In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred)
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience
caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and
manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
Khan’s Khoffers need your Khash! Khough up!
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time thing.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their opening remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen".
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov
2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last month.
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has* been updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is
blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you
paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his
car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I
think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than it was].
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their opening remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen".
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov
2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>> Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last month.
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has* been
updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is
blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you
paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his
car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I
think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it
breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than it was]. >>
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their opening
remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen".
That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only
registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local numberplate, which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the
format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were older Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been
moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral licensing offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords,
swapped the plates over and all was well.
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city and
wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration.
Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the boot.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
On 28 Nov 2023 at 16:27:48 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov
2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last month.
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>> Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>>>> correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time thing. >>>
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has* been
updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is
blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you
paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his
car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I
think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it
breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than it was]. >>>
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their opening >>> remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen".
That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only
registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local numberplate,
which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the
format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the
Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were older
Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been
moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral licensing
offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords,
swapped the plates over and all was well.
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city and
wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration.
Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the boot.
I believe they issue Q plates nowadays. And you can't change them to your own number. For just this reason.
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you
paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
On 28/11/2023 06:12 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 28 Nov 2023 at 16:27:48 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov
2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant >>>>>> one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>>>>> correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which >>>>>> the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time
thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last month. >>>>
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has* been >>>> updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is
blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you
paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random >>>> jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a kit-car >>>> and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his
car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I
think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it
breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than
it was].
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their
opening
remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen".
That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only
registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local numberplate, >>> which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the
format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the
Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were older
Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been
moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral licensing
offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords,
swapped the plates over and all was well.
[That was a pair of plates, of course.]
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city and
wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration.
Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the boot.
I believe they issue Q plates nowadays. And you can't change them to
your own
number. For just this reason.
Since then, I understand, re-registration applications for vehicles from British jurisdictions not within the current UK registration system (eg,
NI, IoM, Channel Islands, Gibraltar) have to be given a mainland mark
which "tells" the police the correct year of first registration. Under
that scheme, my Cortina would have been given an "N" suffix rather then
an "R".
"Q" plates, IIRC, are for vehicles of indeterminate age (for whatever
reason and there are several possible) or vehicles re-constructed from
parts of indeterminate age.
On 29/11/2023 11:25, JNugent wrote:
On 28/11/2023 06:12 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 28 Nov 2023 at 16:27:48 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov >>>>> 2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ
compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting >>>>>>> the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which >>>>>>> the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time
thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last
month.
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has*
been
updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is
blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you >>>>> paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different random >>>>> jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a
kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his >>>>> car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I >>>>> think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it >>>>> breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than
it was].
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their
opening
remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen". >>>>
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only
registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local
numberplate,
which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the
format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the
Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were older >>>> Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been
moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral licensing >>>> offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords,
swapped the plates over and all was well.
[That was a pair of plates, of course.]
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city andI believe they issue Q plates nowadays. And you can't change them to
wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration.
Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the boot. >>>
your own
number. For just this reason.
Since then, I understand, re-registration applications for vehicles
from British jurisdictions not within the current UK registration
system (eg, NI, IoM, Channel Islands, Gibraltar) have to be given a
mainland mark which "tells" the police the correct year of first
registration. Under that scheme, my Cortina would have been given an
"N" suffix rather then an "R".
Memory suggests that was in response to a large number of British make
cars being re-imported from Australia, where dry air had kept any from rusting, and being passed off as younger vehicles.
"Q" plates, IIRC, are for vehicles of indeterminate age (for whatever
reason and there are several possible) or vehicles re-constructed from
parts of indeterminate age.
On 29/11/2023 12:21 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 29/11/2023 11:25, JNugent wrote:
On 28/11/2023 06:12 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 28 Nov 2023 at 16:27:48 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov >>>>>> 2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ
compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today,
quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which >>>>>>>> the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time >>>>>>> thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last
month.
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless *has* >>>>>> been
updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is >>>>>> blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you >>>>>> paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your
numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different
random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a
kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when his >>>>>> car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I >>>>>> think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time, despite it >>>>>> breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger than >>>>>> it was].
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were >>>>>> curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their
opening
remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever seen". >>>>>
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only
registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local
numberplate,
which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the
format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the >>>>> Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were
older
Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been
moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral
licensing
offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords, >>>>> swapped the plates over and all was well.
[That was a pair of plates, of course.]
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city and >>>>> wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration.
Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the
boot.
I believe they issue Q plates nowadays. And you can't change them to
your own
number. For just this reason.
Since then, I understand, re-registration applications for vehicles
from British jurisdictions not within the current UK registration
system (eg, NI, IoM, Channel Islands, Gibraltar) have to be given a
mainland mark which "tells" the police the correct year of first
registration. Under that scheme, my Cortina would have been given an
"N" suffix rather then an "R".
Memory suggests that was in response to a large number of British make
cars being re-imported from Australia, where dry air had kept any from
rusting, and being passed off as younger vehicles.
Are there a lot of those?
I remember a dealer who used to get batches of ex-CI vehicles every
summer. They used to sell out quickly.
"Q" plates, IIRC, are for vehicles of indeterminate age (for whatever
reason and there are several possible) or vehicles re-constructed
from parts of indeterminate age.
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
On 29/11/2023 17:44, JNugent wrote:
On 29/11/2023 12:21 pm, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 29/11/2023 11:25, JNugent wrote:
On 28/11/2023 06:12 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 28 Nov 2023 at 16:27:48 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2023 01:04 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <uk4ife$8jdt$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:21:17 on Tue, 28 Nov >>>>>>> 2023, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 10:54, Roland Perry wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ
compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today,
quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from >>>>>>>>> which
the numberplate was transferred)
Ah!, there is the prime suspect, presumably it is an update time >>>>>>>> thing.
They managed to update their "Is my car compliant" website, last >>>>>>> month.
But apparently not their PN-issuing site, which nevertheless
*has* been
updated to describe the correct make/model - on the PCN - which is >>>>>>> blatantly compliant.
Why would you transfer a numberplate?
It's a personal plate I've had since about 1985. Back then, when you >>>>>>> paid for petrol by credit card, you had to tell the cashier your >>>>>>> numberplate, and I liked one which didn't change to a different
random
jumble of numbers and letters every few years.
Reminds me of a story I've told before: A friend was building a
kit-car
and as a runabout had a vehicle with an undated plate. Which when >>>>>>> his
car was finished he transferred [I then bought his runabout, which I >>>>>>> think then got an "A" plate, which was policy at the time,
despite it
breaking their own rule about making a vehicle appear younger
than it was].
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were >>>>>>> curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their >>>>>>> opening
remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've ever
seen".
That reminds me of how, in 1977, I bought a 1975 Cortina 1.6L,
registered in Narn Iron as GIJ 688.
I went down to the Royal Liver Buildings straightaway and not only >>>>>> registered the car in my name, but also applied for a local
numberplate,
which they had no difficulty in issuing on the spot. It was in the >>>>>> format XYZ nnnR, where YZ was one of the various two letter codes the >>>>>> Liverpool branch of DVLA had at their disposal. Some of them were
older
Liverpool City codes (KA, KB, KC, KD, KF, LV) and a number had been >>>>>> moved in from the old Bootle, Southport, St Helens and Wirral
licensing
offices (and maybe others). I got a numberplate made up at Halfords, >>>>>> swapped the plates over and all was well.
[That was a pair of plates, of course.]
But a few nights later, Merseyside Police stopped me in the city and >>>>>> wanted to know how a Mk III Cortina could have a 1977 registration. >>>>>> Luckily, I still had all the paperwork and the old plates, in the
boot.
I believe they issue Q plates nowadays. And you can't change them
to your own
number. For just this reason.
Since then, I understand, re-registration applications for vehicles
from British jurisdictions not within the current UK registration
system (eg, NI, IoM, Channel Islands, Gibraltar) have to be given a
mainland mark which "tells" the police the correct year of first
registration. Under that scheme, my Cortina would have been given an
"N" suffix rather then an "R".
Memory suggests that was in response to a large number of British
make cars being re-imported from Australia, where dry air had kept
any from rusting, and being passed off as younger vehicles.
Are there a lot of those?
IIRC, they were coming over by the shipload.
I remember a dealer who used to get batches of ex-CI vehicles every
summer. They used to sell out quickly.
For the same reason. People could get a car that, from the registration, looked new to others but at second hand prices.
"Q" plates, IIRC, are for vehicles of indeterminate age (for
whatever reason and there are several possible) or vehicles
re-constructed from parts of indeterminate age.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience
caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and
manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate.
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, …..).
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed things cost the deal.
On 28/11/2023 13:04, Roland Perry wrote:
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their
opening remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've
ever seen".
I think that is an odd quirk of the system, whereby they like to have
at least a minor part of the construction which bears some relationship
with a common vehicle - easer it seems if you state that for example,
"I used a Morris gearbox".
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
Oh, the perils of having a vanity plate!
In message <uk4qm0$234t1$1@solani.org>, at 13:40:47 on Tue, 28 Nov 2023,
Les. Hayward <les@nospam.invalid> remarked:
On 28/11/2023 13:04, Roland Perry wrote:
A couple of weeks later, he was pulled over by the police who were
curious what the kit-car was, looked it up on the PCN, and their
opening remark was "that's the strangest looking Land Rover we've
ever seen".
I think that is an odd quirk of the system, whereby they like to have
at least a minor part of the construction which bears some
relationship with a common vehicle - easer it seems if you state that
for example, "I used a Morris gearbox".
No, nothing like that. There were no Land Rover parts in his kit car (it
was simply used to go collect the parts he did use). I forget where the bigger things came from, maybe Triumph Heralds?
Norman Wells remarked:
Oh, the perils of having a vanity plate!
If you'd read my previous postings (not a great strength of yours, we
all realise) it's not vanity, but memory.
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one.
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience
caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and
manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate.
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees,
…..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick
delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed
things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the car, and at any time.
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and
manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >>> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a >> very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it >> when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular
registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick
delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Between viewing the new car and collection took about 50 hrs. (Mid
Thurs to Sat afternoon.)
Roland Perry wrote:
Norman Wells remarked:
Oh, the perils of having a vanity plate!
If you'd read my previous postings (not a great strength of yours, we all realise)
it's not vanity, but memory.
Simples, just change your name by deed-poll to "JE71 LKC" or whatever.
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL
website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and
manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY
OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >>> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed
within a very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is
no excuse for it when any of us can see the make and model belonging
to a particular registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick
delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have
bought the car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Between viewing the new car and collection took about 50 hrs. (Mid
Thurs to Sat afternoon.)
On 1 Dec 2023 at 10:12:33 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL >>>>> website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and >>>>> manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY >>>>> OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >>>> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a >>> very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it
when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular
registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick >>>> delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have >>>bought the car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number >on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days >or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get >new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of >number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
Between viewing the new car and collection took about 50 hrs. (Mid
Thurs to Sat afternoon.)
[1] One or two depending whether you can reuse the original vanity number >plates or they have too many holes in the wrong places.
[2] Keep the old plates as you will almost certainly be able to use them when >you sell the new car after removing your vanity number ...
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number >on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days >or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get >new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of >number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
In message <kstuhaF3e5vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:31:55 on Fri, 1 Dec 2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number >> on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >> number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >> Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days
or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get
new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of
number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
But that doesn't solve the TfL database-lag, unless you choose a time to
do the transfer when you won't be driving in London for at least a
month.
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses.
My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed >>this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before
19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my >>address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be >>expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old
copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like everyone >else?
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >> However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >> from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
On 3 Dec 2023 at 07:39:06 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kstuhaF3e5vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:31:55 on Fri, 1 Dec
2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have >>>>>bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you >>>> need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the
vanity number on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original
if the car had one) number to display. You change the plates and
sell the car at your leisure. Then you buy the car with its existing >>>registration and, at your leisure, days or weeks later, you transfer
the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get new plates.[2] This >>>costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of number
plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
But that doesn't solve the TfL database-lag, unless you choose a time to
do the transfer when you won't be driving in London for at least a
month.
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address >for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >from a local council.
It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying
cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an >unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >> However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >> from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
On 03/12/2023 in message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net> Norman Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my
address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be
expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own
old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an option.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
It has never been issued with a number. Nor, in fact, does it have a street >name to apply the number to. (Except for a Cxxxx number which applies to any >minor road which no-one knows and isn't used by Royal Mail or the postcode >database). So it is: housename, hamlet name, post town name, postcode. Only >50% of ecommerce sites can parse the post code database correctly for this >address.
On 03/12/2023 10:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 03/12/2023 in message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net> Norman
Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and >>>>addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the >>>>council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a
version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my >>>>complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin >>>>purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected from
a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using
its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like >>>everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an
option.
There are also many people in well-numbered roads who think it reflects
their status to live in Rose Cottage rather than no 74, and insist on
that whatever problems it creates for others.
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >>> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >>> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >>> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >>> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
My own District Council for example styles its own premises as "The
Grange", and I've never seen a number quoted.
In message <kt36l3FgmanU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:21:07 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 10:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 03/12/2023 in message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net> Norman
Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the
council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a
version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my
complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin
purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected from >>>>> a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using
its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my local council >>>>> example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an
option.
There are also many people in well-numbered roads who think it reflects
their status to live in Rose Cottage rather than no 74, and insist on
that whatever problems it creates for others.
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which don't
display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from one last
week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a quarter of
houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the 'Blue'
house.
In message <kt2v8jFerqgU1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:14:59 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 07:39:06 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kstuhaF3e5vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:31:55 on Fri, 1 Dec >>> 2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have >>>>>> bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you >>>>> need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the
vanity number on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original
if the car had one) number to display. You change the plates and
sell the car at your leisure. Then you buy the car with its existing
registration and, at your leisure, days or weeks later, you transfer
the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get new plates.[2] This
costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of number
plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
But that doesn't solve the TfL database-lag, unless you choose a time to >>> do the transfer when you won't be driving in London for at least a
month.
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >> However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >> from a local council.
On the other hand I doubt they seek to fine your £270 every time a
courier attempts to deliver something with your preferred version of the address.
It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying
cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an
unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
There are two issues here, which are becoming conflated. One is the
delay which they admit of up to a month, the other is the fact that the notice they sent me had THE CORRECT VEHICLE MAKE AND MODEL (which was manufactured specifically to meet the relevant Euro-standard), thus the database *had* been updated, but not fully enough to prevent them
issuing the notice.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 13:23:42 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
My own District Council for example styles its own premises as "The
Grange", and I've never seen a number quoted.
High street shops generally have a number, but very few display it. It would be useful for finding a small shop on a long street.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 07:39:06 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kstuhaF3e5vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:31:55 on Fri, 1 Dec
2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you >>>> need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number
on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >>> number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >>> Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days
or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get
new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of >>> number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
But that doesn't solve the TfL database-lag, unless you choose a time to
do the transfer when you won't be driving in London for at least a
month.
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like >>>everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an option.
There are also many people in well-numbered roads who think it reflects
their status to live in Rose Cottage rather than no 74, and insist on that >whatever problems it creates for others.
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago
and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19 years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the
old version of my address for all admin purposes. This is clearly
incompetent, but only to be expected from a local council. It
seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying
cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
On 03/12/2023 03:03 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 13:23:42 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec >>> 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of
my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be
expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live
DVLA system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own
old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
My own District Council for example styles its own premises as "The
Grange", and I've never seen a number quoted.
High street shops generally have a number, but very few display it. It
would
be useful for finding a small shop on a long street.
Google maps on a smart-phone is your friend.
In message <kt3d2lFinocU1@mid.individual.net>, at 13:10:46 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
It has never been issued with a number. Nor, in fact, does it have a
street
name to apply the number to. (Except for a Cxxxx number which applies
to any
minor road which no-one knows and isn't used by Royal Mail or the
postcode
database). So it is: housename, hamlet name, post town name, postcode.
Only
50% of ecommerce sites can parse the post code database correctly for
this
address.
I have noticed that about half the ecommerce sites with "address
finders" return my correct address, and the other half an incorrect one.
It does sound like there are two vendors, one of whose product is more
based on reality than the other.
