Hello,
What I am trying to find out is whether the Royal Mail has a right of access to deliver the mail. The DTI, on its web site, say's that Royal Mail is legally obliged to deliver mail. I want to know whether my right to privacy means that I can refuse entry to my property to any person except those with an invite. I know that the police/gas/fire brigade/customs can enter without my permission. I believe that the Royal Mail are obliged to "attempt" to deliver mail, and that if they can not it would be returned to the sender (Legitimate originator would have a return address on their envelope) or else there may be some kind of "undeliverable mail" room somewhere.
If anyone has any information about this I would welcome it. In particular the relevant Act that allows the Royal Mail to enter my property without permission.
I don’t necessarily want to prevent the postman from delivering mail, I’m just interested in whether I have more rights over my own property than the agent (postman) of some faceless advertising dept. who is exploiting a special privilege extended to the Royal Mail in order to force their wares on to all and sundry? I can pretty much guarantee that when this special privilege was awarded (if in fact it was) that it was not intended to allow private companies the right to bombard private citizens with advertising literature.
Regards
lowprofile
TRESPASS TO LAND
DEFINITION
Trespass to land occurs where a person directly enters upon another's land without permission, or remains upon the land, or places or projects any object upon the land.
CONTINUING TRESPASS
A continuing trespass is a failure to remove an object (or the defendant in person) unlawfully placed on land. It will lead to a new cause of action each day for as long as it lasts (Holmes v Wilson and others (1839) 10 A&E 503; Konskier v Goodman Ltd [1928] 1 KB 421).
MISTAKEN OR NEGLIGENT ENTRY
Trespass to land is an intentional tort. However, intention for the act is required, not an intention to trespass. Consequently, deliberate entry is required and lack of knowledge as to trespass will not be a defense (Conway v George Wimpey & Co [1951] 2 KB 266, 273).