Postal rule is no longer needed because in the 21 Century, contracts can be concluded in seconds, using both instantaneous and non-instantaneous methods of communication with little or no risk of loss and delay.
Therefore, it should be abandoned as an obstacle to fairness in contract law. As a result, it does not apply to instantaneous methods of communication (i.e.
Even if he does, we know that it will be no more an acceptance of an offer, but a counter-offer by stipulating actual receipt or a specific way of communication, or even initiating the negotiations by instantaneous method.
He can require parties to telegraph instead of using a slower method like the postal services.
I confirm that I have read and understand the definitions of plagiarism, collusion and the fabrication of data as described in the University's Code of Practice on Assessment.
I confirm that I have not committed plagiarism or fabrication of data when completing this submitted piece of work, nor have I colluded with any other student in the preparation and production of this work. It was arbitrary, because there was no range of choice for communication and the postal services were the only option for distance contracting.
He is the one that can manipulate the offer and introduce conditions.
The offeree is less likely to change the conditions.
This is why the postal rule is not such a burden if manipulated intelligently.
In the US, another postal rule regulation can be seen in the Century, companies have a range of communication choice to make a contract.