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my
address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be
expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own
old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 09:23:41 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >>> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >>> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >>> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >>> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
It has never been issued with a number. Nor, in fact, does it have a street name to apply the number to. (Except for a Cxxxx number which applies to any minor road which no-one knows and isn't used by Royal Mail or the postcode database). So it is: housename, hamlet name, post town name, postcode. Only 50% of ecommerce sites can parse the post code database correctly for this address.
In message <kt36l3FgmanU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:21:07 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 10:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 03/12/2023 in message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net> Norman
Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the >>>>> council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a
version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my
complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin >>>>> purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live
DVLA system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably
using its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my >>>>> local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an option.
There are also many people in well-numbered roads who think it
reflects their status to live in Rose Cottage rather than no 74, and
insist on that whatever problems it creates for others.
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which don't
display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from one last
week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a quarter of
houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the 'Blue' house.
On 1 Dec 2023 at 10:12:33 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL >>>>> website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and >>>>> manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY >>>>> OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >>>> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a >>> very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it
when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular
registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick >>>> delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days
or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address >for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which don't
display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from one last
week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a quarter of
houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the 'Blue' house.
On 03/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my
address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be
expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own
old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
Most of the houses in my road don't have numbers. I think a few at one
end do but, at an estimate, 80% don't.
The first house was probably built pre 1900, ours was built on vacant
land in the 80s (we recall seeing it being built). It is one of the last ones. Imagine the confusion if the houses were numbered.
I recall, as a youngster, our house number was changed when the council
built on a field. It caused confusion for months.
This would have been repeated countless times in our current road as the various plots were filled.
On 3 Dec 2023 09:14:59 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this. >> However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected >> from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
"The council" is not a monolithic entity. And the various address databases used by various parts of the council are not necessarily consistent, because some of those databases require the inclusion of objects that are not postal addresses.
Mark
On 01/12/2023 11:31, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 1 Dec 2023 at 10:12:33 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>>>>> correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which >>>>>> the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the >>>>>> 17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL >>>>>> website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who >>>>>> sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and >>>>>> manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY >>>>>> OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many
opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>>>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a >>>> very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it
when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular
registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick >>>>> delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>>>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number >> on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >> number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >> Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days
or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get
new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of
number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
You omitted "Invent a time machine first". For your approach to work,
I'd need to go back in time.
When I woke on Thursday, while I was hoping to buy a new car at some
point, I didn't remotely expect to do so (in terms of being able to even order it, let alone take delivery) for months.
Around midday, I learned there was one available in the local dealer.
They wanted to sell it by the Sat (the end of the month)- a buyer had cancelled. Had Senior Management's car not been in for its service
and/or she'd not asked if they had the model I wanted in stock, I'd have missed the deal.
It isn't the first time I've done a 'quick deal'- the car I traded,
while I'd been planning to buy one for a while, the actual purchase was
done within a week or so. Then, the dealer specifically said things
would be delayed if there was a vanity plate involved- he'd just had an
issue with one.
I've nothing against vanity plates. They just seem more trouble than I
want to deal with. If others want them, fine.
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name will
display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which don't
display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from one last
week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a quarter of
houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the
'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
In message <ukcbih$1qsoq$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:12:33 on Fri, 1 Dec
2023, Brian <invalid@invalid.com> remarked:
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the
correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which
the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the
17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL >>>>> website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who
sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and >>>>> manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY >>>>> OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate. >>>>
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many >>>> opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed
within a very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is
no excuse for it when any of us can see the make and model belonging
to a particular registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick >>>> delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have
bought the car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you
need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Between viewing the new car and collection took about 50 hrs. (Mid
Thurs to Sat afternoon.)
You can now transfer numberplates online in a matter of minutes,
although there is a delay while DVLA snail-mails you new V5's and
retention certificates. But despite their reputation for inefficiency,
in this particular instance it was all over in four days.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 18:46:44 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 01/12/2023 11:31, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 1 Dec 2023 at 10:12:33 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 30/11/2023 18:57, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2023 at 16:23:22 GMT, "Brian" <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In the first half of October I swapped my car for a ULEZ compliant one. >>>>>>>
Imagine my surprise, to receive a Penalty Notice today, quoting the >>>>>>> correct vehicle description (not for example the old one from which >>>>>>> the numberplate was transferred) for driving in Gunnersbury on the >>>>>>> 17th November. Complete with a thumbnail photo of my new car.
I had checked this weeks ago, but did it again just now, and the TfL >>>>>>> website confirms it's ULEZ complaint, as indeed had the dealer who >>>>>>> sold it to me.
I feel a call to The Daily Mail coming on.
What would be suitable compensation for the distress and inconvenience >>>>>>> caused? As a bare minimum the threatened penalty of £180.
They claim they want to see V5's, registration transfer documents and >>>>>>> manufacturer's specifications as proof it's compliant, BUT THEIR VERY >>>>>>> OWN WEBSITE CONFIRMS IT IS!!
This is one of several reasons I have never bought a custom number plate.
While I have no objection to people buying them, there seem to be too many
opportunities for things like this to happen ( warranties, parking fees, >>>>>> …..).
With the modern online systems the new number is correctly listed within a
very few days. Incompetence is never far away, but there is no excuse for it
when any of us can see the make and model belonging to a particular
registration on line.
Plus, as happened recently, I had the opportunity to buy and take quick >>>>>> delivery of a new car. Transferring a customer number would have delayed >>>>>> things cost the deal.
There is no problem transferring to a custom number after you have bought the
car, and at any time.
Doing that in the time I had would have been impossible. Remember- you >>>> need a number on the car you are selling/trading in.
Simple. Some days or weeks before you sell the car you put the vanity number
on hold with the DVLA who give you a new (the original if the car had one) >>> number to display. You change the plates and sell the car at your leisure. >>> Then you buy the car with its existing registration and, at your leisure, days
or weeks later, you transfer the on-hold vanity number to the new car and get
new plates.[2] This costs no more (barring the cost of one or two sets of >>> number plates[1]) than doing it simultaneously.
You omitted "Invent a time machine first". For your approach to work,
I'd need to go back in time.
When I woke on Thursday, while I was hoping to buy a new car at some
point, I didn't remotely expect to do so (in terms of being able to even
order it, let alone take delivery) for months.
Around midday, I learned there was one available in the local dealer.
They wanted to sell it by the Sat (the end of the month)- a buyer had
cancelled. Had Senior Management's car not been in for its service
and/or she'd not asked if they had the model I wanted in stock, I'd have
missed the deal.
It isn't the first time I've done a 'quick deal'- the car I traded,
while I'd been planning to buy one for a while, the actual purchase was
done within a week or so. Then, the dealer specifically said things
would be delayed if there was a vanity plate involved- he'd just had an
issue with one.
I've nothing against vanity plates. They just seem more trouble than I
want to deal with. If others want them, fine.
If you had one it would be no problem. If you are giving your car in part exchange it takes all of three minutes to change the registration number online and then you can tell the garage the current plates are wrong and what the number should be. And, as aforesaid, you need do nothing about the new car's number until after you have bought it.
As explained at length the application of the vanity plate is only a problem if you quite pointlessly demand the garage do it for you. Otherwise, it has precisely zero affect on the transaction.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 18:15:13 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 03/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec >>> 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my >>>>> address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be
expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA >>>>> system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own
old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
Most of the houses in my road don't have numbers. I think a few at one
end do but, at an estimate, 80% don't.
The first house was probably built pre 1900, ours was built on vacant
land in the 80s (we recall seeing it being built). It is one of the last
ones. Imagine the confusion if the houses were numbered.
I recall, as a youngster, our house number was changed when the council
built on a field. It caused confusion for months.
This would have been repeated countless times in our current road as the
various plots were filled.
Where plots are laid out, which may not be the case in your road, the council will usually issue plot numbers which are then attached to the houses as they are built.
For all the exceptions that people here are making out to be commonplace
or even actually the norm:
"Properties throughout the British mainland used only house names until
1765 when an act of Parliament decreed that all new properties must also
have a house number and street name for better identification of
properties and boundaries"
https://www.yoursigns.com/history-of-uk-house-names-street-numbers#:~:text=About%20House%20Numbers%20in%20the,in%20e.g.%2020%20Salisbury%20Avenue.
If I am not mistaken you can technically be fined by the council (at least in some places) for not displaying a number. A better law, and one less likely to
create whinges about jobsworths, is for the council to be compelled to write the missing number in red spray paint one metre high on the front wall.
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name
will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which
don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from
one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a >>quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the >>'Blue' house.
The thing about numbers, though, is that they follow a defined sequence
and you can, or should, be able to work out which house has a
particular number.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 14:11:10 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kt36l3FgmanU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:21:07 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 10:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 03/12/2023 in message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net> Norman
Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the >>>>>> council confirmed this. However, the council's website uses a
version of the list written before 19 years ago and, despite my
complaint, insists on the old version of my address for all admin >>>>>> purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected from >>>>>> a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA
system for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using >>>>>> its own old copy was an unfortunate design decision like my local council
example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
Many houses in rural areas don't have numbers so that's not an
option.
There are also many people in well-numbered roads who think it reflects
their status to live in Rose Cottage rather than no 74, and insist on
that whatever problems it creates for others.
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name will
display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which don't
display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from one last
week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a quarter of
houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five nearest
neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the 'Blue'
house.
If I am not mistaken you can technically be fined by the council (at least in >some places) for not displaying a number.
A better law, and one less likely to create whinges about jobsworths,
is for the council to be compelled to write the missing number in red
spray paint one metre high on the front wall.
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name
will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which
don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from
one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a >>quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the >>'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's not
on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 13:23:42 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written >>>>before 19 years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old >>>>version of my address for all admin purposes. This is clearly >>>>incompetent, but only to be expected from a local council. It
seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying >>>>cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an >>>>unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
My own District Council for example styles its own premises as "The
Grange", and I've never seen a number quoted.
High street shops generally have a number, but very few display it. It would >be useful for finding a small shop on a long street.
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name
will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which
don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from
one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a
quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are the
'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's not
on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row
of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old
pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
The last street I lived in there was a non-obvious gap with numbers
19-24 inclusive airbrushed out. (It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses people
who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the other).
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
I say "opposite $hospitality venue"
In message <kt3jl8FkicfU1@mid.individual.net>, at 15:03:04 on Sun, 3 Dec 2023, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 13:23:42 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3 Dec >>> 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19 years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old
version of my address for all admin purposes. This is clearly
incompetent, but only to be expected from a local council. It
seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system for identifying
cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy was an >>>>> unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number.
My own District Council for example styles its own premises as "The
Grange", and I've never seen a number quoted.
High street shops generally have a number, but very few display it. It
would
be useful for finding a small shop on a long street.
Or you have to onto Google and ask "What's the theoretical street number
of eg. Boots The Chemist (although they don't display it)" and then
start counting as best you can from there.
On 03/12/2023 22:39, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 18:15:13 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 03/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun, 3Most of the houses in my road don't have numbers. I think a few at one
Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written
before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my >>>>>> address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be >>>>>> expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA >>>>>> system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own >>>>>> old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their number. >>>
end do but, at an estimate, 80% don't.
The first house was probably built pre 1900, ours was built on vacant
land in the 80s (we recall seeing it being built). It is one of the last >>> ones. Imagine the confusion if the houses were numbered.
I recall, as a youngster, our house number was changed when the council
built on a field. It caused confusion for months.
This would have been repeated countless times in our current road as the >>> various plots were filled.
Where plots are laid out, which may not be the case in your road, the
council
will usually issue plot numbers which are then attached to the houses
as they
are built.
For all the exceptions that people here are making out to be commonplace
or even actually the norm:
"Properties throughout the British mainland used only house names until
1765 when an act of Parliament decreed that all new properties must also
have a house number and street name for better identification of
properties and boundaries"
https://www.yoursigns.com/history-of-uk-house-names-street-numbers#:~:text=About%20House%20Numbers%20in%20the,in%20e.g.%2020%20Salisbury%20Avenue.
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name
will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which
don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from
one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only a
quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are
the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's not
on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row
of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old
pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
The last street I lived in there was a non-obvious gap with numbers
19-24 inclusive airbrushed out. (It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses people
who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the other).
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
I say "opposite $hospitality venue"
Not everyone is, or can be, contacted in advance though. That's why Ionly the few conurbations sport any form of numbering. Most of us live
asked earlier about Amazon drivers for example.
I read most of the foregoing with some amusement, since here on Anglesey
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row
of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old
pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence?
The last street I lived in there was a non-obvious gap with numbers
19-24 inclusive airbrushed out. (It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses people
who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the other).
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
I say "opposite $hospitality venue"
Not everyone is, or can be, contacted in advance though. That's why I
asked earlier about Amazon drivers for example.
On 3 Dec 2023 at 21:24:15 GMT, "Mark Goodge" ><usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 09:14:59 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My >>> house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19 >>> years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system >>> for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy >>> was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
"The council" is not a monolithic entity. And the various address databases >> used by various parts of the council are not necessarily consistent, because >> some of those databases require the inclusion of objects that are not postal >> addresses.
I find that an inadequate justification.
On 3 Dec 2023 22:39:47 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 21:24:15 GMT, "Mark Goodge"
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 09:14:59 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
"The council" is not a monolithic entity. And the various address databases >>> used by various parts of the council are not necessarily consistent, because
some of those databases require the inclusion of objects that are not postal
addresses.
I find that an inadequate justification.
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
Mark
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 14:26:57 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row
of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old >>> pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence?
If it's part of the official name of the property, then it will appear in
the National Land and Property Gazetteer along with its geographical coordinates, enabling anyone with access to the NLPG or a product which contains it (such as OS AdddressBase or Royal Mail's Postcode Address File) to locate it with precision down to 1m. In fact, you can even look it up online yourself:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
The last street I lived in there was a non-obvious gap with numbers
19-24 inclusive airbrushed out. (It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses people >>> who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the other).
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
I say "opposite $hospitality venue"
Not everyone is, or can be, contacted in advance though. That's why I
asked earlier about Amazon drivers for example.
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every property they deliver to.
On 4 Dec 2023 at 17:51:38 GMT, "Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 22:39:47 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 21:24:15 GMT, "Mark Goodge"
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 09:14:59 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
"The council" is not a monolithic entity. And the various address databases
used by various parts of the council are not necessarily consistent, because
some of those databases require the inclusion of objects that are not postal
addresses.
I find that an inadequate justification.
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or >> is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which
version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
Mark
There version according to the council tax bill is the same as mine. The Royal
Mail version is the same as mine. However findmyaddress.co.uk and the councils
website use the 19 year old version. My conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that the council is not doing everything properly.
On 04/12/2023 18:54, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 17:51:38 GMT, "Mark Goodge"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-for-government/identifying-property-and-street-information
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 22:39:47 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 21:24:15 GMT, "Mark Goodge"
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 09:14:59 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names and addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version of my address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example.
"The council" is not a monolithic entity. And the various address databases
used by various parts of the council are not necessarily consistent, because
some of those databases require the inclusion of objects that are not postal
addresses.
I find that an inadequate justification.
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or >>> is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which >>> version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
Mark
There version according to the council tax bill is the same as mine. The Royal
Mail version is the same as mine. However findmyaddress.co.uk and the councils
website use the 19 year old version. My conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that >> the council is not doing everything properly.
Mandatory for Councils to use UPRN & UPSN now !
On 03/12/2023 22:49, Norman Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 22:39, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 18:15:13 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 03/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun,
3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
My council holds the definitive list of local house names andWouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
addresses. My
house name was slightly changed 19 years ago and the council
confirmed this.
However, the council's website uses a version of the list written >>>>>>> before 19
years ago and, despite my complaint, insists on the old version
of my
address
for all admin purposes. This is clearly incompetent, but only to be >>>>>>> expected
from a local council. It seems a shame TfL cannot use the live DVLA >>>>>>> system
for identifying cars, like everyone else. Presumably using its own >>>>>>> old copy
was an unfortunate design decision like my local council example. >>>>>>
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their
number.
Most of the houses in my road don't have numbers. I think a few at one >>>> end do but, at an estimate, 80% don't.
The first house was probably built pre 1900, ours was built on vacant
land in the 80s (we recall seeing it being built). It is one of the
last
ones. Imagine the confusion if the houses were numbered.
I recall, as a youngster, our house number was changed when the council >>>> built on a field. It caused confusion for months.
This would have been repeated countless times in our current road as
the
various plots were filled.
