From: "Derek F" 
Newsgroups: uk.finance
Subject: Re: Passbooks .........
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:15:22 +0000 (UTC)


"David Marsh"  wrote in message
news:slrnc7nof9.43c.see-sig@pepper.viewport.lan...
> [Text interleaved/in conversation order: read to end for all comments]
> begin quote from Rob in uk.finance
>  about: Re: Passbooks .........
>
> > Part of the problem is with the system these days is the computer system
> > that companies use to get addresses. If the road only has numbers fine -
but
> > if it has numbers within houses or flats .....
>
> Arrgh! *Don't* start me on that.
> Whoever designed that utterly broken system should be flayed alive,
slowly.
>
> The concept of flats is _hardly_ an unusual case, yet that sh*tty system
> just can't handle it. I don't know where they get the address data from,
> but even on the rare occasions that it doesn't choke on the concept of a
> flat, the lookups it gives you to choose from rarely coincide with the
> numbers that the flats are actually known by.
>
> Royal Mail should sort it out once and for all by giving every flat an
> official number, making it known to the resident (and to Ye Keeper of Ye
> Databasse) and saying "You *will* use this flat number from now on, or
> your mail will get lost").
>
> As it is, they seem to have done the official number bit, but have
> utterly neglected to tell anybody who might be concerned (ie, the
> residents) about it. 
>
>
> -- 
> David Marsh,              |

To try to avoid confusion I always put my address as Flat 4, 36 High Street
(13 flats at the address) My council Tax bill comes to 36/4 but BT have me
in the phone book as 4/36 and the TV licensing office used to keep on
sending me letters asking why I did not have a licence  to several
variations of the address. As we never seem to have the same Delivery
Officer (Postman ) for more than a week at a time, I am never surprised when
mail comes days late or in the case of a magazine I subscribe to only
arrives one week in past three.
Derek.