Report comment

I agree there should be no special dispensation for LiPs and a rule must be a rule for everyone. That however does not mean that the rules of service are logical or fair.

It makes sense to have on some occasions rules on deemed delivery so that you are deemed to have received something even if you did not receive it in actual fact. But what rhyme or reason can there be for the reverse that you are considered not to have been served even if you received the documents in question?

In which other walk of life is something not done even it is obvious to all that it was done? When you order something for home delivery then unless the item didn't turn up the question is not did you authorise this or that address for delivery but did you get the item you ordered. And so it should be with service.

If you are served by email and it was received and came to the addressee's attention then service is good irrespective of whether the method is permitted or not, whether it's the 'last known address' or however and whenever. The burden of proof would be on the person using the service method but so long that they can prove that it came to the addressee's attention that should be it.