Where plots are laid out, which may not be the case in your road, the
council
will usually issue plot numbers which are then attached to the houses
as they
are built.
For all the exceptions that people here are making out to be
commonplace or even actually the norm:
"Properties throughout the British mainland used only house names
until 1765 when an act of Parliament decreed that all new properties
must also have a house number and street name for better
identification of properties and boundaries"
https://www.yoursigns.com/history-of-uk-house-names-street-numbers#:~:text=About%20House%20Numbers%20in%20the,in%20e.g.%2020%20Salisbury%20Avenue.
Which Act of Parliament please? I see some sites reference the Postage
Act of 1765 in support of the claim made above but I've just read it and there's nothing in there even remotely close.
Others mention the Street Naming and Numbering (England) Regulations
1999 but there's no such act on legislation.gov.uk.
I fear we may be in "legal tender" territory again here, (Ed: Please
$deity$, no!), where web-sites are making claims about legislation
without either quoting it, or even providing a cite.
I know of several streets, built well after 1765, where none of the
houses have numbers so the claim is clearly erroneous. For example
houses on The Circle in Mere (WA16 6QY) were all built well after 1765
but all houses are named only - there's not a number in sight.
Similarly, choosing at random a house name with which I am familiar,
plugging "Oakdene" into https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search gives a
whole list of properties with that name and not a house number in sight either.
Are you claiming all of those properties were built before 1765, the developers broke the uncited legislation, or could it be that the
legislation doesn't say what it is claimed to say, (assuming it even
exists)?
Regards
S.P.
On 03/12/2023 22:49, Norman Wells wrote:
On 03/12/2023 22:39, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 3 Dec 2023 at 18:15:13 GMT, "Brian" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
On 03/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt2votFf006U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:23:41 on Sun,
3 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 09:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
Wouldn't it be better all round if you just used its number, like
everyone else?
There are numerous buildings which are not referred to by their
number.
Most of the houses in my road don't have numbers. I think a few at one >>>> end do but, at an estimate, 80% don't.
For all the exceptions that people here are making out to be
commonplace or even actually the norm:
"Properties throughout the British mainland used only house names
until 1765 when an act of Parliament decreed that all new properties
must also have a house number and street name for better
identification of properties and boundaries"
https://www.yoursigns.com/history-of-uk-house-names-street-numbers#:~:text=About%20House%20Numbers%20in%20the,in%20e.g.%2020%20Salisbury%20Avenue.
Which Act of Parliament please? I see some sites reference the Postage
Act of 1765 in support of the claim made above but I've just read it and there's nothing in there even remotely close.
Others mention the Street Naming and Numbering (England) Regulations
1999 but there's no such act on legislation.gov.uk.
I fear we may be in "legal tender" territory again here, (Ed: Please
$deity$, no!), where web-sites are making claims about legislation
without either quoting it, or even providing a cite.
I know of several streets, built well after 1765, where none of the
houses have numbers so the claim is clearly erroneous. For example
houses on The Circle in Mere (WA16 6QY) were all built well after 1765
but all houses are named only - there's not a number in sight.
Similarly, choosing at random a house name with which I am familiar,
plugging "Oakdene" into https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search gives a
whole list of properties with that name and not a house number in sight either.
Are you claiming all of those properties were built before 1765, the developers broke the uncited legislation, or could it be that the
legislation doesn't say what it is claimed to say, (assuming it even
exists)?
Do you give your guide to Amazon drivers for example?
On 04/12/2023 17:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 14:26:57 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row >>>> of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old >>>> pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence?
If it's part of the official name of the property, then it will appear in
the National Land and Property Gazetteer along with its geographical
coordinates, enabling anyone with access to the NLPG or a product which
contains it (such as OS AdddressBase or Royal Mail's Postcode Address File) >> to locate it with precision down to 1m. In fact, you can even look it up
online yourself:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
It's all if, if, ifs though, when anyone considerate and trying to help
would just use the number of the house and the road with which everyone
is familiar, and be done with it.
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be
using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every
property they deliver to.
I doubt if the nice Lithuanian chap paid just 50p per delivery using his
own van does though. I think we owe it to him to help him out if we can
and not put unnecessary obstacles in his path. Don't you?
On 4 Dec 2023 at 21:16:13 GMT, "Robert" <robert@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 18:54, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 17:51:38 GMT, "Mark Goodge"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-for-government/identifying-property-and-street-information
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or
is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which >>>> version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
There version according to the council tax bill is the same as mine. The Royal
Mail version is the same as mine. However findmyaddress.co.uk and the councils
website use the 19 year old version. My conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that
the council is not doing everything properly.
Mandatory for Councils to use UPRN & UPSN now !
But it is still the councils job to decide and hence to change road names and >house names and numbers. There seem to be two examples in this thread where >the (?immutable) UPRN database has the original name/number/road but the >council and the Royal Mail postcode database have a new one. One to my >knowledge is nearly twenty years out of date.
Either the people who run the UPRN system needed to be delegated the task of >doing changes in road and house names and numbers, which would clearly be >inappropriate, or there should have been a way to store the original address >but poll councils and Royal Mail weekly or more often so the UPRN look up >could reflect the revised address.
On 03/12/2023 21:53, Norman Wells wrote:
Do you give your guide to Amazon drivers for example?
Wherever possible. It's only 3 words.
On 4 Dec 2023 22:12:42 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 21:16:13 GMT, "Robert" <robert@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 18:54, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 17:51:38 GMT, "Mark Goodge"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-for-government/identifying-property-and-street-information
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or
is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which >>>>> version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
There version according to the council tax bill is the same as mine. The Royal
Mail version is the same as mine. However findmyaddress.co.uk and the councils
website use the 19 year old version. My conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that
the council is not doing everything properly.
Mandatory for Councils to use UPRN & UPSN now !
But it is still the councils job to decide and hence to change road names and
house names and numbers. There seem to be two examples in this thread where >> the (?immutable) UPRN database has the original name/number/road but the
council and the Royal Mail postcode database have a new one. One to my
knowledge is nearly twenty years out of date.
The canonical, legal list of addresses is the NLPG. Royal Mail, however, having existed long before the NLPG, also has a pre-existing database of addresses which is not always the same as the NLPG. That doesn't make any real world difference, because the point of RM's database is to facilitate the delivery of post, and so long as it does that then it doesn't matter to them whether some other database has a different address on it. (This goes back to the whole postcode thing, but more generally: the sole purpose of a postal address is to deliver post. It has absolutely no other meaning).
Either the people who run the UPRN system needed to be delegated the task of >> doing changes in road and house names and numbers, which would clearly be
inappropriate, or there should have been a way to store the original address >> but poll councils and Royal Mail weekly or more often so the UPRN look up
could reflect the revised address.
Local authorities are responsible for the NLPG and issuing UPRNs. For new developments, or any changes to existing streets and properties, they set
the street name and the property names and numbers, and Royal Mail imports that data into its own system and allocates postcodes and other parts of a postal address, which are then exported back to the NLPG. So it's a two-way system which, theoretically, means that both sides stay in sync. But, for legacy addresses, it doesn't, always. And by "legacy" I mean properties
which existed prior to 2010 when the NLPG was formally mandated as the canonical database.
In particular, it used to be the case (but is no more) that Royal Mail would add or change a numbered property name on the request of the property owner, without consulting with the relevant local authority. Because if the
property has a number, then the name has no legal significance, but it may assist postal delivery to have a record of the name which is displayed on
the property. Again, this is because postal addresses exist solely to
deliver post, and therefore there is no overrriding need for them to be consistent with any other database of addresses.
What that means in your case, then is that, since you made the change 19 years ago, the change predated the current system so you do have a legacy address. The change you requested appears to have been made by Royal Mail, but not on the NLPG (which, in any case, didn't exist 19 years ago, at least not in its current form).
What you would need to do, therefore, is make a fresh request to your local authority to change the name they have recorded. Once that is complete, both the NLPG and Royal Mail will hold the same form of your property name and
the two will once again be consistent.
Mark
On 5 Dec 2023 at 13:43:14 GMT, "Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 22:12:42 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 21:16:13 GMT, "Robert" <robert@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 18:54, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 4 Dec 2023 at 17:51:38 GMT, "Mark Goodge"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-for-government/identifying-property-and-street-information
Does it appear differently in different places on the council's website, or
is it just that their version differs from yours? More pertinently, which
version is shown here:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
There version according to the council tax bill is the same as mine. The Royal
Mail version is the same as mine. However findmyaddress.co.uk and the councils
website use the 19 year old version. My conclusion, unsurprisingly, is that
the council is not doing everything properly.
Mandatory for Councils to use UPRN & UPSN now !
But it is still the councils job to decide and hence to change road names and
house names and numbers. There seem to be two examples in this thread where >>> the (?immutable) UPRN database has the original name/number/road but the >>> council and the Royal Mail postcode database have a new one. One to my
knowledge is nearly twenty years out of date.
The canonical, legal list of addresses is the NLPG. Royal Mail, however,
having existed long before the NLPG, also has a pre-existing database of
addresses which is not always the same as the NLPG. That doesn't make any
real world difference, because the point of RM's database is to facilitate >> the delivery of post, and so long as it does that then it doesn't matter to >> them whether some other database has a different address on it. (This goes >> back to the whole postcode thing, but more generally: the sole purpose of a >> postal address is to deliver post. It has absolutely no other meaning).
Either the people who run the UPRN system needed to be delegated the task of
doing changes in road and house names and numbers, which would clearly be >>> inappropriate, or there should have been a way to store the original address
but poll councils and Royal Mail weekly or more often so the UPRN look up >>> could reflect the revised address.
Local authorities are responsible for the NLPG and issuing UPRNs. For new
developments, or any changes to existing streets and properties, they set
the street name and the property names and numbers, and Royal Mail imports >> that data into its own system and allocates postcodes and other parts of a >> postal address, which are then exported back to the NLPG. So it's a two-way >> system which, theoretically, means that both sides stay in sync. But, for
legacy addresses, it doesn't, always. And by "legacy" I mean properties
which existed prior to 2010 when the NLPG was formally mandated as the
canonical database.
In particular, it used to be the case (but is no more) that Royal Mail would >> add or change a numbered property name on the request of the property owner, >> without consulting with the relevant local authority. Because if the
property has a number, then the name has no legal significance, but it may >> assist postal delivery to have a record of the name which is displayed on
the property. Again, this is because postal addresses exist solely to
deliver post, and therefore there is no overrriding need for them to be
consistent with any other database of addresses.
What that means in your case, then is that, since you made the change 19
years ago, the change predated the current system so you do have a legacy
address. The change you requested appears to have been made by Royal Mail, >> but not on the NLPG (which, in any case, didn't exist 19 years ago, at least >> not in its current form).
What you would need to do, therefore, is make a fresh request to your local >> authority to change the name they have recorded. Once that is complete, both >> the NLPG and Royal Mail will hold the same form of your property name and
the two will once again be consistent.
Mark
Nice idea, but the local authority made the change 19 years ago and passed it on to Royal Mail. I know that because the council told me so. Unfortunately, when the NLPG was set up they seem to have passed on to it an old address database which did not include the change.
FWIW, they also use the old database on their website. I wrote to the web customer service people about this a few years ago and they acknowledged my complaint but have done nothing about it.
If I have understood correctly, someone else on this thread had a similar problem.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 20:26:29 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 17:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 14:26:57 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:If it's part of the official name of the property, then it will appear in >>> the National Land and Property Gazetteer along with its geographical
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row >>>>> of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old >>>>> pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence? >>>
coordinates, enabling anyone with access to the NLPG or a product which
contains it (such as OS AdddressBase or Royal Mail's Postcode Address File) >>> to locate it with precision down to 1m. In fact, you can even look it up >>> online yourself:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
It's all if, if, ifs though, when anyone considerate and trying to help
would just use the number of the house and the road with which everyone
is familiar, and be done with it.
That still doesn't solve the problem of houses without numbers.
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be >>> using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every
property they deliver to.
I doubt if the nice Lithuanian chap paid just 50p per delivery using his
own van does though. I think we owe it to him to help him out if we can
and not put unnecessary obstacles in his path. Don't you?
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 20:26:29 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 04/12/2023 17:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 14:26:57 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:If it's part of the official name of the property, then it will appear in >>> the National Land and Property Gazetteer along with its geographical
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a row >>>>> of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a century old >>>>> pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence? >>>
coordinates, enabling anyone with access to the NLPG or a product which
contains it (such as OS AdddressBase or Royal Mail's Postcode Address File) >>> to locate it with precision down to 1m. In fact, you can even look it up >>> online yourself:
https://www.findmyaddress.co.uk/search
It's all if, if, ifs though, when anyone considerate and trying to help
would just use the number of the house and the road with which everyone
is familiar, and be done with it.
That still doesn't solve the problem of houses without numbers.
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be >>> using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every
property they deliver to.
I doubt if the nice Lithuanian chap paid just 50p per delivery using his
own van does though. I think we owe it to him to help him out if we can
and not put unnecessary obstacles in his path. Don't you?
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
Mark
Good, but I don't buy it that you tell all your deliverymen for example.
And I don't know that they all use that system anyway. If they don't, that's just another obstacle you've inconsiderately thrown in their way.
How and when do you tell Amazon delivery drivers?
(It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses people
who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the other).
On 05/12/2023 10:32, Norman Wells wrote:
On 05/12/2023 00:02, Simon Parker wrote:
On 03/12/2023 22:49, Norman Wells wrote:
For all the exceptions that people here are making out to be
commonplace or even actually the norm:
"Properties throughout the British mainland used only house names
until 1765 when an act of Parliament decreed that all new properties
must also have a house number and street name for better
identification of properties and boundaries"
https://www.yoursigns.com/history-of-uk-house-names-street-numbers#:~:text=About%20House%20Numbers%20in%20the,in%20e.g.%2020%20Salisbury%20Avenue.
Which Act of Parliament please? I see some sites reference the
Postage Act of 1765 in support of the claim made above but I've just
read it and there's nothing in there even remotely close.
Others mention the Street Naming and Numbering (England) Regulations
1999 but there's no such act on legislation.gov.uk.
Then it may be the Towns Improvement Clauses Act 1847, S64 of which is
headed 'Houses to be numbered and streets named', but who knows?
Anybody that looks that reference up will know.
Allow me:
<quote>
64. Houses to be numbered and streets named.
The commissioners shall from time to time cause the houses and buildings
in all or any of the streets to be marked with numbers as they think
fit, and shall cause to be put up or painted on a conspicuous part of
some house, building, or place, at or near each end, corner, or entrance
of every such street, the name by which such street is to be known; and
every person who destroys, pulls down, or defaces any such number or
name, or puts up any number or name different from the number or name
put up by the commissioners, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding
level 1 on the standard scale for every such offence.
<end quote>
So not that either.
Any further punts to offer?
I fear we may be in "legal tender" territory again here, (Ed: Please
$deity$, no!), where web-sites are making claims about legislation
without either quoting it, or even providing a cite.
Noooo! Heaven forfend! Shouldn't be allowed.
There's only one thing worse than a web-site making a claim about
legislation without having checked it, and that's when somebody then
goes on to quote that web-site as an authority.
I can only imagine how embarrassing that must be.
It would have been bizarre if it had just made it up.
The fact remains that it would be better all round if everyone just
used numbers, and not twee names that drive deliverymen and emergency
services to despair.
And which numbers would you like houses that haven't been issued with an authorised number to use? Should each householder display their
favourite number and use that? What if houses at the opposite ends of
the street both want to be number 1?
As for the emergency services finding people, they accept both
What3Words and grid references in addition to standard addresses.
Delivery drivers are typically using an app supplied by the organisation
for whom they're making deliveries. There is a whole world of options beyond Apple / Google map apps.
What we seem to have here is the all too common problem of you insisting
that the world changes to align with your view, rather than you
accepting that your view is mistaken and that you need to adjust your
view to accommodate the facts of the matter.
On 05/12/2023 13:20, Mark Goodge wrote:
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is >> using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
Nice idea, but the local authority made the change 19 years ago and passed it >on to Royal Mail. I know that because the council told me so. Unfortunately, >when the NLPG was set up they seem to have passed on to it an old address >database which did not include the change.
FWIW, they also use the old database on their website. I wrote to the web >customer service people about this a few years ago and they acknowledged my >complaint but have done nothing about it.
