Mail in transit is owned by the Queen

[Dactyl]

Just been watching Friday's HIGNFY and one of the panelists (whose named I have completley forgotten) claimed that from the time a letter (or anything else mailed) is posted to the the time it is delivered it is owned by the Queen (hence, Royal Mail).

Furthermore, he claimed you could be done for treason if you stole a letter while it was in transit.

Sounds dodgy to me, any thoughts?

[Tarquin Farquart]

Originally Posted by Dactyl

Just been watching Friday's HIGNFY and one of the panelists (whose named I have completley forgotten)

It's Ed Byrne. I don't know about the transit treason thing.

[Andrew of Ware]

My mum, in the 1960s, told me that all post is owned by the monarch until it is delivered. So the story, whether true or not, has been around for a long time.

Even if it true I am not sure about the treason bit, though.

[Mycroft]

By Post Office rules anything posted belongs to the poster until it is delivered; there are specific rules about non-deliverable mail without return address - it is sent to a depot in Belfast who are the only people authorised to open mail (other than in specific police enquiries) to assertain if there is a senders addresss inside, if not it is destroyed. WRT stolen mail the criminal charge is not treason; it is 'Interfering with the Mail' although if someone disseminates information obtained by illegally opening mail they can be charged under the Official Secrets Act.

[FullMetal]

maybe not ownership? but i would more believe it being considered held in trust of the queen.

[katdixo]

I don't have a cite, but in the US, I've always been told that once you drop a letter in the mailbox, it becomes the property of the USPS. If you have second thoughts about mailing something and try to get it back, you could be committing a felony (not treason, though!).

[Sly Dog]

Originally Posted by katdixo

I don't have a cite, but in the US, I've always been told that once you drop a letter in the mailbox, it becomes the property of the USPS. If you have second thoughts about mailing something and try to get it back, you could be committing a felony (not treason, though!).

Actually it is merely in the custody of the Postal Service, not "property of", and you can get it back. Postal Supervisors have the authority to return mail to a person with proper identification if it matches the return address on the envelope or package. A Letter Carrier cannot return an item but he/she will take it to his/her supervisor if you request, and let the supervisor make the decision. However, once it has been delivered it becomes the property of the receiver and taking mail from someone else's mailbox is a felony.

I was a US Postal Letter Carrier for several years and faced this type of situation a few times.

[Jay Tea]

Originally Posted by Tarquin Farquart

It's Ed Byrne

I cursed him some years ago after a gig during which he proved himself to be an utter wanker. It really worked, ever since his career has plumbed new depth after new depth. This pleases me

Originally Posted by Sly Dog

I was a US Postal Letter Carrier for several years and faced this type of situation a few times.

Is this the same as a UK postie?

Mornin' UK Postal Letter Carrier! That my Amazon stuff?

[katdixo]

Originally Posted by Sly Dog

Actually it is merely in the custody of the Postal Service, not "property of", and you can get it back. Postal Supervisors have the authority to return mail to a person with proper identification if it matches the return address on the envelope or package. A Letter Carrier cannot return an item but he/she will take it to his/her supervisor if you request, and let the supervisor make the decision. However, once it has been delivered it becomes the property of the receiver and taking mail from someone else's mailbox is a felony.

I was a US Postal Letter Carrier for several years and faced this type of situation a few times.

Do you have a cite? I'm not challenging you, just curious to see exactly what the statute says.

[Graham2001]

This may or may not be related to the above but until the 1850's (I think) it was within the power of the Royal Mail to open & read your letters.

This was done by the Secret Office, a branch of the Post Office, which worked under open ended warrants issued by the Secret Office.

All of which was perfectly legal under the original Post Office Act.

[llewtrah]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

By Post Office rules anything posted belongs to the poster until it is delivered; there are specific rules about non-deliverable mail without return address - it is sent to a depot in Belfast who are the only people authorised to open mail (other than in specific police enquiries) to assertain if there is a senders addresss inside, if not it is destroyed. WRT stolen mail the criminal charge is not treason; it is 'Interfering with the Mail' although if someone disseminates information obtained by illegally opening mail they can be charged under the Official Secrets Act.

