"Lazy" Swain House postman dumped 7,000 letters (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

"Lazy" Swain House postman dumped 7,000 letters

10:00am Thursday 1st November 2012 in News By Hannah Postles, T&A Reporter

A self-confessed “lazy” Bradford postman who dumped 7,000 items of junk mail in his garden shed over six years was branded foolish by magistrates.

Bradford and Keighley Magistrates’ Court heard Stefan Garbus, 30, who had been working for Royal Mail for about ten years, stashed door-to-door mail items in a shed and bins at his home in Cheltenham Road, Swain House, rather than deliver them.

John Watson, prosecuting for Royal Mail, told magistrates Garbus had been put under surveillance after it had received a complaint about the delivery of postal packets in April this year.

Officers visited his home and found 7,077 items in his shed and garden bins, with the earliest dated March 2006, and evidence some of them had been burnt.

“When he was interviewed he said he had not delivered them out of laziness and admitted he had intentionally delayed the delivery of these items,” Mr Watson said. “He was remorseful and said he felt terrible.”

The court heard all the items were junk mail and none of them were addressed to any individuals.

Mr Walton said the cost of him failing to deliver the items were “unidentifiable”.

Garbus, who resigned from his job at Royal Mail is now a courier firm which delivers supplies for the NHS, pleaded guilty to delaying the delivery of postal packets and damaging Royal Mail property by burning some of the mail items.

The court heard there was evidence he had dumped mail between 2006 and April this year.

Sara Khan, mitigating, said her client would have been paid extra money if he had delivered the items, but he had been “struggling to cope” with work.

“He realises and accepts he was in a position of trust being employed by Royal Mail to carry out the duties required of him.”

Magistrates heard Garbus told a probation officer he had been “economising” his round by taking out items he felt were not as “important as other stuff”.

The officer said he was previously of good character and believed he had a “low risk” of reoffending.

He was handed a a 12-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £1,200 costs.