On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 21:37:13 +0000, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 05/12/2023 13:20, Mark Goodge wrote:
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers
are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
Seems pretty close to me. Why do you dismiss it so?
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that all new >properties must also have a house number and street name for better >identification of properties and boundaries"
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told.
Simon Parker wrote:
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765
"decreed that all new properties must also have a house number and
street name for better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be interested
to look at it.
On 06/12/2023 13:14, Norman Wells wrote:
On 06/12/2023 10:36, Simon Parker wrote:
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that all64. Houses to be numbered and streets named.
The commissioners shall from time to time cause the houses and
buildings in all or any of the streets to be marked with numbers as
they think fit, and shall cause to be put up or painted on a
conspicuous part of some house, building, or place, at or near each
end, corner, or entrance of every such street, the name by which such
street is to be known; and every person who destroys, pulls down, or
defaces any such number or name, or puts up any number or name
different from the number or name put up by the commissioners, shall
be liable to a penalty not exceeding level 1 on the standard scale
for every such offence.
<end quote>
new properties must also have a house number and street name for better identification of properties and boundaries"
The section quoted does no such thing, not even close. One only needs
to read and understand the first seven words to see this: "The
commissioners shall *from time to time*...". I've added some
highlighting to assist you.
For a man that has argued numerous times for a strict interpretation of
the word "sometimes" the phrase "from time to time" should need no explanation, but just in case you're having a (Ed: convenient!) lapse in memory and concentration, I will remind you that "from time to time" is
a synonym for "sometimes" and therefore the definition you insist ought
to be applied to "sometimes" must also apply to "from time to time".
In short, "The commissioners may *sometimes* cause the houses... to be marked" is clearly not the act of parliament which supports your claim.
And that's without needing to consider that this act is about 'marking' streets and houses, not merely 'assigning' numbers.
You "don't have a dog" in the fight on a topic you introduced as a sub-thread? *You* insisted that all houses have a number and anyone
using a "twee name" for their house rather than a number is doing so for reasons of vanity and pomposity. Not only do you have a dog in the
fight, but the fight was convened by you and you insisted it was fought.
However, I an cognisant of the fact that you are incapable of admitting
that you are ever wrong, so I will graciously accept that your statement
"I don't have a dog in this fight" is, in the Normanesque language, an admission that your statement was without foundation, was mistaken and
that you're withdrawing it.
The fact remains that it would be better all round if everyone just
used numbers, and not twee names that drive deliverymen and
emergency services to despair.
And which numbers would you like houses that haven't been issued with
an authorised number to use? Should each householder display their
favourite number and use that? What if houses at the opposite ends
of the street both want to be number 1?
It wouldn't be their choice but imposed on them, presumably by the
responsible local authority.
It may have escaped your attention but many local authorities are
currently running at a deficit of millions, some at tens of millions,
and others have essentially gone bankrupt.
Where, on their list of priorities, do you think a local authority
should place the issue of ensuring every house has a number rather than
a name? Should it be above or below ensuring the bins are emptied? Inspecting trees and ensuring they are safe, taking remedial action
where necessary? (I throw this one in as a friend recently had a significant amount of damage done to his car when a large branch fell
off one of the LA's trees (lots of "tree-lined" roads around here, and
some of the trees are quite large). Initially the LA tried to blame
him, (more accurately his wife, who was in charge of the vehicle at the
time and parked it under said tree), but saw sense during pre-action disclosure when they admitted they had extended the period between inspections to save money.) Inspecting, and where necessary repairing, potholes? Funding adult social care? Funding mental health services? Meeting their recycling obligations? Please do say which services you
would like your local authority to cut so that they can free up funding
for this most urgent of tasks of ensuring every house that currently has
only a name is issued with a number too.
As for the emergency services finding people, they accept both
What3Words and grid references in addition to standard addresses.
I bet, for very good reasons, they prefer proper addresses meaning
numbers and street names.
And what, pray tell, are you prepared to bet? With what consequence
when it is proven that you are wrong? Do tell.
Before answering, I assume you are aware that:
(a) there's a formal process for adding a name to a house that has been issued with a number?
(b) there's a formal process for changing the name of a house, (which is highly recommended by those in the know as the right name can make a
house significantly more desirable)?
Why do you find it so difficult to understand and accept that not all
houses have been issued with a number?
Similarly, there is an approved process for formally adding a name to
one's house if one so desires. Anybody that takes the time and trouble
(Ed: and expense - don't forget the expense!) to go through the process
of formally adding a name to their property has ever right to expect to
be able to use it in their address.
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name >>>>will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which >>>>don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from
one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only
a quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five >>>>nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are
the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's
not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a
row of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a
century old pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old >>houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence?
The last street I lived in there was a non-obvious gap with numbers
19-24 inclusive airbrushed out. (It was a cul-de-sac numbered
consecutively down one side and up the other, which also confuses
people who think streets have odd numbers one side and even ones the
But my guide for visitors describes the house. It's distinctive.
I say "opposite $hospitality venue"
Not everyone is, or can be, contacted in advance though. That's why I
asked earlier about Amazon drivers for example.
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is >using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers
are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be >using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every >property they deliver to.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Simon Parker wrote:
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765
The only acts from 1765 which I can see any reference to relate to
banknotes and stamps, only one of those is available online, vellum is not >very searchable ...
"decreed that all new properties must also have a house number and
street name for better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be interested
to look at it.
Here's the 1847 act
<https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/10-11/34/crossheading/naming-streets#section-64>
looking at it, as is usually the case, you see places where it has been >amended by later legislation, but the only reference I can see where it >amends or references an earlier one is from 1845.
Does this mean the commissioners must cause houses etc. must be numbered
in a manner they deem fit or they only need to be numbered if the commissioners think fit?
On 07/12/2023 in message <kte957Fp1voU3@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns
wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Simon Parker wrote:
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765
The only acts from 1765 which I can see any reference to relate to
banknotes and stamps, only one of those is available online, vellum is
not very searchable ...
"decreed that all new properties must also have a house number and
street name for better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be
interested to look at it.
Here's the 1847 act
<https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/10-11/34/crossheading/naming-streets#section-64>
looking at it, as is usually the case, you see places where it has
been amended by later legislation, but the only reference I can see
where it amends or references an earlier one is from 1845.
This is where the fun starts with English law, you don't know what it actually means until you've read the following legislation and case law!
For instance:
The Act opens:
"[1.]Extent of Act.
This Act shall extend only to such towns or districts in England or
Ireland as shall be comprised in any Act of Parliament hereafter to be
passed which shall declare that this Act shall be incorporated therewith;"
and states later:
"The expression “the special Act” used in this Act shall be construed to mean any Act which shall be hereafter passed for the improvement or regulation of any town or district, or of any class of towns or districts,"
and:
"If any house or building within the limits of the special Act"
We would, therefore, need to know what areas in what Acts this Act
extends to so we know whether a specific house should be numbered or not
in accordance with:
"64 Houses to be numbered and streets named.
The commissioners shall from time to time cause the houses and buildings
in all or any of the streets to be marked with numbers as they think fit,"
Does this mean the commissioners must cause houses etc. must be numbered
in a manner they deem fit or they only need to be numbered if the commissioners think fit?
In message <d9s1nidjsoir6g3tjdjie4frad29a6sis8@4ax.com>, at 22:14:57 on Wed, 6 Dec
2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >>to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >>only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >>driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
From memory his first delivery at around 8.am was to a point about 1mile away from me. He then did a complete tour of the area, up to 8
--
Roland Perry
In message <kt65thFagaqU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:26:57 on Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a name
will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses which
don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick something up from >>>>> one last week - it was a road on a council estate - and maybe only >>>>> a quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his five
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we are
the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's
not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's a
row of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a
century old pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr old
houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence?
You've forgotten the proposition that people with house names are more
likely to advertised than just numbers.
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>>scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >>>to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >>>only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>>are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >>>driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
That facility is certainly offered by at least one delivery company.
As described above, it was actually possible to track the driver's progress >on a map.
On 07/12/2023 19:17, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt65thFagaqU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:26:57 on Mon, 4
Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:You've forgotten the proposition that people with house names are
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3
Dec 2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked:
On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's >>>>row of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a >>>>century old pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a >>>>>>name will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses >>>>>>which don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick
something up from one last week - it was a road on a council >>>>>>estate - and maybe only a quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his >>>>>>nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we
the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's >>>>>not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through 12d... >>
old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary >>>name any householder could select, and need not advertise its
presence?
more likely to advertised than just numbers.
That hasn't been established, nor in my view is it obvious.
In any case, you'll only see the advertising if you're looking at it.
And if you don't know where it is in the first place, you won't be.
In message <ukti6j$1ebpb$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:49:48 on Thu, 7 Dec 2023, billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>>>scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>>location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needsThe Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav. >>>>
to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he
only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>>logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>>>are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the
driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
That facility is certainly offered by at least one delivery company.
As described above, it was actually possible to track the driver's progress >>on a map.
Just because one company offers its customers the ability to track THE VAN doesn't mean
all, or even most
Lithuanian drivers are given the tech to allow them to navigate to exactly outside each
delivery address.(a)
The driver needs to look at the outside of numerous houses, where
such house names are typically displayed, until he finds the one
which matches the delivery address. Exactly the same as they do
with numbers (except numbers are more likely to be missing).
In message <kteradF843U3@mid.individual.net>, at 21:21:17 on Thu, 7 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 07/12/2023 19:17, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kt65thFagaqU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:26:57 on Mon, 4
Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:more likely to advertised than just numbers.
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3
Dec 2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked: >>>>>> On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a
name will display it outside, whereas there are too many houses >>>>>>> which don't display a number. In fact I had to go pick
something up from one last week - it was a road on a council >>>>>>> estate - and maybe only a quarter of houses had a number.
The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his
nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we
the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but it's
not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a through
12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live there's
row of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far away are a
century old pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr
old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an arbitrary
name any householder could select, and need not advertise its presence? >>> You've forgotten the proposition that people with house names are
That hasn't been established, nor in my view is it obvious.
Clearly you don't subscribe to such local groups.
From mine today:
"Has anyone received an Amazon delivery of three parcels which
are not for them please? These are Christmas presents for my
grandchildren. Would have been delivered at 4.15pm should have
been delivered to $num $name Road $town. Many thanks."
reply:
"If it’s the same person who delivers on $road they could be
anywhere."
In any case, you'll only see the advertising if you're looking at it.
And if you don't know where it is in the first place, you won't be.
The driver needs to look at the outside of numerous houses, where
such house names are typically displayed, until he finds the one
which matches the delivery address. Exactly the same as they do
with numbers (except numbers are more likely to be missing).
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message news:EwNRkaMsXwclFAdK@perry.uk...
In message <ukti6j$1ebpb$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:49:48 on Thu, 7 Dec 2023, >> billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>>>> scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>>> location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needsThe Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav. >>>>>
to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he
only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>>> logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>>>> are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the
driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
That facility is certainly offered by at least one delivery company.
As described above, it was actually possible to track the driver's progress >>> on a map.
Just because one company offers its customers the ability to track THE VAN >> doesn't mean
all, or even most
I never claimed they all did. As in "at least one"
You claimed at least one firm did so, to which another poster whose attribution has been snipped, responded "You are overestimating the capability, vastly " when you never claimed that they all did
in the first place. Either
Lithuanian drivers are given the tech to allow them to navigate to exactly >> outside each
delivery address.(a)
I don't quite see how that relates to the customer's ability to track
the driver's progress as in (b)
RP "How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see
where the driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?"
As it would be quite possible to implement (a) while not implementing (b)
bb
Sainsbury Management at its best. No 453
The new auto-checkout software displays the following opening
message on the screen. SCAN AND PAY. In ORANGE. But you can't PAY
anything until you've first SCANNED something can you ? After which
a PAY option will appear on the screen bottom right.
So why doesn't the opening message simply say SCAN ?
In message <ukti6j$1ebpb$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:49:48 on Thu, 7 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>>> scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>> location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needsThe Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav. >>>>
to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he
only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>> logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>>> are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the
driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
That facility is certainly offered by at least one delivery company.
As described above, it was actually possible to track the driver's progress >> on a map.
Just because one company offers its customers the ability to track THE
VAN doesn't mean all, or even most, Lithuanian drivers are given the
tech to allow them to navigate to exactly outside each delivery address.
On 8 Dec 2023 at 12:38:22 GMT, ""billy bookcase"" <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message
news:EwNRkaMsXwclFAdK@perry.uk...
In message <ukti6j$1ebpb$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:49:48 on Thu, 7 Dec 2023, >>> billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both hisThe Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav. >>>>>>
scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>>>> location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs
to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he
only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>>>> logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers
are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the
driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
That facility is certainly offered by at least one delivery company.
As described above, it was actually possible to track the driver's progress
on a map.
Just because one company offers its customers the ability to track THE VAN >>> doesn't mean
all, or even most
I never claimed they all did. As in "at least one"
You claimed at least one firm did so, to which another poster whose
attribution has been snipped, responded "You are overestimating the
capability, vastly " when you never claimed that they all did
in the first place. Either
Lithuanian drivers are given the tech to allow them to navigate to exactly >>> outside each
delivery address.(a)
I don't quite see how that relates to the customer's ability to track
the driver's progress as in (b)
RP "How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see
where the driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?" >>
As it would be quite possible to implement (a) while not implementing (b)
bb
Sainsbury Management at its best. No 453
The new auto-checkout software displays the following opening
message on the screen. SCAN AND PAY. In ORANGE. But you can't PAY
anything until you've first SCANNED something can you ? After which
a PAY option will appear on the screen bottom right.
So why doesn't the opening message simply say SCAN ?
I am sure that a not-negligible group of users would suppose that all that they had to do was scan the items, and Sainsbury's would get the payment in one of these modern, mysterious technical ways.
On 06/12/2023 22:14, Mark Goodge wrote:
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his
scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery
location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >> to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >> only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the
logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers
are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >> driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
That precision must explain then why an Amazon delivery to me last week
was stated to have been handed to householder at a particular time when
I was in, but wasn't to me or any of my neighbours.
In message <qu3smi99t00bnskc2qm6bae1p0qervou4j@4ax.com>, at 17:48:58 on
Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be >>using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every >>property they deliver to.
And once again your expectations are blown to smithereens.
In message <d9s1nidjsoir6g3tjdjie4frad29a6sis8@4ax.com>, at 22:14:57 on
Wed, 6 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >>to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >>only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >>driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 20:18:25 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:27:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <qu3smi99t00bnskc2qm6bae1p0qervou4j@4ax.com>, at 17:48:58 on
Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to
be using an address database which includes precise coordinates for
every property they deliver to.
And once again your expectations are blown to smithereens.
Elsewhere in this thread I have posted a link to Amazon's website which
demonstrates clearly that they do have that capability.
The weakness in Amazon's system is, typically, the drivers, not their
navigation app. Not all of them are equally competant. But even the app
may sometimes get it wrong if it's relying in incorrectly loaded data.
My personal observation is the tracking is advanced when the order is
marked as "delivered". Then the "number of stops before you" goes down by
1.
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:27:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <qu3smi99t00bnskc2qm6bae1p0qervou4j@4ax.com>, at 17:48:58 on >>Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to
be using an address database which includes precise coordinates for
every property they deliver to.
And once again your expectations are blown to smithereens.
Elsewhere in this thread I have posted a link to Amazon's website which demonstrates clearly that they do have that capability.
The weakness in Amazon's system is, typically, the drivers, not their navigation app. Not all of them are equally competant. But even the app
may sometimes get it wrong if it's relying in incorrectly loaded data.
On 08/12/2023 12:15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kteradF843U3@mid.individual.net>, at 21:21:17 on Thu, 7
Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 07/12/2023 19:17, Roland Perry wrote:Clearly you don't subscribe to such local groups.
In message <kt65thFagaqU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:26:57 on Mon,
4 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
On 04/12/2023 13:48, Roland Perry wrote:You've forgotten the proposition that people with house names are >>>>more likely to advertised than just numbers.
In message <ukissk$30u5h$8@dont-email.me>, at 21:44:52 on Sun, 3 >>>>>>Dec 2023, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> remarked: >>>>>>> On 03/12/2023 14:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In my experience it's vastly more likely that a house with a >>>>>>>>name will display it outside, whereas there are too many >>>>>>>>houses which don't display a number. In fact I had to go >>>>>>>>pick something up from one last week - it was a road on a >>>>>>>>council estate - and maybe only a quarter of houses had a number. >>>>>>>> The one I was picking up from didn't have a number, nor his >>>>>>>>nearest neighbours. He knew about this, because he'd said, we >>>>>>>>the 'Blue' house.
