There is a legal precedent (Bernuth Lines Ltd) that ruled that any valid email address at a company could be used for the service of documents.
Although applying only to maritime arbitration cases, it would suggest perhaps that any valid WDTK address might constitute a valid response. On 16 Mar 2012, at 10:24, Stephen Booth <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16 March 2012 07:58, Seb Bacon <[email protected]> wrote: >> FYI, every outgoing email already says "Please use this email address >> for all replies to this request: [email protected]" at the >> bottom. Other ideas for user education welcome :) >> > > Could the ICO be encouraged to view a reply sent to an email address > other than that in the From: or Reply-To: headers of or specified in > the body of the original emailed request as not being a reply, even if > the authority believe or claim to believe it went to the same person? > > Stephen > > -- > It's better to ask a silly question than to make a silly assumption. > > http://stephensorablog.blogspot.com/ | > http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenboothuk | Skype: stephenbooth_uk > > Apparently I'm a "Eierlegende Woll-Milch-Sau", I think it was meant as > a compliment. > > _______________________________________________ > developers-public mailing list > [email protected] > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > Unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/colm%40truthmonkey.org _______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
