Fraudulent redirection of mail

Dear Sir or Madam,

On 30 April 2009 I wrote to Wendy Cowlishaw, FOI Coordinator and I
have not received an acknowledgement or a response within the
required timescale.

I reproduce my letter below.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Potter

Ms Wendy Cowlishaw
Royal Mail freedom of Information Co-ordinator
Dearne House
Cortonwood Drive
Brampton
Barnsley
S73 0UF

Dear Ms Cowlishaw,

Your reference 1-994367733 Ms Anita Byrne

I wish to see any correspondence relating to my complaint about the
way in which a fraudulent attempt to redirect the mail of myself
and that of my wife was handled. I attach a copy of the letter I
wrote to Mr Crozier and the response from Ms Byrne which I do not
believe addresses a key issue. I find some amusement in the fact
that Ms Byrne’s letter dated 25 March was lost in the post unless
it was redirected?

The key issue is that the Redirecting mail to a private address
application form states “We will refuse your application unless you
produce valid ID for each different surname”. You will see from the
copy of the form that the application is made in my name and my
wife’s yet there is only one name on the document checking section
and only two supporting documents. I therefore suspect that Royal
Mail has failed in its duty of care and that the correspondence
relating to this issue will clarify this since a thorough
investigation will explain why the redirect was set up without all
the documentation required.

I also have concerns about the card verification process when an
earlier attempt had taken place over the internet. I do not believe
the fraudster can have used a card registered to my address as I
have had no statements and therefore I can only assume that the
card was registered to the fraudulent address. There is no point in
Royal mail claiming to “take fraud prevention very seriously” if
this is allowed to happen. Only internet applications should be
accepted if the card is registered to the old address. If people
have already moved they should have to make an application at a
Post Office.

I accept that the envelope sent to notify of a redirect is readily
identifiable but if we had been on holiday, for example, the
redirect would have been in place on our return and significant
damage would probably already been suffered.

I am amazed that Royal Mail does not give their staff the right to
question the validity of a signature but accept that it would be
difficult if it matched the signature on the supporting document.

I also accept that there is a balance between cost and security but
it would cost little for Royal Mail to make it a condition for the
customer to provide an original and copy of the proof of identity
provided and the copy could then be attached to the application
form. This would enhance Royal Mails credentials with regard to
fraud prevention since details of such applications could be passed
to relevant bodies. For example, in my case the fraudster has
obtained a Jobcentre account in my name.

I look forward to the receipt of the relevant documents and will be
interested to know what Royal Mail intend to do if it is confirmed
that the mail redirect was established without the required proof
of identity having been provided.

I enclose copies of relevant documents to enable you to verify my
identity.

Dear Mr Young,

Are you saying that Royal Mail never received the letter sent to
Wendy Cowlishaw on 30 April by 1st Class mail?

If so that is very interesting since this is the second time a
piece of mail relating to this issue has been lost in the post.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Potter

Dear Sir or Madam,

You should have responded to my FOI request by yesterday (6 July
2009) but have failed to do so and neither have you advised me of a
revised date.

You are therefore in breach of your legal obligation.

Please advise me whether you have any intention of replying.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Potter

Dear Mr Cere,

Thank you.

Since I never received a response to my request asking you to
confirm whether or not my original letter to Mrs Cowlishaw dated 30
April 2009 was ever received I am forced to conclude that it was
lost in the post. This was in addition to the letter sent to me by
Ms Byrne dated 25 March 2009 which I did not receive.

On the basis that two pieces of correspondence relating to this
issue have been lost in the post please publish your response on
this page having first removed any details relating to my address.

Perhaps your response will help other people who are suffering from
identity fraud.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Potter

Dear Mr Cere,

Thank you.

Since I did not get a response to my request for confirmation as to
whether or not you received my letter to Mrs Cowlishaw dated 30
April 2009 I have been forced to conclude it was lost in the post.

This was in addition to the letter sent by Ms Byrne dated 25 March
2009 which I did not receive.

On the basis that two pieces of correspondence relating to this
issue have now been lost please publish your response on this site
having removed details of my address.

Perhaps your response will help other victims of identity fraud.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Potter

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am unhappy with the lack of information provided in response to
my FOI request and have sent the following message to The Head of
Information Compliance.

Dear Sirs,

I wish to express my dissatisfaction about the way in which Royal
Mail have dealt with my FOI request for details of your
investigation into the way in which mail redirects were set up for
my wife and myself which exposed us to identity fraud.

On 30 April 2009 I wrote to Wendy Cowlishaw referring to a letter
sent to me from Anita Byrne dealing with my concerns. I wanted to
see correspondence relating to Ms Byrne’s investigations because I
believe Royal Mail failed in it’s duty of care in setting up a mail
redirect without the correct documentation relating to proof of
identity. I assume this letter was lost in the post but Royal Mail
has not had the courtesy to respond to my question about whether
this letter was received.

In responding to my FOI request Royal Mail has not provided any
information relating to the investigations and instead has provided
documents which I already have, some of which are copies of
documents I sent to Royal Mail which have my writing on them. Sadly
you have not had the courtesy to explain why you have not provided
the documents requested.

Please provide copies of the documents relating to the
investigations carried out by Anita Byrne to enable me to establish
whether Royal Mail had followed the correct procedure in
establishing a redirect for two people with only two pieces of
proof of identity.

I also want details of the debit/credit cards used for the web
applications on 23 January 2009 and the amount debited to enable me
to trace the fraudulent transaction.

If you have any doubt about what I am asking for please contact me.

I have wasted enough money in postage sending you copies of past
correspondence so I trust you will be able to find it from your own
records.

Yours faithfully,

Andrew Potter

Dear Mr Cere,

I can only think that you find it amusing to ignore what I am
asking for and continue to supply me with information I already
have.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Potter