We always use the name on letters. We're technically 15, but >>>>>>>it's not on show. Nor are 13 or 17. Before 13 are 12 and 12a >>>>>>>through 12d...
Yes, that's another counting issue. In the street I live
there's row of modern fill-in homes numbered A-F, and not far >>>>>>century old pair of semis numbered "A" and "B" between two 200yr >>>>>>old houses.
And where would 'Rose Cottage' be, given that it's just an
arbitrary name any householder could select, and need not
advertise its presence?
That hasn't been established, nor in my view is it obvious.
From mine today:
"Has anyone received an Amazon delivery of three parcels which
are not for them please? These are Christmas presents for my
grandchildren. Would have been delivered at 4.15pm should have
been delivered to $num $name Road $town. Many thanks."
reply:
"If it’s the same person who delivers on $road they could be
anywhere."
In any case, you'll only see the advertising if you're looking atThe driver needs to look at the outside of numerous houses, where
it. And if you don't know where it is in the first place, you won't be.
such house names are typically displayed, until he finds the one
which matches the delivery address. Exactly the same as they do
with numbers (except numbers are more likely to be missing).
No, it's not the same at all. Numbers are sequential, and moreover d >educible if some are missing.
Names are not.
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:30:41 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <d9s1nidjsoir6g3tjdjie4frad29a6sis8@4ax.com>, at 22:14:57 on >>Wed, 6 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
The Lithuanian chap making the deliveries for 50p a parcel in his >>>>>own van is
using an app which tells him exactly where to go.
From the postcode, the number and the street, according to his satnav.
No, the app tells him precisely where to go. That is, the app is both his >>>scheduler and his satnav, and takes him sequentially from one delivery >>>location to the next, each identified by precise coordinates. He never needs >>>to look up any address. He just goes exactly where he is told. That's why he >>>only gets paid 50p per delivery, because all of the expenditure by the >>>logistics company goes into building that app which the freelance drivers >>>are then required to use.
How do you think the online tracking system that allows you to see where the >>>driver is, and how many stops he has to make before you, works?
You are overestimating the capability, vastly.
I'm not estimating from observation. I'm explaining from acquired knowledge. >But, if you're prefer to read it from a different source, have a look at >Amazon's recruitment website for self-employed drivers:
https://flex.amazon.co.uk/
In particular, here are a couple of excerpts from various parts of that >website. From the "How it works" page:
[...]
Then, using the Amazon Flex app as guidance, navigate to each destination
and deliver parcels and smiles wherever you go.
And, from the FAQ:
How do I navigate from stop to stop while delivering?
Amazon Flex maps and navigation are developed specifically for the needs
of delivery drivers. This includes features such as alerts with details on
how to stay safe during emergencies, instructions for arrival to avoid
risky road crossings, highlighted building outlines to easily identify the
delivery location, and the ability to see the path to the next stop on the
map as you arrive at your current stop for easier parking and departures.
there's the added joy of roads which are numbered: 10,12,18,20... as
well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
In message <ukv34d$1o8gk$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:54 on Fri, 8 Dec 2023, billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message news:sAIb4rN7jwclFAbh@perry.uk...
The driver needs to look at the outside of numerous houses, where
such house names are typically displayed, until he finds the one
which matches the delivery address. Exactly the same as they do
with numbers (except numbers are more likely to be missing).
Except that in 99.9% of cases the missing number can inferred from
any numbers displayed on adjacent properties. As can the likely
location of a particular number on a long road,
Not as many as that. When I was searching for a place recently, there were no numbers
on any of the houses for several doors up and down the road.
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which are numbered:
10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last ten years.
I think you 'need to get out more'[tm]
In message <ktghnkFcavkU4@mid.individual.net>, at 12:49:56 on Fri, 8 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
(except numbers are more likely to be missing).
No, it's not the same at all. Numbers are sequential, and moreover d
educible if some are missing.
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which are numbered: 10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to
mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last ten years.
Names are not.
Houses with names almost always display the name, that's the whole
point.
Roland Perry wrote:
there's the added joy of roads which are numbered: 10,12,18,20... as
well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I'm amazed that the word 'boustrophedon' hasn't put in a appearance yet.
In message <ktghnkFcavkU4@mid.individual.net>, at 12:49:56 on Fri, 8 Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
No, it's not the same at all. Numbers are sequential, and moreover
deducible if some are missing.
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which are numbered: 10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to
mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last ten years.
Names are not.
Houses with names almost always display the name, that's the whole point.
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 19:27:47 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <qu3smi99t00bnskc2qm6bae1p0qervou4j@4ax.com>, at 17:48:58 on >>Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
I would expect a very large and well-funded company such as Amazon to be >>>using an address database which includes precise coordinates for every >>>property they deliver to.
And once again your expectations are blown to smithereens.
Elsewhere in this thread I have posted a link to Amazon's website which >demonstrates clearly
that they do have that capability.
The weakness in Amazon's system is, typically, the drivers, not their >navigation app. Not all of them are equally competant. But even the app may >sometimes get it wrong if it's relying in incorrectly loaded data.
Mark
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message >news:h1VIl8VDrDflFAxF@perry.uk...
In message <ukv34d$1o8gk$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:44:54 on Fri, 8 Dec
2023, billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message >>>news:sAIb4rN7jwclFAbh@perry.uk...
The driver needs to look at the outside of numerous houses, where
such house names are typically displayed, until he finds the one
which matches the delivery address. Exactly the same as they do
with numbers (except numbers are more likely to be missing).
Except that in 99.9% of cases the missing number can inferred from
any numbers displayed on adjacent properties. As can the likely
location of a particular number on a long road,
Not as many as that. When I was searching for a place recently, there
were no numbers on any of the houses for several doors up and down
the road.
IOW you needed to use the fingers on *both* hands
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which
are numbered:
10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to mention
10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last
ten years.
And now you've moved to a street where the houses have fancy names
as well.
I think you 'need to get out more'[tm]
That's the thing. When I go out for walks I sometimes forget to bring my
"I Spy Street Numbering Schemes" and notebook with me.
On 15 Dec 2023 at 11:38:26 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <ktghnkFcavkU4@mid.individual.net>, at 12:49:56 on Fri, 8 Dec
2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
snip
(except numbers are more likely to be missing).
No, it's not the same at all. Numbers are sequential, and moreover d
educible if some are missing.
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which are
numbered: 10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16... not to
mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last ten
years.
Names are not.
Houses with names almost always display the name, that's the whole
point.
Maybe this is locality dependent. In the north midlands about 20% of farms >and 40% of small rural houses (ie ones not occupied by middle class incomers) >displayed names. If you'd lived there for 15 generations you were expected to >know.
On 15/12/2023 11:38, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <ktghnkFcavkU4@mid.individual.net>, at 12:49:56 on Fri, 8
Dec 2023, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
No, it's not the same at all. Numbers are sequential, and moreover >>>deducible if some are missing.
And when trying to interpolate, there's the added joy of roads which
are numbered: 10,12,18,20... as well as 10, 12, 12a 12b, 14, 16...
not to mention 10, 11, 12, 13...
I've lived in streets with *all* three of those schemes, in the last
ten years.
Names are not.
Houses with names almost always display the name, that's the whole
point.
As Mr Morecambe explained some time ago, they may be all the right
names, but not necessarily in the right order.
In message <lrs6ni97bch59suoie3ckucj2dtg2knpq9@4ax.com>, at 20:11:15 on
Fri, 8 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
I'm not estimating from observation. I'm explaining from acquired knowledge. >>But, if you're prefer to read it from a different source, have a look at >>Amazon's recruitment website for self-employed drivers:
https://flex.amazon.co.uk/
In particular, here are a couple of excerpts from various parts of that >>website. From the "How it works" page:
[...]
Then, using the Amazon Flex app as guidance, navigate to each destination >> and deliver parcels and smiles wherever you go.
And, from the FAQ:
How do I navigate from stop to stop while delivering?
Amazon Flex maps and navigation are developed specifically for the needs
of delivery drivers. This includes features such as alerts with details on >> how to stay safe during emergencies, instructions for arrival to avoid
risky road crossings, highlighted building outlines to easily identify the >> delivery location, and the ability to see the path to the next stop on the >> map as you arrive at your current stop for easier parking and departures.
Marketing bullshit.
I've recounted how I saw last week an Amazon driver wandering around a >council estate in Leicestershire for a good ten minutes** vainly trying
to locate the delivery address; and the day before yesterday I got held
up because in Central London an Amazon delivery driver decided to stop
on a narrow Red Route [apparently allowed if you are a van driver with
"I'm parked in a stupid place" yellow flashers operating] and then
proceed to wander around looking for his delivery point.
Your anecdata does not trump professional knowledge, or the documentation >provided by the operators. I do not deny that there are Amazon drivers who >are incapable of properly using the information supplied to them, and others >who, rightly or wrongly, think they are better off using their personal >knowledge rather than following the system. And, also from my professional >experience, I do know that there are gaps in the data, and it isn't always >updated as quickly as it could be to take account of new developments or >changes to addresses (in particular, it often doesn't fully take account of >subdivided properties).
On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:30:10 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <lrs6ni97bch59suoie3ckucj2dtg2knpq9@4ax.com>, at 20:11:15 on >>Fri, 8 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
Marketing bullshit.
I'm not estimating from observation. I'm explaining from acquired knowledge. >>>But, if you're prefer to read it from a different source, have a look at >>>Amazon's recruitment website for self-employed drivers:
https://flex.amazon.co.uk/
In particular, here are a couple of excerpts from various parts of that >>>website. From the "How it works" page:
[...]
Then, using the Amazon Flex app as guidance, navigate to each destination >>> and deliver parcels and smiles wherever you go.
And, from the FAQ:
How do I navigate from stop to stop while delivering?
Amazon Flex maps and navigation are developed specifically for the needs >>> of delivery drivers. This includes features such as alerts with details on >>> how to stay safe during emergencies, instructions for arrival to avoid
risky road crossings, highlighted building outlines to easily identify the >>> delivery location, and the ability to see the path to the next stop on the >>> map as you arrive at your current stop for easier parking and departures. >>
I've recounted how I saw last week an Amazon driver wandering around a >>council estate in Leicestershire for a good ten minutes** vainly trying
to locate the delivery address; and the day before yesterday I got held
up because in Central London an Amazon delivery driver decided to stop
on a narrow Red Route [apparently allowed if you are a van driver with
"I'm parked in a stupid place" yellow flashers operating] and then
proceed to wander around looking for his delivery point.
Your anecdata does not trump professional knowledge, or the documentation >provided by the operators. I do not deny that there are Amazon drivers who >are incapable of properly using the information supplied to them, and others >who, rightly or wrongly, think they are better off using their personal >knowledge rather than following the system. And, also from my professional >experience, I do know that there are gaps in the data, and it isn't always >updated as quickly as it could be to take account of new developments or >changes to addresses (in particular, it often doesn't fully take account of >subdivided properties).
So there will always be cases where it doesn't work,
either as a result of driver error or faulty data, and therefore there will >always be anecdotal observations of instances where it does not work.
But, nonetheless, most of the time (probably more than 99% of the time) it >does work as designed, and I have accurately summarised how it's designed. >(At least, I think I have, although I'm obviously open to correction from >someone with more extensive inside knowledge than I have). The fact that >there are times when it doesn't work doesn't mean it never works.
In message <44urnids8tfqeo65to7q49vlfa9glaf26e@4ax.com>, at 19:30:39 on
Sat, 16 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
Your anecdata does not trump professional knowledge, or the documentation >>provided by the operators. I do not deny that there are Amazon drivers who >>are incapable of properly using the information supplied to them, and others >>who, rightly or wrongly, think they are better off using their personal >>knowledge rather than following the system. And, also from my professional >>experience, I do know that there are gaps in the data, and it isn't always >>updated as quickly as it could be to take account of new developments or >>changes to addresses (in particular, it often doesn't fully take account of >>subdivided properties).
In neither of the cases I saw would that have happened.
But, nonetheless, most of the time (probably more than 99% of the time) it >>does work as designed, and I have accurately summarised how it's designed. >>(At least, I think I have, although I'm obviously open to correction from >>someone with more extensive inside knowledge than I have). The fact that >>there are times when it doesn't work doesn't mean it never works.
Sure. But it doesn't work sufficiently often, that it's a significant
cause of friction (to people whose parcels are delivered to the wrong
place, and other road users whose passage is blocked by stupidly parked >delivery vans).
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to
park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make >themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking
the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
Some of the firms certainly have that system, as it least one of them found us
first go even though the centre of our postcode is a quarter of a mile away down a different road. But others don't - indicating penny-pinching, incompetence and/or Evri.
I have never, ever, not once, since I placed my very first Amazon
order, had it wrongly delivered to a different property. That's over 20
years as a customer and with deliveries to five different residential >addresses and three different commercial addresses.
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to
park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make >>themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking
the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
Some of the firms certainly have that system, as it least one of them found us >first go even though the centre of our postcode is a quarter of a mile away >down a different road. But others don't - indicating penny-pinching, >incompetence and/or Evri.
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on
Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked:
I have never, ever, not once, since I placed my very first Amazon
order, had it wrongly delivered to a different property. That's over
20 years as a customer and with deliveries to five different
residential addresses and three different commercial addresses.
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is constantly getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages addressed to 99
and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to
park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make
themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking
the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the
delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to
that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on
Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >>delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >>that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
it could be a driver not using the system properly, or a device
that's failing to get a precise GPS location.
On 21/12/2023 12:44 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on
Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked: >>> I have never, ever, not once, since I placed my very first Amazon
order, had it wrongly delivered to a different property. That's over
20 years as a customer and with deliveries to five different
residential addresses and three different commercial addresses.
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is constantly
getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages addressed to 99
and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to
park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make >>>> themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking
the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >>> delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >>> that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is constantly >getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages addressed to
99 and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:44:24 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on >>Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >>>delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >>>that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
I've never said that the software does tell the driver where to park,
so I'm not sure what I'm supposedly agreeing to here. It seems pretty
obvious to me that it can't effectively do that, because the software
doesn't know the local conditions.
I wouldn't expect the software to tell the driver not to
run a red light either. Using the public highway legally is the >responsibility of the driver. That's the bit they're paid to do.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again?
In message <FNRBrx1oMDhlFAmu@perry.uk>, at 12:44:24 on Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> remarked:
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is
constantly getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages
addressed to 99 and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
And this morning Amazon dumped two packages on their doorstep, didn't
ring the bell, and ran away. Packages for 99B.
I can add instructions to my Amazon account
I have also used a locker, and was told that was full so
they couldn't leave the package!
From memory, the time allowed for pick-up may be as much as threedays - or at least whatever it was it seemed over generous given
On 07/12/2023 12:04, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/12/2023 in message <ktdn39Fj28cU1@mid.individual.net> Simon Parker >>wrote:
Seems pretty close to me. Why do you dismiss it so?
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that all >>>new properties must also have a house number and street name for better >>>identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be interested
to look at it.
I do not believe the claimed legislation exists. I have access to
numerous legislative databases, some of which are subscription only, and
have drawn a blank on all fronts when searching for it using a variety of >keywords.
This seems to sum-up the situation perfectly:
https://xkcd.com/978/
Regards
S.P.
On 07/12/2023 12:04, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/12/2023 in message <ktdn39Fj28cU1@mid.individual.net> Simon Parker
wrote:
Seems pretty close to me. Why do you dismiss it so?
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that all
new properties must also have a house number and street name for
better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be interested
to look at it.
I do not believe the claimed legislation exists. I have access to
numerous legislative databases, some of which are subscription only, and
have drawn a blank on all fronts when searching for it using a variety
of keywords.
This seems to sum-up the situation perfectly:
https://xkcd.com/978/
Regards
S.P.
"Fredxx" <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote in message >news:um3vlh$1ie42$1@dont-email.me...
I can add instructions to my Amazon account
I have also used a locker, and was told that was full so
they couldn't leave the package!
Something which is occurring with increasing frequency; as presumably
the popularity of lockers has increased.
