ethical dilemma - mail

[bcipam]

Clearly the prior owners are trying to avoid creditors or other such people. The ethical and legal thing to do is "return mail to sender" so those people are informed this is no longer a legal address.

You need to be careful by not notifying the sender the person they seek no longer lives there, they might file a lien or place some bail against the house which you now own. Much better to set up a paper trail showing you did the right thing then have to deal with a lien on the house.

[Chicken Little]

Return to sender is fine. You are not here to re-parent them.

[Becky]

Rts.

[ClockworkOrange]

Yup, RTS...................Oh, I feel a song coming on.

Now who remembers Elvis Presley singing Return to Sender.

[lph]

Yup, RTS...................Oh, I feel a song coming on.

Now who remembers Elvis Presley singing Return to Sender.

I've karaoked it. Very badly...

[hebe]

Yup, RTS...................Oh, I feel a song coming on.

Now who remembers Elvis Presley singing Return to Sender.

"address unknown, no such number..." I'm married to an Elvis buff.

Definitely return to sender.

[Irulan]

I just put a slash mark through the main address, mark "no longer at this address" and put in the mail box.

[badgercat]

Yes, return to sender... I agree, you've already gone above and beyond.

Tip: when RTS-ing, use a permanent marker to black out any barcodes (front or back, black or orange) that were printed on the envelope by the post office. I had a job for a year at a college dorm hall-desk, and a big part of our daily duties was sorting mail. This included forwarding, RTS-ing, or destroying mail addressed to former residents, depending on whether or not they left a forwarding address, how long ago they moved out, and the level of postage. (Presort Standard and the like--aka bulk or "junk" mail--don't get forwarded, unless there are forwarding instructions from the sender, because as I understand it the sender has to have paid extra for forwarding services. You can feel free to throw that out just as you would your own junk mail.)

Anyway, if we didn't black out those barcodes, even if we had crossed out the address and marked Return to Sender, sometimes the envelopes would come right back to us because they got routed based on the pre-existing barcodes, not what was written/stamped on the envelope. Granted, it's been about 5 years since I worked in that capacity, but I'm guessing it's still the same deal. Your postal carrier would probably catch it, but it might save him/her a step.

[jessmarimba]

Thanks guys. I have a bunch of mail in the mailbox to be returned now.

I feel bad about one, which was a slightly oversized envelope that seems to be a Christmas/holiday thing or other, but has no return address (c'mon, people!). But...too bad. I reminded them with my last forwarding & the only reason I didn't send that back was b/c one was a card from Israel.

[indysteel]

Clearly the prior owners are trying to avoid creditors or other such people. The ethical and legal thing to do is "return mail to sender" so those people are informed this is no longer a legal address.

You need to be careful by not notifying the sender the person they seek no longer lives there, they might file a lien or place some bail against the house which you now own. Much better to set up a paper trail showing you did the right thing then have to deal with a lien on the house.

While I think the OP will ultimately be best served by using RTS, as a creditor's rights/bankruptcy attorney, I think the risk of a nonconsensual lien being placed on her house is pretty remote, especially since the former tenants moved out so long ago.

[ny biker]

While I think the OP will ultimately be best served by using RTS, as a creditor's rights/bankruptcy attorney, I think the risk of a nonconsensual lien being placed on her house is pretty remote, especially since the former tenants moved out so long ago.

I also think Jess would know already if there were creditors trying to reach the former owners, because there would be mail from them.

It sounds like laziness to me.

[indysteel]

I also think Jess would know already if there were creditors trying to reach the former owners, because there would be mail from them.

It sounds like laziness to me.

True. Typically, state complaints are served either in person by a process server or by registered mail. If someone proceeds against the former owners using their old address, the OP will likely know about it.

I could bore you with the ins and outs of creditor's rights and collections, but suffice to say that I don't think this is a big concern.

[SadieKate]

It's been 3 years since we bought our current house and we've used RTS until last month when we now use the more handy trashcan.

However, RTS is the only way to go. You have no obligation to forward mail directly to the previous occupants. You are causing more problems by not using it because the post office cannot get the address corrected. The few times we get incorrectly addressed mail there is now a handwritten ? on the envelope which indicates to us that the PO expects and wants us to correct the situation with them. The only bad part to RTS is that all the catalog companies can still track you down.

The only time we went to more trouble was when we received title company correspondence addressed to someone at our current address but trying to buy a house next door to a rental house we had sold a couple years earlier (I know because I opened the two envelopes). This was a little freaky. We contacted both the title company and the county. The county rep was very helpful and followed up to make sure no action was happening against our property. The title company basically didn't give a sh!t. Choose your title companies carefully.