This issue we'll look at laws concerning sending and receiving 'legal' notices through the mail. Whether the notice is truly legal, or it is a notice of defective goods received or a demand for a balance due, the law is basically the same.

This law, as summarized recently in a judicial division, is as follows:

"There is a presumption that a letter properly addressed to the addressee, stamped with sufficient postage and deposited in a mailbox or post office, is deemed to have been received by the addressee within a reasonable time thereafter. This presumption is grounded upon the recognized probability that government offices such as postal authorities will perform their duties properly. The presumption is rebuttable, but definitive evidence the letter is not actually received is required to defeat the presumption."

Generally, a lawsuit in which the mailing, or receipt, of a notice is in dispute begins with the proof of the party who claims to have actually mailed it. This is usually in the form of testimony of someone in the office as to office procedures for mailings. It is not necessary that someone actually remember mailing that particular letter. All that is needed is proof the procedures testified to would, if followed, result in a mailing.

Once the court is satisfied the letter was actually mailed, the presumption it was also received becomes effective. The party who is presumed to have received the letter must now come forward to rebut that presumption.

The first thing that comes to the minds of those attempting to prove they did not receive the letter is to deny receipt. "It's my word against his," is the initial response. This will not work.

In this situation, most courts will take the position as stated by New York's highest court: "A prima facie case of receipt established by competent evidence of proper mailing, may not be rebutted by the mere assertion, by the addressee that he did not receive the mailed document."

This means once it has been shown to the court�s satisfaction a letter has been properly mailed, a simple denial of receipt will not be enough to overcome the presumption it has been received.

How then does one attempt to 'prove' he did not receive the letter? The easiest way seems to be to show the mailing itself was improper. This can be done by showing the office procedures testified to by the sender were never actually followed, or they were performed so carelessly, it would be unreasonable to assume the notice was in fact mailed. This would have to be done by getting someone who worked within the company to actually admit the procedures were never really followed.

Another way to prove non-receipt is to show the post office never delivered it. One way is to get the local post office officials to admit that, even though properly addressed, mail does not always get to the correct destination.

It is not at all easy to 'prove' one did not receive a letter after the sender proves he did in fact mail it. One simply cannot ignore a legal or official notice with the thought, "I'll just deny I ever received it."

On the other hand, if you are the sender of one of these notices you should take all possible steps to avoid being placed in the position of having to prove proper mailing short of hand delivery. We have found the best way is to send the letter or notice two ways - by certified mail return receipt requested, and send a copy first class.