The actual locker units themselves are all of uniform size overall
comprising different sized lockers. So that apart from doubling the
capacity at each location assuming there was available space, they
would need to find extra nearby locations; which they have singularly
failed to do so far.
From memory, the time allowed for pick-up may be as much as three days
- or at least whatever it was it seemed over generous given users are
notified straight away. Although then of course Amazon would then be
lumbered with the problem of handling the uncollected items. And
presumably banning those users from future locker use would cost
Amazon too much business.
On 07/12/2023 12:04, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/12/2023 in message <ktdn39Fj28cU1@mid.individual.net> Simon
Parker wrote:
Seems pretty close to me. Why do you dismiss it so?
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that
all new properties must also have a house number and street name for >>>better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be
interested to look at it.
I do not believe the claimed legislation exists. I have access to
numerous legislative databases, some of which are subscription only,
and have drawn a blank on all fronts when searching for it using a
variety of keywords.
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where
they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
In message <um4hpo$1lfsv$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:09 on Fri, 22 Dec 2023, billy bookcase
<billy@anon.com> remarked:
From memory, the time allowed for pick-up may be as much as threedays - or at least whatever it was it seemed over generous given
users are notified straight away.
Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you
were expecting to pick it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again?
Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the middle
of the road stopping all the other traffic.
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes on
the kerb saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van drivers either.
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:47:23 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 21/12/2023 12:44 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on
Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked: >>>> I have never, ever, not once, since I placed my very first Amazon
order, had it wrongly delivered to a different property. That's over
20 years as a customer and with deliveries to five different
residential addresses and three different commercial addresses.
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is constantly
getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages addressed to 99 >>> and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to >>>>> park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make >>>>> themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking >>>>> the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >>>> delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >>>> that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting, they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally require parking either.
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be
a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally >>require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >travel.
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21 Dec 2023,
JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the middle of the road
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again? >>
stopping all the other traffic.
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles (temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes on the kerb >>
saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van drivers either.
...whatever that means!
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
middle of the road stopping all the other traffic.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again? >> Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles >(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes
on the kerb saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van
drivers either.
...whatever that means!
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles
(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
The difference surely, as it is between stopping and parking, is that in the >former case the driver is still behind the wheel of the vehicle and can
drive away immediately in the case of an emergency.
So the taxi driver could drive away immediately whereas somebody stood >outside of somebody's house delivering a parcel couldn't
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes
on the kerb saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van
drivers either.
...whatever that means!
What it means is lots of van drivers don't think "no loading/unloading" >applies to them, when in fact it's almost 100% aimed at them (not
drivers of private cars).
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message >news:5XWudYx36ohlFAQs@perry.uk...
In message <um4hpo$1lfsv$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:09 on Fri, 22 Dec >>2023, billy bookcase
<billy@anon.com> remarked:
days - or at least whatever it was it seemed over generous given
From memory, the time allowed for pick-up may be as much as three
users are notified straight away.
Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you
were expecting to pick it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
But if that's a realistic expectation - that a package may delivered
late
- then its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
whom this limited reasource is a very real convenience.
In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
would seem a far more equitable solution
I actually can't help wondering what it might be that you'd need
to pick up at the very minute on your way somewhere on holiday
that you either couldn't have ordered in good time weeks earlier
or that you couldn't order on your return.
In message <kumtevF77hdU1@mid.individual.net>, at 02:03:11 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be
a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally >>>require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kumtjtF77hdU2@mid.individual.net...
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21 Dec 2023,
JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the middle of the road
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again? >>>
stopping all the other traffic.
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles
(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
The difference surely, as it is between stopping and parking, is that in the >former case the driver is still behind the wheel of the vehicle and can
drive away immediately in the case of an emergency.
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where
they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
In message <kumfsnFpcq2U3@mid.individual.net>, at 22:11:34 on Fri, 22Spot on
Dec 2023, Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> remarked:
On 07/12/2023 12:04, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 07/12/2023 in message <ktdn39Fj28cU1@mid.individual.net> Simon
Parker wrote:
Seems pretty close to me. Why do you dismiss it so?
Your claim was that "an act of Parliament" from 1765 "decreed that
all new properties must also have a house number and street name
for better identification of properties and boundaries"
Has somebody actually identified the legislation? I would be
interested to look at it.
I do not believe the claimed legislation exists. I have access to
numerous legislative databases, some of which are subscription only,
and have drawn a blank on all fronts when searching for it using a
variety of keywords.
There is such legislation, but people tend to over-read it. It gave what
we mainly call today District Councils, powers to require houses to
display numbers, and people constructing new roads to get permission
what to name them. My District Council even has a part-time "Naming and Numbering Officer" (a 'team' of half a person).
https://www.eastcambs.gov.uk/housing/street-naming-numbering
See also the cites to legislation.
But each council has to formally adopt the powers, it's not a statutory
duty.
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where
they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel.
In message <um69mn$20rsg$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:36:22 on Sat, 23 Dec 2023, billy
bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message news:5XWudYx36ohlFAQs@perry.uk...
In message <um4hpo$1lfsv$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:42:09 on Fri, 22 Dec 2023, billy
bookcase
<billy@anon.com> remarked:
days - or at least whatever it was it seemed over generous given
From memory, the time allowed for pick-up may be as much as three
users are notified straight away.
Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you
were expecting to pick it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
But if that's a realistic expectation - that a package may delivered
late
No when you've paid extra for it to be delivered quicker, and they've confirmed that.
- then its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
whom this limited resource is a very real convenience.
That's Amazon's problem for delivering it to the locker later than
they said they would.
In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
would seem a far more equitable solution
And where's your nearest Amazon depot. Mine's in Peterborough an
hour's drive away.
I actually can't help wondering what it might be that you'd need
to pick up at the very minute on your way somewhere on holiday
that you either couldn't have ordered in good time weeks earlier
or that you couldn't order on your return.
In my case once it was business cards with Japanese translations
on the back, which I didn't realise I needed until days before leaving.
Or when I went to South Korea a rental phone which worked on their
non-GSM network. You wouldn't want the latter arriving weeks earlier,
because they charge by the day. And obviously in both cases, "when
you return" is hopeless.
In message <kumtjtF77hdU2@mid.individual.net>, at 02:05:49 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
middle of the road stopping all the other traffic.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again? >>> Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If I say "Take me to the Champagne Bar on the upper level of St Pancras Station", and his taxi won't fit in the lift?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles
(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes
on the kerb saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van
drivers either.
...whatever that means!
What it means is lots of van drivers don't think "no loading/unloading" applies to them, when in fact it's almost 100% aimed at them (not
drivers of private cars).
Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you were expecting to pick
it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 18:31:01 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
OK. I'll rephrase that. There ae no postal addresses to which it is
forbidden by law to travel.
Places which are within a secure compound (eg, an air force base, or
Downing Street) have a public-facing delivery point on the perimeter
that can be accessed in order to deliver post without needing to enter
the secure zone.
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 13:11:15 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kumtevF77hdU1@mid.individual.net>, at 02:03:11 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be >>>> a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally
require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel. There are addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel in a motor vehicle.
Red Routes are "no stopping" routes, which means you can't even make deliveries on them or pick up/set down passengers. If you want to do that, you need to find a different place to stop.
Most pedestrianised areas have an exemption for loading and/or access, at least part of the day.
Mark
In message <kumtevF77hdU1@mid.individual.net>, at 02:03:11 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to
be a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally
require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kumtjtF77hdU2@mid.individual.net...
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21 Dec 2023,
JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the middle of the road
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again? >>>
stopping all the other traffic.
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles
(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
The difference surely, as it is between stopping and parking, is that in the former case the driver is still behind the wheel of the vehicle and can
drive away immediately in the case of an emergency.
So the taxi driver could drive away immediately whereas somebody stood outside of somebody's house delivering a parcel couldn't
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes on the kerb
saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van drivers either.
...whatever that means!
Irony ! irony ! They've all..... something or other.
bb
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:47:23 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 21/12/2023 12:44 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <rgj5oitfoftnibbg1if4h3cqkvjtiq4rof@4ax.com>, at 11:28:23 on
Wed, 20 Dec 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> remarked: >>>> I have never, ever, not once, since I placed my very first Amazon
order, had it wrongly delivered to a different property. That's over
20 years as a customer and with deliveries to five different
residential addresses and three different commercial addresses.
I have a friend who lives at, let's say 99A <Street>. And is constantly
getting people wrongly ringing the doorbell for packages addressed to 99 >>> and 99B (their two neighbours).
They also report a steady stream of Royal Snail-Mail arriving through
their letterbox half an hour after the regular delivery, which they
presume is their public-spirited neighbours re-delivering it.
All three houses have prominent numbers displayed facing the street.
JOOI, would you expect the software you describe to advise drivers to >>>>> park on the pavement on narrow streets, or is that a decision they make >>>>> themselves. And if the choice is parking on the pavement, or blocking >>>>> the street, where else would the software suggest they parked?
That would be a decision made by the driver. The software identifies the >>>> delivery location. It's up to the driver how they get from the vehicle to >>>> that point, if they can't drive all the way there.
So you now, finally, agree the software doesn't tell the driver the
nearest legal place to park. That's a huge fail, if you ask me.
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting, they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally require parking either.
Mark
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 07:50:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where
they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
Letsby Avenue in Sheffield is classic citogensis; the name does not appear
in the canonical list of street names held in the National Street Gazetteer. But it has been repeated so often in so many different non-canonical sources that many mapping systems which allow user-generated content (including Google Maps) now include it.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel. There are addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel in a motor vehicle.
On Sat, 16 Dec 2023 19:30:39 +0000, I
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
Your anecdata does not trump professional knowledge, or the
documentation provided by the operators. I do not deny that there
are Amazon drivers who are incapable of properly using the
information supplied to them, and others who, rightly or wrongly,
think they are better off using their personal knowledge rather than >following the system. And, also from my professional experience, I
do know that there are gaps in the data, and it isn't always updated
as quickly as it could be to take account of new developments or
changes to addresses (in particular, it often doesn't fully take
account of subdivided properties).
For the sake of completeness, I should also mention the other common
failure mode (quite possibly the most common, although that's just speculation on my part), which is when the driver's phone fails to
get a precise GPS position and hence he doesn't really know precisely
where the destination is relative to his location.
Mark
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>> travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel. There are addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel
in a
motor vehicle.
Prohibited Places under S5, of the National Security Act 2023 are
certainly places that you are forbidden by law to travel to (without authorisation) either on foot or by car. I am sure that there are others.
5 Unauthorised entry etc to a prohibited place
(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)the person—
(i)accesses, enters, inspects or passes over or under a prohibited
place, or
(ii)causes an unmanned vehicle or device to access, enter, inspect or
pass over or under a prohibited place,
(b)that conduct is unauthorised, and
(c)the person knows, or having regard to other matters known to them
ought reasonably to know, that their conduct is unauthorised.
(2)A person’s conduct is unauthorised if the person—
(a)is not entitled to determine whether they may engage in the conduct, and (b)does not have consent to engage in the conduct from a person so
entitled.
Jeff
If it isn't officially "Letsby Avenue" in the National Street
Gazetteer, what do they say it is
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
Places which are within a secure compound (eg, an air force base, or
Downing Street) have a public-facing delivery point on the perimeter
that can be accessed in order to deliver post without needing to enter
the secure zone.
Indeed, which is why I found it interesting that "Room 235, Building
210" (amongst others) at RAF Mildenhall has its own specific entry in
the Postcode Address File, given that it seems rather unlikely that the >postman will be going inside the building, or even the base, to make the >delivery.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>> travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel. There are addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel in a >> motor vehicle.
Prohibited Places under S5, of the National Security Act 2023 are
certainly places that you are forbidden by law to travel to (without >authorisation) either on foot or by car. I am sure that there are others.
Proposition:
"Place" and "address" are not synonyms.
Discuss.
On 23/12/2023 14:49, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 07:50:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where >>> they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
Letsby Avenue in Sheffield is classic citogensis; the name does not appear >> in the canonical list of street names held in the National Street Gazetteer. >> But it has been repeated so often in so many different non-canonical sources >> that many mapping systems which allow user-generated content (including
Google Maps) now include it.
It's not on <http://www.streetmap.co.uk/>, but is on ><https://www.openstreetmap.org>.
Whether or not it's an urban legend I don't know, but a few links seem
to say that it was a suggestion by some wag in the constabulary, and >Sheffield council didn't receive any objections to it. If it isn't
officially "Letsby Avenue" in the National Street Gazetteer, what do
they say it is (<https://www.thensg.org.uk/> times out, as does ><http://www.nlpg.org.uk/>)?
This is one of the many reasons why postal addresses are not the same as geographic addresses. The coordinates of my home's postal address are
located within my property. But the coordinates of my office postal address at Basepoint were some 50 yards southeast of my office, and not within any part of the building that we were renting.
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
JNugent wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously
pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
It's what the council have called the city centre for decades.
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
On 26/12/2023 01:11 am, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
It's what the council have called the city centre for decades.
It might well be what certain people call it.
But a route on which vehicles are allowed is plainly not pedestrianised.
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to >>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have
access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
I don't think you'd find the word in the local authority's order which >changed the street's status.
On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 23:12:53 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to >>>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
"Pedestrianised" is the usual term for a street which formerly was open to all users, but is now restricted to predestrians other than with some
limited exemptions for vehicles.
It's often impractical to fully prohibit vehicles from a street where they have previously been permitted, because there are often premises that can only be accessed from that street for the purpose of deliveries. So limited exemptions (typically, deliveries before 10am or after 4pm) are common. That doesn't mean that, as far as people on foot are concerned, it's not a pedestrianised street.
I don't think you'd find the word in the local authority's order which
changed the street's status.
No, because it's not a legal term, it's a descriptive term.
But you'll
generally find it used in the minutes of the discussions leading to a decision to implement such an order, an in the press release announcing it. Here's a typical media report which uses the word, clearly quoting from a council press release which used it:
https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/18728652.longer-ban-cars-bikes-pedestrianised-worcester-streets/
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv1524F2c95U2@mid.individual.net...
On 26/12/2023 01:11 am, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
It's what the council have called the city centre for decades.
It might well be what certain people call it.
But a route on which vehicles are allowed is plainly not pedestrianised.
Yes it is.
Before it was "pedestrianised" "all vehicles" could use it at "all times
of the day.
After it was pedestrianised, only certain categories of vehicles were
allowed to use it, and certainly not primarily as a "through route" but
for "access only. Ambulances, fire engines obviously at all times plus
refuse collection, deliveries, usually at only certain times of the day.
Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
simply never provided for.
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
On 27/12/2023 11:35 am, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 23:12:53 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote: >>>>
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to >>>>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
"Pedestrianised" is the usual term for a street which formerly was open to >> all users, but is now restricted to predestrians other than with some
limited exemptions for vehicles.
The term is undoubtedly in common usage. But it has no legal meaning and
no obvious exclusive meaning in everyday parlance.
It's often impractical to fully prohibit vehicles from a street where they >> have previously been permitted, because there are often premises that can
only be accessed from that street for the purpose of deliveries. So limited >> exemptions (typically, deliveries before 10am or after 4pm) are common. That >> doesn't mean that, as far as people on foot are concerned, it's not a
pedestrianised street.
Yes, it does.
On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:31:40 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 27/12/2023 11:35 am, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 23:12:53 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to >>>>>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
"Pedestrianised" is the usual term for a street which formerly was open to >>> all users, but is now restricted to predestrians other than with some
limited exemptions for vehicles.
The term is undoubtedly in common usage. But it has no legal meaning and
no obvious exclusive meaning in everyday parlance.
Indeed not. It isn't necessary for a street to be exlusively for the use of pedestrians in order to be described as pedestrianised.
It's often impractical to fully prohibit vehicles from a street where they >>> have previously been permitted, because there are often premises that can >>> only be accessed from that street for the purpose of deliveries. So limited >>> exemptions (typically, deliveries before 10am or after 4pm) are common. That
doesn't mean that, as far as people on foot are concerned, it's not a
pedestrianised street.
Yes, it does.
You're arguing with common English usage here. You may not want to use the word in that sense, but nearly everybody else does.
On 27/12/2023 11:54 am, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv1524F2c95U2@mid.individual.net...
On 26/12/2023 01:11 am, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
It's what the council have called the city centre for decades.
It might well be what certain people call it.
But a route on which vehicles are allowed is plainly not pedestrianised.
Yes it is.
