postal law question (re-using postage)

Factual Questions
1

Hi guys! This is not the exact situation that I’m aware of, but it should apply just the same:

Suppose someone was running a business, and got requests by mail for information on that business. Said businessperson carefully opened the mail, inserted an information sheet, resealed the envelope, and dropped it back in the mail marked “refused, return to sender”

Now clearly some law is being broken here, the question is which one(s)? Cites would be useful.

2

http://about.usps.com/posters/pos5/welcome.htm

Hardly worth the cost of a stamp.

3

Also, even if you didn’t get caught, if I sent a snail mail request to a business and they sent mail back to me like that. I wouldn’t do business with them. If they were doing that much work to save 46¢ (is that what a stamp costs right now) I’d wonder what they were going to try to cheat me out of when I actually do business with them. It sounds like the dad from Matilda.

4

One more thing, now that I think about it. If I sent something to a company and it came back marked “refused, return to sender”, what makes you think I’d open it? I’d assume I did something wrong (wrong address, place out of business etc), throw it out and find someone else to do business with.

5

Question answered. But for the sake of the nitpickers, lets assume it’s two old ladies on fixed budgets writing to each other.

6

What do you mean? It would probably work, but the same laws would apply.
A better method would be to leave the stamp off and switch the To and Return address. Then you wouldn’t even have to use one stamp.

7

I knew a college student that pulled that stunt of reversing address. Back then he got away with it a few times. With all the computer stuff these days I suspect there is a high chance they would catch it. They probably actually know where they picked it up. Do it once IMO and you might get away with it. Do it lots of times and that letter might be the random “no stamp” letter they pull to get all CSI on.

The risk is NOT worth the bang for the buck. Unless you are so darn poor you don’t even have any food. And you don’t wanna mess with Wilford Brimely.

8

Yes the same laws would apply, it’s just a more plausible scenario.

9

Email.

10

old ladies! Luddites! Get off my lawn, Ethilrist.