Q: Preservation notice

A: No.

If one is aware they have evidence that can be relevant to what may be a legal case, destruction of the evidence can be used against them in the case.

A: This is an important legal question, but the answer is not as straightforward as you might hope. Let me explain:

1. Generally speaking, parties have an obligation to preserve relevant evidence once litigation is reasonably anticipated, even before a formal preservation notice is issued.

2. The absence of a formal preservation notice from the plaintiff does not automatically give the defendant the right to destroy records.

3. If a defendant destroys relevant records after they reasonably should have known that litigation was likely, they may face serious consequences, including:

- Sanctions from the court

- Adverse inferences (where the court assumes the destroyed evidence would have been unfavorable to the destroying party)

- Potential claims of spoliation of evidence

4. The key factor is often when a party "reasonably anticipated" litigation. This can occur before a lawsuit is filed or a preservation notice is received.

5. Best practices for businesses and individuals include:

- Implementing a robust document retention policy

- Issuing internal litigation holds when litigation is reasonably anticipated

- Consulting with legal counsel before destroying potentially relevant records

It's important to note that specific rules can vary by jurisdiction and the nature of the case. If you're dealing with a real legal situation, it's crucial to consult with a qualified attorney who can provide advice tailored to your specific circumstances.