211–213 of 213 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're nailing it--some black hat has figured out the encoding and is making fake stamps. Same as gift card draining.
Wouldn't surprise me if the "encoding" was just unencrypted UUIDs.
If this is really about a fine for counterfeiting a stamp, isn't £5 astonishingly low? In the US that's a serious federal felony with up to five years in prison. https://puryearlaw.com/2015/12/27/federal-counterfeit-postag...
So it's not really a fine in the criminal sense. And I assume you don't admit any wrongdoing or avoid prosecution by paying it. It's more like a processing surcharge.
The mailbox could verify the stamp barcode and refuse it if it's invalid, or require a simple contactless payment when no stamp (or an invalid one) is present. Problem solved. It would also be handy because you don't need to keep stamps in stock for that once off time you need to post something.
Of course this tech hasn't existed for most of the life of the postal system but it does now. So why not do that?
Fining the recipient who had nothing to do with the alleged crime in question is a bit disingenious. It's something that was unavoidable in the past but not now.