Results 1 to 10 of 64

Threaded View

  1. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    750

    Default Re: Banned from Mailbox

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    Yes indeed. Semantics. And if you were not aware of it before, let me tell you that in the law how things are defined matter a great deal. You chose to define the term "effectively own" to suit your own purposes of defending your claim about ownership once I pointed out that in fact there are such things as private mailboxes. That's exactly the kind of tactic lawyers do — looking for the definition that suits the case they wish to make, if the law doesn't already provide a specific definition. So congratulations, you are more like the lawyers that you say you hate than you perhaps realize. I told you that I was using the term in the more legal sense — to effectively own something would mean having pretty much the same bundle of legal rights that a real owner would have. Within our own definitions we each may be right. But so what? None of that helps the OP with his problem, does it?

    Oh how you search for ways that the other person is wrong. But if I was your client, you'd be looking for ways that I would be right. Which proves this is just a dance for you.

    'Effectively owning' something is not the same as legally owning something, just as a virtual experience is not the same as an actually experience. But they are a form of 'owning' or 'experiencing' just the same.

    I asked you to describe a 'private mailbox' that the Fed does not have ultimate control over and you didn't/couldn't do it, yet you mention it again.

    An example that is very similar to 'effectively owning' something is a rental car. A renter has ultimate control over it, even is legally responsible for damage to it and others hurt by it, yet the renter did not buy that car. Webster says that is a form of 'owning' something, but why would a lawyer bow to Webster? Lawyers are masters at redefining words. Leasing and making payments on a car is another form of 'owning' a car but not legally owning it by paying for the whole car.

    As for the OP, he's gone and we are onto another subject about his mailbox. But if he followed the thread now, he'd know that whoever is messing with his mail within that box is not legally allowed to do that. So, he would benefit from this thread as much as pg1067 is annoyed by it.

    I outlined before the practical impact for the OP of all of this. He can complain to the USPS about it, though for the reasons I stated earlier I doubt the USPS will care much about it. But it's free to complain to his local postmaster and maybe the local postmaster would feel like talking to the homeowner about it. If I were the OP I wouldn't hold my breath on that, though. That said, if I were in his shoes I'd at least take a shot at it. If the USPS doesn't care, then whether the OP has some legal recourse depends on additional facts that we don't have. But even if he does, the time and expense of pursuing that remedy might not be worth it. This probably will come down to negotiating whatever deal he can get with the homeowner. If you have a different take on what the OP can do, by all means please do share it.
    The USPS is not a law enforcement agency which is why you recommended a futile approach like that. But they could offer legal text that contains the postal delivery law that could be shown to the homeowner. The carrier could even orally warn/inform the homeowner. Either would likely have an impact. Also, the OP could put up his own mailbox with is name on it. I am sure you thought of both of those scenarios but wouldn't mention it because the lawyer game of defeating me is what you are playing here.

    What I get from you is that you think you are an authority on the law because you can recite statutes and because you have a refined ability to twist words and mislead people, much like a Christian thinks they are an authority on Jesus Christ just because they can recite Scripture. However, I wouldn't trust either person to be accurate, unbiased and truthful.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Retail Fraud / Shoplifting: If You're Banned from a Store Are You Banned From the Entire Chain
    By caterpuff in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-20-2013, 06:58 AM
  2. Vandalism and Mischief: Mailbox Vandalism
    By PandorasBox in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-21-2012, 05:05 PM
  3. Careless Driving: Hit a Mailbox While Speeding
    By apatel0408 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-12-2012, 11:21 PM
  4. Speeding Tickets: Got One of These in My Mailbox Yesterday
    By HonkingAntelope in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-13-2011, 11:56 PM
  5. Quiet Enjoyment: Non-Functioning Mailbox
    By ShuteyeBSG75 in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-07-2008, 09:31 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources