On Jul 19, 2:36*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

In message
, at
06:08:51 on Sun, 19 Jul 2009, Mizter T remarked:

But try convincing many Londoners that the area code is 020, not 020x :-)

I notice it, but it's not really something that bothers me. Some
people seem like they're going to implode with fury when they see or
hear the code being incorrectly used - so perhaps the whole serves a
useful purpose in identifying those who can't keep things in
proportion!

It's a bit like calling the driving car on a Pendolino a "locomotive",
or a light engine a "train". Different inaccuracies annoy different
people.

I must admit that neither of those inaccuracies really bother me
either!

As I said, I do write and speak the codes properly myself, which can
throw people somewhat. But I also use 8-digit numbers from my
landline, so it all makes sense to me! (Less so I suppose to those who
only use mobiles.)

In message
Bruce wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 02:55:10 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

England does of course exist legally - though there are a number of
areas where a reference to England is actually an abbreviated
reference to England *and* Wales (e.g. reference to contracts being
enforced according to "English law" in "English courts"). In the past
one could have said that constitutionally Wales was basically part of
England, but with devolution this description would be less apt.


Wales was England's first colony.


Polson displaying his ignorance again.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:57:33 +0100 someone who may be "Peter Masson"
wrote this:-

The Royal Mail give seven mistakes which can make a
postal address incorrect, of which one is 'Do not put the Post town in lower
case.'

Yet things where this "mistake" has been made get through, the
majority of postal items I see.

Do not punctuate

Nothing wrong with that.

Do not use the words 'near' or 'by' (I suppose you have to if you are
sending something to Stoke by Clare or Stoke-by-Nayland)

Ditto.

Do not leave the Postcode incomplete

So they don't want people to be helpful by supplying as much
information as they have. No wonder they are in trouble.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On 19 July, 16:46, David Hansen
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:57:33 +0100 someone who may be "Peter Masson"
wrote this:-

The Royal Mail give seven mistakes which can make a
postal address incorrect, of which one is 'Do not put the Post town in lower
case.'

Yet things where this "mistake" has been made get through, the
majority of postal items I see.

Do not punctuate

Nothing wrong with that.

Do not use the words 'near' or 'by' (I suppose you have to if you are
sending something to Stoke by Clare or Stoke-by-Nayland)

Ditto.

Do not leave the Postcode incomplete

So they don't want people to be helpful by supplying as much
information as they have. No wonder they are in trouble.

While I always address things correctly*, post town in capitals etc, I
do think that their rules are a bit Royal Mailcentric. For example,
unless the advice has changed, the postcode always has to be last, on
a line of its own, even if addressed from overseas.

That may help it find the right place once it gets to the UK, but
doesn't really help the post office of the country where you post it
know which country to send it to.


*And I'm about the only person I know who ever does.

Peter Masson wrote:


"David Hansen" wrote

An example of a correct (fictional) address is

TFR
12 Main Street
Edinburgh
EH0 0EH

Incorrect (sorry). The Royal Mail give seven mistakes which can make a
postal address incorrect, of which one is 'Do not put the Post town in
lower case.'

The others a
Do not indent the address
Do not omit the name or building number
Do not punctuate

What about a letter to Westward Ho!?

Do not use the words 'near' or 'by' (I suppose you have to if you are
sending something to Stoke by Clare or Stoke-by-Nayland)

Or Kingston near Lewes.

Do not leave the Postcode incomplete
Do not underline or write anything beneath the Postcode.

Peter


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message , Peter Masson
writes
There is also a good practical reason for including the unnecessary
county in a postal address. Letters addressed to
CHISLEHURST
BR7 5xx
have not infrequently arrived late with a spurious Bristol postmark.
This does't seem to happen when they are addressed
CHISLEHURST Kent
BR7 5xx

There are also cases where two post towns in different parts of the
country share a name (Ashford, Richmond, etc). While the correct
postcode does differentiate, inclusion of the county name does reduce
the risk of misrouting.

Bearing in mind that the routing is done electronically by 'outbound
postcode' only, ie. the first portion, BR7 in your example, I fail to
see how adding the county can have any effect on this at all as it's not
even read by the system.

I've been involved with a cleansing exercise to Royal Mail preferred for
an organisation I'm involved with (which mainly involved removal of
counties) and have yet to be made aware of any problems with mail
routing in the past 2 years.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
In message , Peter Masson
writes
There is also a good practical reason for including the unnecessary county
in a postal address. Letters addressed to
CHISLEHURST
BR7 5xx
have not infrequently arrived late with a spurious Bristol postmark. This
does't seem to happen when they are addressed
CHISLEHURST Kent
BR7 5xx

There are also cases where two post towns in different parts of the
country share a name (Ashford, Richmond, etc). While the correct postcode
does differentiate, inclusion of the county name does reduce the risk of
misrouting.

Bearing in mind that the routing is done electronically by 'outbound
postcode' only, ie. the first portion, BR7 in your example, I fail to see
how adding the county can have any effect on this at all as it's not even
read by the system.

If the electronic reader fails to register the postcode (especially if the
address is handwritten) and the item is rejected for manual sorting, it is
only too easy for the Mk1 human eyeball to misread BR7 5xx as Bristol.

Peter

In message , Peter Masson
writes

There is also a good practical reason for including the unnecessary
county in a postal address. Letters addressed to
CHISLEHURST
BR7 5xx
have not infrequently arrived late with a spurious Bristol postmark.
This does't seem to happen when they are addressed
CHISLEHURST Kent
BR7 5xx

There are also cases where two post towns in different parts of the
country share a name (Ashford, Richmond, etc). While the correct
postcode does differentiate, inclusion of the county name does reduce
the risk of misrouting.

Bearing in mind that the routing is done electronically by 'outbound
postcode' only, ie. the first portion, BR7 in your example, I fail to
see how adding the county can have any effect on this at all as it's
not even read by the system.

If the electronic reader fails to register the postcode (especially if
the address is handwritten) and the item is rejected for manual
sorting, it is only too easy for the Mk1 human eyeball to misread BR7
5xx as Bristol.

The Mk1 eyeball can't differentiate between an S and an R?

It needs replacing with a less defective version then.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Recliner wrote:

I'm still forced to use Middlesex as part of my address by Web forms that
have a mandatory 'County' field.

Put "London" or "Greater London" and it will get through just as fast.

Mizter T wrote:

No - the official Royal Mail requirement to include postal counties
continued past the creation of Greater London. I'll try and find the
date when the requirement was dropped.

It was in 1996.

Most English postal counties *did* change in the local government
reorganisations of the 1960s & 1970s, with the following exceptions:

* London was not changed due to stretched finances in the 1960s.
* Middlesex continued to be used except for Potters Bar which was move to
Hertfordshire.
* Herefordshire and Worcestershire were kept separate.
* Humberside was split into North Humberside and South Humberside.
* Greater Manchester was not introduced in the 1970s because of potential
confusion with the "Manchester" postal town.

The E4 postcode is part of the London postal district. "Greater
London" has absolutely *no meaning* whatsoever in a postal address
sense - cast-iron fact.

Not totally. Since 1996 the county field has been optional and people have
been able to use what they like, and "Greater London" (or even just
"London") is a valid county entry.

The Church of England's Diocese of London only covers part of Greater
London (and includes at least one bit outside of Greater London,
Spelthorne),

That's because the Diocese is named after the City of London, which is the
bishop's seat, not the whole metropolis.