Column | Unsolicited mail – NRC

It seems as if more and more mail is being sent to me by companies, institutions and private individuals who want something from me. This week it happened to me four times in one day.

The most innocent example was the Animal Protection Society. I have a lot of sympathy for that club, but I already give regularly to the Monkey Foundation and “I can’t keep going,” as my conscience unscrupulously puts it. This now results in a veiled reprimand from the Animal Protection Society. “Last year, inspectors from the National Animal Welfare Inspection Service responded to reports of neglected animals no fewer than 14,493 times. (…) Dogs, cats, rabbits, goats, ponies, horses, no animal species was spared. Isn’t that terrible, Mr Abrahams?”

It included a photo of the horse Bella “in her own feces.” Mr Abrahams found it terrible indeed, but he hurriedly opened the next envelope, the one from the Water Board Tax. They took a much more humble tone there. They admitted that a change in system had caused a delay in sending the assessments. As a result, I would “may” receive several assessments this year. “We understand that this can be very annoying and we apologize for this.”

As far as I’m concerned, it’s not necessary, because I like such delays. But at the Water Board Tax they are afraid that I will now not be able to pay those multiple assessments at the same time. “You can always call,” they write, “and we will look for a solution together.”

Should I call? The temptation is great. “You can keep those excuses, but I would appreciate it if I could postpone payment for a period at least as long as the delay caused by your system.”

If they refuse, I can take advantage of the offer that another letter writer made me that day: the Amsterdam Housing Company. He really wants to buy my house. “We are active as a buyer and developer of houses in Amsterdam (…). We buy houses, then we make them more sustainable and renovate them and then offer them to one of our customers (….). In this way we ensure that your neighborhood retains enough high-quality and energy-efficient homes, which is good for the quality of life in your neighborhood.”

Isn’t that moving? They don’t do it to benefit themselves, no, they want to make my neighborhood more livable. They are even willing to accept “hidden defects” in my home as their risk. I’m going to call them first thing tomorrow.

First I have to respond to a request from the Head of Research and Statistics of the municipality of Amsterdam. It turns out that I belong to a “random group of residents” who can answer questions about “domestic or sexual violence.” “I understand that this may be a difficult subject for you,” writes the Head. “For example, because you have experience with domestic or sexual violence.”

The Head seems to think that such a letter is only opened by victims. But there must also be many perpetrators who open this letter first. And what will such a perpetrator do? Pass it on to his victim(s)? Or in the trash?




ttn-32