Legally there is a difference between ownership and possession (possession being 9/10ths of the law and for my sins Law of Property was one of the disciplines I studied, albeit a long time back). The undelivered letter may be in possession of the PO (and physically in the possession of an agent/employee of the PO), but is still owned by the sender.

This doesn't always seem to have been the case. Reading a Wilkie Collins novel ("No Name"), an individual tried to retrieve a letter that had been posted and was unable to since the letter no longer belonged to them. That was back in the 1840s though. The historical position wasn't covered in class so I don't know if it was just a plot device or whether it was accurate. Endnotes in some of his other novels pointed out inaccuracies (usually for the sake of the plot) where he wrote of legal situations (Woman in White, Armadale).

However, what if it's not in Transit? What if the postal services starts using Vauxhall vans instead of Transits

I recall the story that if you stuck a stamp upside down on a letter it was treason because it was a not-so-secret sign of treasonous plottings (or at the very least an insult to the monarch). As schoolkids we used to get the delicious feeling of being really bad if we stuck stamps on Xmas cards upsdie down (a seasonal childhood chore). Many years later, knowing the PO deals with millions of items of post per day, I realised no-one would actually notice the orientation of the stamp and were only interested in the letter having a stamp.

[llewtrah]

Originally Posted by Graham2001

This may or may not be related to the above but until the 1850's (I think) it was within the power of the Royal Mail to open & read your letters.

They still can if there is sufficient cause. A card sent to my mother was opened because the decorative bow on the car had a wire support. It limped to its destination several weeks later with a note and a PO seal saying it had been officially opened. The gift card was still inside, so it wasn't a case of theft by temporary workers (a problem here). My dad, who sometimes has a little too much time on his hands, enquired further. The wire had triggered an alarm and the letter was opened in case it was an explosive device.

[Keeper of the Mad Bunnies]

This is an interesting read, as far as United States law is concerned.

Some Laws Postal Inspectors Enforce

A strict reading of 18 U.S.C. 1702 would say that the letter becomes the property of the receiver once mailed.

Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from any letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail carrier, before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes, embezzles, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

I was unable to find any reference to whether there is a legitimate course to retrieve a mailed item.

[llewtrah]

It also affects law of contract in England/Wales. There have been court cases over whether a contract is made when the sender posts an agreement (e.g. a signed contract) or when the intended recipient receives it. I think it was worked out to be when the recipient gets it, otherwise they don't know they are bound by a contract, but it's years since I studied that sort of thing and it's probably been reinterpreted and clarified so many times that it isn't a "one size fits all" ruling. All sorts of interesting cases came up when letters crossed in the post or went astray and one party thought the 2 parties were under contract and the other argued there was no contract.

[Royston2010]

My friend in his younger, more rebelious days broke into a postbox and stole the letters, because of his age he got away with a repremand but he was told, had he been older he could have been tried for treason.

Case solved

[PointySextant]

I'm not sure they literally mean a possession of the crown, but the treason thing being an outdated law still on the books is something I can believe. For a very long time the sacred and inviolate nature of one mans correspondence to another was so highly though of that some rather strict and brutal laws were enacted to ensure that no one was reading your mail in between pick up and delivery. Even at the founding of the United States it was a serious consideration, and one of the reasons that the post office is written into the constitution itself. In an age without telephones, e-mail, or any other method of long distance communication, and when the right to privacy for a conversation in a pub or home away from the prying eyes and ears of the world and government was a pipe dream, the letters sent between colleagues were seen as the one sacred and inviolate method of communication, no matter your rank or standing.

That said, I think they may mistaking the fact that one could get the death penalty for waylaying the Royal Mail, sometimes on the spot from the armed guards that accompanied it from stop to stop, for an actual treason charge. I'm not sure it was treason, but you certainly had a bullet or a noose in your future if you robbed from a mail packet back in the day.