From: vashti@dream.org.uk (Vashti)
Newsgroups: uk.legal uk.finance uk.telecom.mobile
Subject: Re: Mobile phone- identity theft?
Date: 17 Oct 2005 22:04:30 GMT
Originator: vashti@dream.org.uk (Vashti)

In uk.legal, Alex Heney wrote:

>>Of course it is inviting me to be harassed.  The addressee is not having
>>to deal with bailiffs and turn away the police; I am.  
>
> That is only because they are acting stupidly. Giving them evidence,
> ONCE, that you are not the person the letters are addressed to should
> have been *quite* sufficient.

Yes, but my point is, it wasn't sufficient at all.  Contacting the police
didn't help; contacting those responsible at numerous courts and collection
agencies didn't help; the only thing that seems to have been of any use
is the passage of time.

>>The addressee is
>>not having all kinds of information demanded from them with threats of
>>further harassment if I don't provide it; I am.
>
> No you aren't. The addressee is. If the letters are not addressed to
> *you*, then they don't apply to *you*.

I think the people I spoke to who said that they could not cease contacting
my address unless I gave them my personal details and those of my partner
were certainly talking to me.  Talking bollocks, perhaps, but talking it
to me nonetheless.

>>  The addressee does not
>>have to worry about leaving their windows open; I do.
>
> Only if the addressee lives somewhere other than mainland UK, or is an
> idiot.
>
> And you don't have to worry about leaving your windows open *any* more
> than any normal householder does.

Given what I've read about bailiffs having the right to enter a property
through open windows, I wouldn't want to put it to the test.

What you say would be correct in a perfect world, but that world doesn't
appear to be the one I live in.  These are not pleasant people, and if
they can get away with not playing by the rules, they will.