Before it was "pedestrianised" "all vehicles" could use it at "all times
of the day.
...And?
After it was pedestrianised, only certain categories of vehicles were
allowed to use it, and certainly not primarily as a "through route" but
for "access only. Ambulances, fire engines obviously at all times plus
refuse collection, deliveries, usually at only certain times of the day.
A pedestrianised street (some of them do exist) is a street wherein vehicles other than
a hand-drawn vehicle (eg, a trolley or a pram) are not permitted.
Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
simply never provided for.
We all know that.
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
On Sun, 24 Dec 2023 09:18:09 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:49, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 07:50:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>
You get the odd counter-example, where Letsby Avenue in Sheffield (where >>>> they built a new out-of-town police HQ) was probably guerilla tactics.
Letsby Avenue in Sheffield is classic citogensis; the name does not appear >>> in the canonical list of street names held in the National Street Gazetteer.
But it has been repeated so often in so many different non-canonical sources
that many mapping systems which allow user-generated content (including
Google Maps) now include it.
It's not on <http://www.streetmap.co.uk/>, but is on
<https://www.openstreetmap.org>.
That's because OpenStreetMap is user-generated, and a user has added it.
Strictly speaking, it shouldn't be there. This crops up every now and then
on the OSM-GB mailing list, and the consensus is generally to leave it in place because, even though it's unofficial, it has genuine local usage. But it's sill only ever one pedantic editor away from being deleted.
Whether or not it's an urban legend I don't know, but a few links seem
to say that it was a suggestion by some wag in the constabulary, and
Sheffield council didn't receive any objections to it. If it isn't
officially "Letsby Avenue" in the National Street Gazetteer, what do
they say it is (<https://www.thensg.org.uk/> times out, as does
<http://www.nlpg.org.uk/>)?
The canonical list of streets in the NSG can be found here:
https://www.findmystreet.co.uk/street-list
FindMyStreet is a public-facing version of the NSG (and similarly FindMyAddress is a public-facing version of the NLPG), maintained by
GeoPlace which is the company that has the contract to maintain the NSG and NLPG. So the data on those two websites is (apart from very recent allocations which haven't yet made their way onto the website yet) is the most official you will get.
But... the addresses in the NLPG are *administrative* addresses, not postal addresses. Mostly, they're the same. But they aren't necessarily the same. And even where they are the same, their geographic coordinates don't necessarily coincide.
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 27/12/2023 11:54 am, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 26/12/2023 01:11 am, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week.
So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
It's what the council have called the city centre for decades.
It might well be what certain people call it.
But a route on which vehicles are allowed is plainly not pedestrianised.
Yes it is.
Before it was "pedestrianised" "all vehicles" could use it at "all times >>> of the day.
...And?
After it was pedestrianised, only certain categories of vehicles were
allowed to use it, and certainly not primarily as a "through route" but
for "access only. Ambulances, fire engines obviously at all times plus
refuse collection, deliveries, usually at only certain times of the day.
A pedestrianised street (some of them do exist) is a street wherein vehicles other than
a hand-drawn vehicle (eg, a trolley or a pram) are not permitted.
Not even ambulances and fire engines ?
Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
simply never provided for.
We all know that.
So are you seriously suggesting, that as per your definition above,
all deliveries made to the large stores as can be found in such pedestrianised streets in historic city centres, are made by hand
drawn trolleys ?
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
If only.
Apparently such schemes offer more farcilities for cyclists.
So quite possibly for the unfortunate pedestrians who find themselves subjected to such schemes they are far from meaningless. Rather a
they're a massive source of inconvenience on a daily basis.
Not even ambulances and fire engines ?
The streets I'm thinking of have permanent barriers which do
not permit anything larger or wider than a hand-drawn vehicle
of a fairy-cycle to pass.
I am pointing out that a street which may be used, and is used,
by motor vehicles is not pedestrianised.
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
If only.
Apparently such schemes offer more farcilities for cyclists.
So quite possibly for the unfortunate pedestrians who find themselves
subjected to such schemes they are far from meaningless. Rather a
they're a massive source of inconvenience on a daily basis.
Indeed. Because they have not been "pedestrianised".
I had a look on Google Streetview, and it seems that at least one part
of "Letsby Avenue" is really part of Europa Link. If you look at ><https://www.instantstreetview.com/@53.396252,-1.400039,166.51h,-3.26p,2z,bVfK57_mMTuvurfWfLioTQ>
and zoom into the street name you can see that it's Europa View. That's
the road leaving the roundabout as shown on the minimap. Unfortunately,
there does seem to be any Streetview record of the long road (first left >after entering that "Letsby Avenue"/Europa Link) which is shown as
Letsby Avenue on OSM. I couldn't even see a street name plate at the
other end of the road.
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv5j52Fss6eU1@mid.individual.net...
snip
Not even ambulances and fire engines ?
The streets I'm thinking of have permanent barriers which do
not permit anything larger or wider than a hand-drawn vehicle
of a fairy-cycle to pass.
Can you provide any actual examples of such streets, which can
be scrutinised by the curious on Google Streetview for
instance ?
I am pointing out that a street which may be used, and is used,
by motor vehicles is not pedestrianised.
So how would you personally describe a street where access to vehicles
is restricted to certain hours ?
Surely not just an ordinary street ?
And who uses such streets during the hours when motor traffic is banned ?
Do they simply stand empty, totally deserted ?
They use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
If only.
Apparently such schemes offer more farcilities for cyclists.
So quite possibly for the unfortunate pedestrians who find themselves
subjected to such schemes they are far from meaningless. Rather a
they're a massive source of inconvenience on a daily basis.
Indeed. Because they have not been "pedestrianised".So that now rather than Mini Holland being a "meaningless term" as you claimed previously, you are now correcting a definition I suggested.
On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:20:03 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>Going further OT (although perhaps more on topic for this NG), is the
wrote:
I had a look on Google Streetview, and it seems that at least one part
of "Letsby Avenue" is really part of Europa Link. If you look at
<https://www.instantstreetview.com/@53.396252,-1.400039,166.51h,-3.26p,2z,bVfK57_mMTuvurfWfLioTQ>
and zoom into the street name you can see that it's Europa View. That's
the road leaving the roundabout as shown on the minimap. Unfortunately,
there does seem to be any Streetview record of the long road (first left
after entering that "Letsby Avenue"/Europa Link) which is shown as
Letsby Avenue on OSM. I couldn't even see a street name plate at the
other end of the road.
It's a private road. In the NSG, it's recorded as:
PRIVATE SERVICE ROAD ACCESSING UNITS A TO T1 EUROPA LINK, SHEFFIELD
https://www.findmystreet.co.uk/map?usrn=34410759
Given that it is a private road, its owners could, if they wanted, name it Letsby Avenue. Although that wouldn't necessarily get entered into the NSG.
On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 13:11:15 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kumtevF77hdU1@mid.individual.net>, at 02:03:11 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms >>>>are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to be >>>>a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally >>>>require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as >>>various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >travel. There are addresses to which it is forbidden by law to travel in a >motor vehicle.
Red Routes are "no stopping" routes, which means you can't even make >deliveries on them or pick up/set down passengers. If you want to do that, >you need to find a different place to stop.
Most pedestrianised areas have an exemption for loading and/or access, at >least part of the day.
On 2023-12-26, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
This is one of the many reasons why postal addresses are not the same as
geographic addresses. The coordinates of my home's postal address are
located within my property. But the coordinates of my office postal address >> at Basepoint were some 50 yards southeast of my office, and not within any >> part of the building that we were renting.
Indeed. I found this out once when I tried to navigate to a prison by
post code, and ended up at a Royal Mail sorting office instead. (Which
from the outside doesn't necessarily look much different!)
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
On 28/12/2023 09:06 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv5j52Fss6eU1@mid.individual.net...
snip
Not even ambulances and fire engines ?
The streets I'm thinking of have permanent barriers which do
not permit anything larger or wider than a hand-drawn vehicle
of a fairy-cycle to pass.
Can you provide any actual examples of such streets, which can
be scrutinised by the curious on Google Streetview for
instance ?
Possibly. It all depends on how many have been obliterated by local
councils. You could take a look at Guelph Place, L7 (which certainly
still > exists). There is, and never was, any facility for a car, van, lorry, dustcart or bus to be driven onto that thoroughfare. AAMOF, I
have an idea that in recent years, the council may even have closed
parts of it to pedestrian traffic. But in its heyday, it was fully pedestrianised. Even chav-cycles were banned because the street
was fully paved as a footway.
There used to be a lot more like that.
I am pointing out that a street which may be used, and is used,
by motor vehicles is not pedestrianised.
So how would you personally describe a street where access to vehicles
is restricted to certain hours ?
Not as "pedestrianised", because that would not describe the restriction.
"Restricted" seems more appropriate
Surely not just an ordinary street ?
Of course not.
And who uses such streets during the hours when motor traffic is banned ?
Do they simply stand empty, totally deserted ?
Why does that matter?
So that now rather than Mini Holland being a "meaningless term" as youThey use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
If only.
Apparently such schemes offer more farcilities for cyclists.
So quite possibly for the unfortunate pedestrians who find themselves
subjected to such schemes they are far from meaningless. Rather a
they're a massive source of inconvenience on a daily basis.
Indeed. Because they have not been "pedestrianised".
claimed previously, you are now correcting a definition I suggested.
"Mini Holland" has no obvious meaning and certainly no precise meaning.
I am sure - from repeated observation as well as from common sense - that
not every street in the Netherlands has the same traffic status.
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv6hncF4053U1@mid.individual.net...
On 28/12/2023 09:06 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv5j52Fss6eU1@mid.individual.net...
snip
Not even ambulances and fire engines ?
The streets I'm thinking of have permanent barriers which do
not permit anything larger or wider than a hand-drawn vehicle
of a fairy-cycle to pass.
Can you provide any actual examples of such streets, which can
be scrutinised by the curious on Google Streetview for
instance ?
Possibly. It all depends on how many have been obliterated by local
councils. You could take a look at Guelph Place, L7 (which certainly
still > exists). There is, and never was, any facility for a car, van,
lorry, dustcart or bus to be driven onto that thoroughfare. AAMOF, I
have an idea that in recent years, the council may even have closed
parts of it to pedestrian traffic. But in its heyday, it was fully
pedestrianised. Even chav-cycles were banned because the street
was fully paved as a footway.
If it never previously admitted vehicles then it cannot have been "pedestrianised".
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
"Ised" is the past participle or something of the verb that described
the changing process
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
A street that is "pedestrianised" wasn't formerly the sole preserve of pedestrians, but also admitted cars etc at some point.
If such a street only ever admitted pedestrians then it wouldn't need
to be "ised".
There used to be a lot more like that.
I am pointing out that a street which may be used, and is used,
by motor vehicles is not pedestrianised.
So how would you personally describe a street where access to vehicles
is restricted to certain hours ?
Not as "pedestrianised", because that would not describe the restriction.
But the restriction "no motor vehicles" only applies during the hours when the
street isn't "pedestrianised"
"Restricted" seems more appropriate
Restricted could mean just anything.
Surely not just an ordinary street ?
Of course not.
And who uses such streets during the hours when motor traffic is banned ? >>> Do they simply stand empty, totally deserted ?
Why does that matter?
So that now rather than Mini Holland being a "meaningless term" as youThey use weasel words like "Mini Holland scheme" for other areas.
Even more inaccurate (or would be if it had a meaning).
That might well depend if buildings in historic Dutch towns had
rear access or not.
As a term, it is meaningless.
If only.
Apparently such schemes offer more farcilities for cyclists.
So quite possibly for the unfortunate pedestrians who find themselves >>>>> subjected to such schemes they are far from meaningless. Rather a
they're a massive source of inconvenience on a daily basis.
Indeed. Because they have not been "pedestrianised".
claimed previously, you are now correcting a definition I suggested.
"Mini Holland" has no obvious meaning and certainly no precise meaning.
I am sure - from repeated observation as well as from common sense - that
not every street in the Netherlands has the same traffic status.
Many more people in Holland ride bicycles. Mini Hollands are designed
so as to encourage more bicycle use, with the provision of cycle lanes
etc
The fact that Holland is mainly flat, their bicycles are mainly heavy roadsters with a very low average speed and that many cyclists in
"this" country will totally ignore them in no way detracts from the
fact that the sole purpose of Mini Hollands is better provision for
cyclists. This, and this alone, is what all such areas designated
as such, all have in common
On 28/12/2023 20:51, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:20:03 +0000, Jeff Layman wrote:
I had a look on Google Streetview, and it seems that at least one
part of "Letsby Avenue" is really part of Europa Link. If you look
at <https://www.instantstreetview.com/@53.396252,-1.400039,166.
51h,-3.26p,2z,bVfK57_mMTuvurfWfLioTQ> and zoom into the street name
you can see that it's Europa View. That's the road leaving the
roundabout as shown on the minimap. Unfortunately, there does seem
to be any Streetview record of the long road (first left after
entering that "Letsby Avenue"/Europa Link) which is shown as Letsby
Avenue on OSM. I couldn't even see a street name plate at the other
end of the road.
It's a private road. In the NSG, it's recorded as:
PRIVATE SERVICE ROAD ACCESSING UNITS A TO T1 EUROPA LINK, SHEFFIELD
https://www.findmystreet.co.uk/map?usrn=34410759
Given that it is a private road, its owners could, if they wanted,
name it Letsby Avenue. Although that wouldn't necessarily get entered
into the NSG.
Going further OT (although perhaps more on topic for this NG), is the
area of Google StreetView and entering private roads. From your
34410759 link, the whole of that road is private, including the part
I referred to off the roundabout which was on StreetView. The rest of
that private road wasn't on StreetView.
I wondered what the StreetView policy was when it came to private
roads. It isn't clear, and even if it isn't allowed access, there are
other ways of getting the information on StreetView. I didn't know it
was possible for members of the public to add information to
StreetView:
<https://londonist.com/london/technology/why-isn-t-canary-wharf- on-google-street-view>
Seems strange that only a short part of "Letsby Ave" is on StreetView,
and Google seems to have missed out the rest. Perhaps it was once
included, but Google were persuaded to remove it.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
In message <slrnuomcdv.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 20:04:15
on Tue, 26 Dec 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
On 2023-12-26, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
This is one of the many reasons why postal addresses are not the same as >>> geographic addresses. The coordinates of my home's postal address are
located within my property. But the coordinates of my office postal address >>> at Basepoint were some 50 yards southeast of my office, and not within any >>> part of the building that we were renting.
Indeed. I found this out once when I tried to navigate to a prison by
post code, and ended up at a Royal Mail sorting office instead. (Which
from the outside doesn't necessarily look much different!)
I've alluded to this earlier in this thread (or a very similar one) to
two or three spooky places in London where if you turn up at what's
listed as the delivery address for their postcode, it is indeed a
sorting office some miles from the actual establishment.
On the other hand, I found relatively little difficulty in accessing the >actual premises when invited there by the occupants.
I wondered what the StreetView policy was when it came to private roads.
It isn't clear, and even if it isn't allowed access, there are other
ways of getting the information on StreetView. I didn't know it was
possible for members of the public to add information to StreetView: ><https://londonist.com/london/technology/why-isn-t-canary-wharf-on-google-street-view>
Seems strange that only a short part of "Letsby Ave" is on StreetView,
and Google seems to have missed out the rest. Perhaps it was once
included, but Google were persuaded to remove it.
In message <slrnuoe9r5.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 18:31:01
on Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
I've been inside both fairly recently (#10 and on the base at
Mildenhall) although to some extent by invitation-only. In both cases I
was unaccompanied, which meant they must have vetted me in some way >beforehand.
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 15:06:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <slrnuoe9r5.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 18:31:01
on Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>> travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
I've been inside both fairly recently (#10 and on the base at
Mildenhall) although to some extent by invitation-only. In both cases I
was unaccompanied, which meant they must have vetted me in some way >>beforehand.
I've never been to Number 10.
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 15:06:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <slrnuoe9r5.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 18:31:01
on Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
On 2023-12-23, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>> travel.
10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA? Room 235, Building 210,
RAF Mildenhall, Bury St Edmunds IP28 8NF? Any address in a
gated community? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
I've been inside both fairly recently (#10 and on the base at
Mildenhall) although to some extent by invitation-only. In both cases I
was unaccompanied, which meant they must have vetted me in some way
beforehand.
