away from the house because another clause in the contract that states that If I breach the terms of the contract that the contract is null and void, but I will lose my deposit. The term was for one year for me to stay. On his next visit. I told him that he or any other persons cannot enter the house without my permission and me letting him in and me been in the house for inspections as I am paying him rent. I show him the relevant law from my collage days. The house is my dwelling as I am paying rent to live there and is protect from unwanted intrusions by law. That is another story from my collage days which force me to get some extra information about dealing with unscrupulous landlords. I never had a problem with him for the duration of the contract and I abide by the contract.

limklad

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

I sincerely doubt anyone will be prosecuted but why would anyone open a letter that isn't addressed to them?

Why would you make this statement. Opening letters not address you break the law! You cannot ignore the law because it is in your way or inconvenience to you. Revenue sending out letters to households where the incorrect addressee is unwittingly and unintentionally set a trap for house owners who open the letters causing a break in criminal law. It is a criminal offence on the letter opener who open that letter. Revenue must report the breach of the law to the gardai like every one else. It is a very serious offence to open, dispose off or destroy other people letters (Postal packets).

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1983/en/act/pub/0024/sec0084.html
Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983

on opening, etc., of postal packets.

84.—(1) A person who—

(a) opens or attempts to open a postal packet addressed to another person or delays or detains any such postal packet or does anything to prevent its due delivery or authorises, suffers or permits another person (who is not the person to whom the postal packet is addressed) to do so, or

(b) discloses the existence or contents of any such postal packet, or

(c) uses for any purpose any information obtained from any such postal packet, or

(d) tampers with any such postal packet,

without the agreement of the person to whom the postal packet is addressed shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to any person who is acting—

(a) in virtue of any power conferred on the company by section 83 , or

(b) in pursuance of a direction issued by the Minister under section 110 , or

(c) under other lawful authority.

Penalties
4.—(1) A person guilty of an offence under—

(a) section 45 of the Telegraph Act, 1863,

(b) section 6 of the Telegraph Act, 1869,

(c) section 11 of the Post Office (Protection) Act, 1884,

(d) section 53A (inserted by the Fourth Schedule ) or 62 of the Post Office Act, 1908,

(e) section 13 of the Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1951 , or

(f) section 37 , 63 , 84 , 87 , 98 or 99 of this Act,

shall be liable—

(i) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £800 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both the fine and the imprisonment, or

(ii) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding £50,000 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both the fine and the imprisonment.

(2) On conviction of a person on indictment for an offence to which subsection (1) relates the court may, in addition to any other penalty, order any apparatus, equipment or other thing used to commit the offence to be forfeited.

(3) Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967 , shall apply in relation to an offence to which subsection (1) relates as if, in lieu of the penalties provided for in subsection (3) of the said section, there were specified therein the penalties provided for in subsection (1) (i) of this section, and the reference in subsection (2) (a) of the said section 13 to the penalties provided for in the said subsection (3) shall be construed and have effect accordingly.

(4) Where an offence to which subsection (1) relates is committed by a body corporate and is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of, any person (or any person acting on his behalf) being a director, manager, or secretary of such body, that person or the person so acting, as the case may be, shall also be guilty of that offence.

Where a person knew that a serious crime had been carried out by another person, but they concealed the carrying-out of that crime or failed to report it to the police. But in 1997, following the abolition of the old felony/misdemeanour distinction by the Criminal Law Act, the offence of 'misprision of felony' was abolished. Instead, two new offences were created by the 1997 Act, but neither is as broad as misprision.

The first, under section 7(2) of the Act, occurs where a person knows that someone else has committed an arrestable offence, and does without reasonable excuse any act with intent to impede the apprehension or prosecution of the other person.

An arrestable offence is an offence punishable by five years or more imprisonment;

valleyoftheunos

I don't know why I'm even bothering but...

Opening a single letter addressed to someone else is not a serious offence, it is an offence but not a serious one, it is at the lowest end of the scale so is a minor offence.

Secondly, people know its against the law to open other people's post. I know it you know it so do I and so do older people. Ever since postal services stated hundreds of years ago people have known that if a letter arrives at your house addressed to someone who doesn't live there you either forward it to them or give it back to the postman.

There is no trap, just incompetence by the revenue. You got a letter not addressed to you, write "not at this address" on the envelope and stick it in a postbox.

Tom Young

OP: Make this thread relevant quickly or I'm shutting it and deleting it on top.

valleyoftheunos

Tom Young wrote: »

OP: Make this thread relevant quickly or I'm shutting it and deleting it on top.

Sorry I shouldn't have engaged.

Grolschevik

limklad wrote: »

As stated in my other comments, not every body have access to internet and many old age pensioners are not in the internet age and not with it with the latest news and some have been abandoned by family members. Revenue have upset a lot of penisioners when household charge when they address the charge to their dead love ones.

So get off your public forum band wagon and look up from that computer and see the real world. There is consequences to every action no matter how good you intentions are. Old age pensions do not have to pay for their TV licence. When the household charge was brought in Revenue said they be using all public databases social welfare, An Post, etc to get addresses, yet the revenue sent letter to dead people despite having this information, upsetting a lot of people who inadvertently broke the law when opening the letter is not address to them unless their were they are the executor of the deceased person estate. The person is an legal entity created by the state agency which issues your birth certificate.

The revenue told gave similar statements when the household charge, yet they screwed up massively. I believe they will screw up again and people will inadvertently break the law when open the letter to another person that is not address to them.

When I was in accommodation a numbers of year ago. I had to ask the landlord to get the bill change to his name as they were in someone else's name. I had it as a condition in the contract that I can only open bills in his name once written permission is given. This is so I can pay the bill. He signed the contract. Later after the contract signing and I paid the deposit and two months rent, I ask him to change the bills to his name as I was looking at the bills which were opened outside the envelope, which also was not paid. I told him I am taking the reading of the meters to make sure they match the reading of the contact and not paying the other person bill. He taught I was pulling the other one. I told him to ask his friend "the lawyer" as he said If I ever do anything to his house he will get his friend "the lawyer" to go after me. I told him I will pay my bills but not other peoples bills since the bills are not in his name. I told him as the conditions of the contract that I pay his bills of this house in which he owned to the amount of the bill. I told him I cannot pay other people bills as it was not his bill as I cannot find out what money is owned therefore I cannot pay the bills as they are not his bills therefore not in breach of the contract. I told him on one of his conditions in the contract is that I comply with the Laws and not create damage in the house. The law states, I cannot open a letter that not in my name or without permission by the addressee. Another condition is that I will not change any bills to my name or any name or change providers unless I have written permission form the landlord.

Within a week he got every bill change to his name and paid them fully and gave me written permission to open the bills with his name. His wife told me and she was laughing that his solicitor friend told him over dinner that I was right and it made him mad that I would be in breach of the law and breach of the contract by opening any letter that not in my name unless I had permission by the addressee. He nearly choke on his steak. She was still hysterical laughing about it as she was telling me. Also after reading the contract his friend also told him by me breaching the contract, I can walk away from the house because another clause in the contract that states that If I breach the terms of the contract that the contract is null and void, but I will lose my deposit. The term was for one year for me to stay. On his next visit. I told him that he or any other persons cannot enter the house without my permission and me letting him in and me been in the house for inspections as I am paying him rent. I show him the relevant law from my collage days. The house is my dwelling as I am paying rent to live there and is protect from unwanted intrusions by law. That is another story from my collage days which force me to get some extra information about dealing with unscrupulous landlords. I never had a problem with him for the duration of the contract and I abide by the contract.

Are you using Google Translate?