Legalities Around Email Communication

makeorbrake

I am patently aware that there is a specific purpose being followed on this thread - and particularly right now - with regard to pursuing Danske re. being thrown off an offset. I don't want to detract from that - but just have one quick query unrelated to that - if I may.

Does anyone have an email address for support for Pepper/Danske right now? I need to contact them asap to get a copy of the Premier Bond Certificate and Policy (similar to Homebond) relevant to the property I have mortgaged with them. I'd prefer to stick this request on an email.

Anyone got the email addy? Failing that, whats the current customer support number?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

makeorbrake

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Then, I'm going to end up in a vortex of pain - as my sol. just emailed me this morning to say that they don't retain them - that the bank does. :-(

makeorbrake

wersal gummage wrote: »

Rang them. The reduced amount should have been debited. The correct amount 'probably' will next month, 'more than likely' and 'should be' but to ring them again in a month if it isn't......

Confidence inspiring stuff :-)


What annoys me the most is these guys won't provide an email address. Email has to be the cheapest most convenient form of communication going. Furthermore, it provides proof of delivery and proof of content - but I guess that's the problem, right? (although of course, this isn't exclusive to Pepper)

/end of rant!

RainyDay

makeorbrake wrote: »

What annoys me the most is these guys won't provide an email address. Email has to be the cheapest most convenient form of communication going. Furthermore, it provides proof of delivery and proof of content

Internet email doesn't provide proof of delivery. Many email systems are designed NOT to give return receipts.

Just got off the phone with the Credit Management folks at Danske today to reschedule my outstanding credit card debt. I was expecting them to turn it into some kind of term loan, but it seems they are continuing to run it out as a CC debt, but they are just resetting the minimum payment amount. They agreed to cut mine from 2 year repayment to 3 year repayment, which will help me get through some cash flow issues this year.

makeorbrake

RainyDay wrote: »

Internet email doesn't provide proof of delivery. Many email systems are designed NOT to give return receipts.

From a legal point of view (and by all means correct me if I'm wrong here), it can be demonstrated that the communication was sent. "read receipts" to my mind are unnecessary. I guess it would confirm the moment someone actually reads the mail - but no more than this. It's a fair assumption to make that if an email communication was sent to a legitimate email address, the recipient will have read same. If they claim they never received it, it can be proven to the contrary. Might involve a lot of work if it came down to that - but it can be proven.

kennM

makeorbrake wrote: »

From a legal point of view (and by all means correct me if I'm wrong here), it can be demonstrated that the communication was sent. "read receipts" to my mind are unnecessary. I guess it would confirm the moment someone actually reads the mail - but no more than this. It's a fair assumption to make that if an email communication was sent to a legitimate email address, the recipient will have read same. If they claim they never received it, it can be proven to the contrary. Might involve a lot of work if it came down to that - but it can be proven.

I'd be tech savy around email and internals etc. You assumption is not 100% correct. Just because you have dispatched an email to a valid email address does not mean that the recipient will have read same. There is a strong likelihood but by no means guaranteed.

makeorbrake

kennM wrote: »

I'd be tech savy around email and internals etc. You assumption is not 100% correct. Just because you have dispatched an email to a valid email address does not mean that the recipient will have read same. There is a strong likelihood but by no means guaranteed.

I'll keep this short as I don't want to take this thread any further off topic. However, if an email is sent to a professional company, there has got to be a reasonable expectation that it has been read.

kennM

makeorbrake wrote: »

I'll keep this short as I don't want to take this thread any further off topic. However, if an email is sent to a professional company, there has got to be a reasonable expectation that it has been read.

Thats a fair statement but it couldn't be argued that it was definitely delivered and read. With a lot of digging this could be proven.

RainyDay

makeorbrake wrote: »

From a legal point of view (and by all means correct me if I'm wrong here), it can be demonstrated that the communication was sent. "read receipts" to my mind are unnecessary. I guess it would confirm the moment someone actually reads the mail - but no more than this. It's a fair assumption to make that if an email communication was sent to a legitimate email address, the recipient will have read same. If they claim they never received it, it can be proven to the contrary. Might involve a lot of work if it came down to that - but it can be proven.

No, you can't really show that a message has been sent. A message sitting in a sent mailbox may never have got to the recipient. There is no 'chain of evidence' showing what servers it passed through along the way. It could easily be blocked by any one of the servers for a whole range of reasons.

And even if it does get the recipients server, that is no guarantee that it gets to the individual concerned, for the same reasons. There are no guarantees with Internet email.

makeorbrake

RainyDay wrote: »

No, you can't really show that a message has been sent. A message sitting in a sent mailbox may never have got to the recipient. There is no 'chain of evidence' showing what servers it passed through along the way. It could easily be blocked by any one of the servers for a whole range of reasons.

And even if it does get the recipients server, that is no guarantee that it gets to the individual concerned, for the same reasons. There are no guarantees with Internet email.

In a legal scenario, can the info not be gleaned from the recipients isp and their servers? I'd imagine this scenario has already come to pass in the irish courts system already. Are we saying that if receipt of an email is disputed, then it stops at that - and the judiciary accept that there is no proof it has been received and consequently, they disregard this facet of a case (regardless of how important it may be)?

kennM

makeorbrake wrote: »

In a legal scenario, can the info not be gleamed from the recipients isp and their servers? I'd imagine this scenario has already come to pass in the irish courts system already. Are we saying that if receipt of an email is disputed, then it stops at that - and the judiciary accept that there is no proof it has been received and consequently, they disregard this facet of a case (regardless of how important it may be)?

Guys I'd say this is a thread for the legal forum rather than sending this thread off on a tangent.

RainyDay

makeorbrake wrote: »

In a legal scenario, can the info not be gleaned from the recipients isp and their servers? I'd imagine this scenario has already come to pass in the irish courts system already. Are we saying that if receipt of an email is disputed, then it stops at that - and the judiciary accept that there is no proof it has been received and consequently, they disregard this facet of a case (regardless of how important it may be)?

I've no idea about the legal situation. I know there is no guaranteed service with Internet email. What happens when the recipients ISP says 'We never got it'?

makeorbrake

RainyDay wrote: »

I've no idea about the legal situation. I know there is no guaranteed service with Internet email. What happens when the recipients ISP says 'We never got it'?

Can't they be subpoena'd for the relevant server logs?

RainyDay

makeorbrake wrote: »

Can't they be subpoena'd for the relevant server logs?

Who's server logs do you subpoena? You don't know who's servers transported the email between the sender and the recipient.

kennM

makeorbrake wrote: »

Can't they be subpoena'd for the relevant server logs?

RainyDay wrote: »

Who's server logs do you subpoena? You don't know who's servers transported the email between the sender and the recipient.

Guys, best forum for this tangent is legal discussion.... I'm sure it has cropped up and folks over there would be best positioned to answer. I could chime in with more technical information but don't want to feed this tangent too much.

Toots

Moved to Legal Discussion. Locked pending LD mod approval.