I've never been to Number 10. I've been to the Foreign Office, very much by invitation, and was given an interesting guided tour by a junior minister
who seemed quite pleased to have someone other than civil servants and constituents to talk to (the headline meeting, with the Minister for Europe, took place at the Palace of Westminster as she was expecting to be called away to vote at short notice, but the pre-meeting with civil servants was in their offices).
I've been to Mildenhall Air Base (and Lakenheath Air Base) many times, although not for a while now as it was mostly related to people I knew who were assigned there when I was a local, and I haven't been a local for more than 20 years. My impression of air base security is that it's concentric; once you've been allowed past the main gate (which is usually an ID check to ensure that you are the person your contact has agreed to vouch for, plus a pat down and sniffer dog given a walk round your car) you have free range of the "social" parts of the base (cafes, bars, function rooms and also the hospital), but access to any of the military parts is much more restricted and you rarely get access to those without a very good reason.
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 08:22:28 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
I wondered what the StreetView policy was when it came to private roads.
It isn't clear, and even if it isn't allowed access, there are other
ways of getting the information on StreetView. I didn't know it was
possible for members of the public to add information to StreetView:
<https://londonist.com/london/technology/why-isn-t-canary-wharf-on-google-street-view>
I don't think Google has a hard and fast policy. I think it generally includes private roads if they appear nonetheless to be generally open to
the public, but not if it appears to the driver of the Streetview camera car that they shouldn't be there, or, as in the case of Canary Wharf, if they
are explicitly excluded by the owner of the private road.
Streetview goes along this private road in Suffolk as far as here, for example:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yNNN8Fz8dos3Ae7i8
which, going by the images, appears to be the point at which the driver concluded that going further would take them onto a farm track, although legally it's exactly the same as the road that has been used to get to that point.
Seems strange that only a short part of "Letsby Ave" is on StreetView,
and Google seems to have missed out the rest. Perhaps it was once
included, but Google were persuaded to remove it.
In the case of "Letsby Avenue", Streetview goes the short distance from the roundabout with Europa Link until reaches, on the one hand, a hard barrier:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yNNN8Fz8dos3Ae7i8
And, in the other direction, a street which is explicitly signed as private property with no public access:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jURTMx5EY1N4Jgtd8
On 23/12/2023 13:11, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kumtevF77hdU1@mid.individual.net>, at 02:03:11 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms
are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to
be a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting,
they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally
require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to
travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
Licenced taxis and certain vehicles transporting disabled people are
exempt from the "no stopping" rule on red routes. It would be
extraordinary if they were not.
There are any number of internet citations for that, in London and
elsewhere.
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
What's that pale "x" on the road? I've never seen that before on any StreetView image.
On 23 Dec 2023 at 13:13:38 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <kumtjtF77hdU2@mid.individual.net>, at 02:05:49 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
On 22/12/2023 01:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <kuj1gbFe3gsU1@mid.individual.net>, at 14:47:23 on Thu, 21
Dec 2023, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
Is "park" the right word?
Do delivery drivers in fact need to park whilst delivering?
What's wrong with just stopping, making the delivery and moving on again?
Because you aren't allowed to do that on the pavement, or in the
middle of the road stopping all the other traffic.
Says who?
Are taxi-drivers obliged by law to take passengers to a location other
than the one to which they wish to be taken?
If I say "Take me to the Champagne Bar on the upper level of St Pancras
Station", and his taxi won't fit in the lift?
If the answer is "no", what is the situation where the spot drop-off
spot chosen by the passenger is in a position where other vehicles
(temporarily) cannot pass the stationary taxi?
There's also several inner-city areas where apparently three-stripes
on the kerb saying "No loading/unloading" doesn't apply to van
drivers either.
...whatever that means!
What it means is lots of van drivers don't think "no loading/unloading"
applies to them, when in fact it's almost 100% aimed at them (not
drivers of private cars).
It's probably aimed at people making large, regular deliveries to particular >premises, for which special arrangements should be made. Not couriers making >quick deliveries to one of several premises on irregular times and dates.
The was a reported case (which my Google-fu is now failing to find, >unfortunately) where a van driver was ticketed while delivering a large box >to an elderly customer who asked him if he would be so good as to carry it >upstairs for her, which he did. The court decided that "loading" only meant >taking it as far as the delivery point, which is the front door of the >property; going beyond that requires waiting as it's no longer strictly >necessary for the purpose of the stop. Similarly, if you order, say, a >washing machine from one of the online sellers which offers installation, >then they can stop outside your house, even on double yellows, to get it
into your house but they can't leave the van there while they install it - >for that, they need to find somewhere else to park.
its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
whom this limited resource is a very real convenience.
That's Amazon's problem for delivering it to the locker later than
they said they would.
Er no. Amazon delivering it later than they said they would,
and you believing them, has now become "your" problem;
for which you're now going to penalise your fellow
Amazon customers by occupying scarce locker space.
In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
would seem a far more equitable solution
And where's your nearest Amazon depot. Mine's in Peterborough an
hour's drive away.
Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
shops.
The only reason I prefer using the lockers is that
there's no faffing about checking your ID, or remembering
where they'd put the stuff. With lockers you just tap in
the number on the screen and a few feet to the left or to
the right, a door quietly releases itself, as if by magic.
Although no doubt by next week they'll have installed
beepers or hooters.
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message >news:5XWudYx36ohlFAQs@perry.uk...
Three days is too short, if a package is delivered late and you were >>expecting to pick
it up on your way somewhere on holiday.
Hold on a mo !
How does a package being delivered late have any relevance to
how long it can be left in a locker ?
Once it's placed in the locker - whether this is on time
or later than promised - and the buyer is notified of
this, why should it need to stay in the locker for up
to three days ?
Jeff Layman wrote:
What's that pale "x" on the road? I've never seen that before on any
StreetView image.
It appears in the vast majority of streetview scenes as you orbit
around, I think it denotes where you will move to if you click.
Going further OT (although perhaps more on topic for this NG), is the
area of Google StreetView and entering private roads. From your
34410759 link, the whole of that road is private, including the part I >referred to off the roundabout which was on StreetView. The rest of
that private road wasn't on StreetView.
I wondered what the StreetView policy was when it came to private
roads. It isn't clear, and even if it isn't allowed access, there are
other ways of getting the information on StreetView.
I've been to various parts of Number 10 and the Palace of Westminster.
But my point of course wasn't that *nobody* is allowed in these places,
which would be ridiculous, but that you would be breaking the law if you >didn't have explicit permission to be there.
I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
seller using one of those couriers).
Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
simply never provided for.
We all know that.
So are you seriously suggesting, that as per your definition above,
all deliveries
made to the large stores as can be found in such pedestrianised streets
in historic city centres
, are made by hand drawn trolleys ?
In message <um7dco$26mpt$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:45:27 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
its being totally unrealistic to demand that Amazon
should store your item for up two weeks whilst you're away on
holiday; if this is at the expense of other Amazon customers for
whom this limited resource is a very real convenience.
That's Amazon's problem for delivering it to the locker later than
they said they would.
Er no. Amazon delivering it later than they said they would,
and you believing them, has now become "your" problem;
for which you're now going to penalise your fellow
Amazon customers by occupying scarce locker space.
Amazon are penalising those other customers.
In such circumstances arranging delivery to a pick-up point
would seem a far more equitable solution
And where's your nearest Amazon depot. Mine's in Peterborough an
hour's drive away.
Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
shops.
I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
seller using one of those couriers).
The only reason I prefer using the lockers is that
there's no faffing about checking your ID, or remembering
where they'd put the stuff. With lockers you just tap in
the number on the screen and a few feet to the left or to
the right, a door quietly releases itself, as if by magic.
Although no doubt by next week they'll have installed
beepers or hooters.
JNugent <jennings&co@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> remarked:
"Park" isn't defined in highway legislation. The two relevant terms >>>>> are "stopping" and "waiting". But waiting is usually considered to >>>>> be a synonym for parking. And most deliveries don't require waiting, >>>>> they merely require stopping. So, colloquially, they don't generally >>>>> require parking either.
Well, quite so.
The same is true of taxis allowing passengers to alight, as well as
various other and similar purposes.
There are, and can be, no addresses to which it is forbidden by law to >>>> travel.
Apart from those on Red Routes, inside pedestrianised areas etc. I'm
aware taxis have some exemptions, but can you cite the list?
Licenced taxis and certain vehicles transporting disabled people are
exempt from the "no stopping" rule on red routes. It would be
extraordinary if they were not.
Only by convention.
When I was in Hong Kong, in effect every main street
was a default red-route, and taxis had to pick up or drop off in side-streets.
There are any number of internet citations for that, in London and
elsewhere.
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to
be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
I disagree, there are many pedestrianised areas where large numbers of drivers clearly feel entitled, including ignoring "No Entry" and "No Motorised Vehicles" signs. Other pedestrianised areas have exemptions
for Loading, and holders of certain blue-badge add-on permits (you need
the specific local permit, just having the badge or a permit from a
different local authority isn't sufficient).
In message <umi7ml$2o95$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:15:43 on Wed, 27 Dec
2023, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> remarked:
Pedestrianised especially refers to historic city centres where
rear access as is a now required of all new developments was
simply never provided for.
We all know that.
So are you seriously suggesting, that as per your definition above,
all deliveries
One rule of Usenet is nothing(sic) is ever "all".
made to the large stores as can be found in such pedestrianised
streets in historic city centres
Some have small stores as well.
, are made by hand drawn trolleys ?
It's commonplace for deliveries to be made using wheeled cages,
especially when there's restrictions on loading etc right outside the shop.
Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
shops.
I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
seller using one of those couriers)
On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
All worthwhile points.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition. >>>
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
All worthwhile points.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
Eh ?
If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
state.
On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition. >>>>
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
All worthwhile points.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
Eh ?
If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
I was responding to that very point!
As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
state.
That might be a little over-literal.
The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians only".
If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
"Ised" is the past participle or something of the verb that described
the changing process
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
A street that is "pedestrianised" wasn't formerly the sole preserve of pedestrians, but also admitted cars etc at some point.
If such a street only ever admitted pedestrians then it wouldn't need
to be "ised".
On 29/12/2023 10:57, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition.
"Ised" is the past participle or something of the verb that described
the changing process
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with >> rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't
have any industry.
A street that is "pedestrianised" wasn't formerly the sole preserve of
pedestrians, but also admitted cars etc at some point.
If such a street only ever admitted pedestrians then it wouldn't need
to be "ised".
As in "sexualise", as if you can make an inanimate object like a ladies' shoe into
something sexual; oh, hang on!
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kvbd4rFu21U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous condition. >>>>>
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't coated with
rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't >>>>> have any industry.
All worthwhile points.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
Eh ?
If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
I was responding to that very point!
As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
state.
That might be a little over-literal.
The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians only". >> If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.
In many pedestrianised areas bicycles, ebikes, escooters, are indeed
totally prohibited, but often to little effect. Usually because any
wardens etc. assuming there are any, are usually on foot. And are
precluded from running after miscreants on health and safety
grounds.
Same as those tasked with clearing up leaves are denied
the use of brushes and the air is instead rent with the gentle
soothing sounds of petrol driven leaf blowers.
So that all "pedestrianised" usually means in practice, is that motor vehicles no longer have unrestricted 24hr access as they formerly
did.
As against say, "Motor vehicles no longer have 24hr access ised"
areas. Which you must admit, is a bit of a mouthful.
On 31/12/2023 10:02 am, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message
news:kvbd4rFu21U1@mid.individual.net...
On 30/12/2023 07:45 pm, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <jnugent@mail.com> wrote in message
news:kv8hhpFfkpuU1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/12/2023 10:57 am, billy bookcase wrote:
To "ise" something is change or transform it from its previous
condition.
So that cloth that is "rubberised" is cloth that formerly wasn't
coated with
rubber.
A country that is "industrialised" is a country that formerly didn't >>>>>> have any industry.
All worthwhile points.
For "pedestrianised", please read "pedestrians-only".
Eh ?
If a thoroughfare has *always* been pedestrians- only, as in the
example you gave, then how can it then be pedestrian*ised*
I was responding to that very point!
As above, when you *ise* something you change it from its previous
state.
That might be a little over-literal.
The central point is that "pedestrianised" has to mean "pedestrians
only".
If it doesn't, it isn't pedestrianised.
In many pedestrianised areas bicycles, ebikes, escooters, are indeed
totally prohibited, but often to little effect. Usually because any
wardens etc. assuming there are any, are usually on foot. And are
precluded from running after miscreants on health and safety
grounds.
That is the fault of those who breach the rules.
Same as those tasked with clearing up leaves are denied
the use of brushes and the air is instead rent with the gentle
soothing sounds of petrol driven leaf blowers.
So that all "pedestrianised" usually means in practice, is that motor
vehicles no longer have unrestricted 24hr access as they formerly
did.
If vehicles are allowed in under certain conditions, the thoroughfare
has not *been* pedestrianised.
As against say, "Motor vehicles no longer have 24hr access ised"
areas. Which you must admit, is a bit of a mouthful.
But not enough to justify an abuse of language, I'd suggest.
On 27/12/2023 08:54 pm, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:31:40 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 27/12/2023 11:35 am, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Tue, 26 Dec 2023 23:12:53 +0000, JNugent <jnugent@mail.com> wrote:
On 25/12/2023 10:01 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 25 Dec 2023 at 21:05:12 GMT, "JNugent" <jennings&co@mail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 25/12/2023 16:16, Andy Burns wrote:
JNugent wrote:So it wasn't a pedestrianised street.
Pedestrian areas are another matter. No-one would seriously expect to >>>>>>>>> be allowed to use a vehicle in/on one of those.
A delivery driver in a pedestrianised street in Leicester (they have >>>>>>>> access through the rising bollards) though it was good to continuously >>>>>>>> pip his horn to get a wheelchair user out of his way last week. >>>>>>>
Nearly all pedestrianised streets (perhaps all) allow vehicular traffic under
some circumstances. For obvious reasons.
Calling such places "pedestrianised" is a category error.
"Pedestrianised" is the usual term for a street which formerly was open to >>>> all users, but is now restricted to predestrians other than with some
limited exemptions for vehicles.
The term is undoubtedly in common usage. But it has no legal meaning and >>> no obvious exclusive meaning in everyday parlance.
Indeed not. It isn't necessary for a street to be exlusively for the use of >> pedestrians in order to be described as pedestrianised.
Of course, individuals cannot be prevented from misusing words. But it doesn't have any legal implications.
It's often impractical to fully prohibit vehicles from a street where they >>>> have previously been permitted, because there are often premises that can >>>> only be accessed from that street for the purpose of deliveries. So limited
exemptions (typically, deliveries before 10am or after 4pm) are common. That
doesn't mean that, as far as people on foot are concerned, it's not a
pedestrianised street.
Yes, it does.
You're arguing with common English usage here. You may not want to use the >> word in that sense, but nearly everybody else does.
On that basis, all streets are pedestrianised. Even in ancient Pompeii.
"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote in message >news:pud6jGIR9$jlFARW@perry.uk...
Here in West London they have plenty of collection points in
shops.
I'm not sure I've seen an Amazon 'collection point' in a shop. Evri,
DHL, UPS and so on, but not Amazon (unless it's an Amazon Marketplace
seller using one of those couriers)
In Cambridge you can pick up your parcels from Next
quote:
You can now pick up your Amazon parcels from Next 11:02, 14 MAY 2019 >https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/you-can-now-pick-up- >16272104
quote:
But not Primark just yet, unfortunately.
While in London, Costcutters are especially popular
Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
17 Golborne Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter Supermarket
128 Westmount Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter Express
305 Finchley Rd
Open ? Closes 9?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
178 Thessaly Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
53 Stratford Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
38-40 Sydenham Rd
Open ? Closes 12?am
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Greenford
Open 24 hours
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
428-430 Well Hall Rd
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
555 Barking Rd
Open ? Closes 12?am
Amazon Counter - Costcutter Raynes Park
52 Coombe Ln
Open ? Closes 7:30?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
13 The Mound
Open ? Closes 10?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Harrow
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Harrow
Open ? Closes 10?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Sutton
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Enfield
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter
Northolt
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Costcutter Bromley
Bromley
Open ? Closes 11?pm
Amazon Counter - Drinks Food & Wine
11 Station Parade
Open ? Closes 11?pm
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 49:32:21 |
| Calls: | 6,711 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,354,781 |
| Posted today: | 1 |