Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have recently become aware that there are now two addresses at '8 Underhill Road' with two different postcodes - SE22 0AH & SE22 0QR/9DX - and at opposite ends of Underhill.


A taxi driver told me about it after he went to the wrong address by mistake and I have now had post for the other address delivered to me. I will repost it with a note to the post office.


Surely it cannot be right for two addresses in the same road to have the same house number even with different postcode.


I am hoping that deliveries for the residents at my address (4 flats) are not going to have misdirected mail etc.

Whilst that might be the case, SE22 0QR has set up a postal address (I think in a new build) for 8 Underhill Rd next to a street sign for Picketts Terrace as far as I can tell from Google Street view (

). All the low Underhill numbers are at the LL/Horniman end of Underhill (SE22 0AH). It is going to be very problematic for deliveries, taxis etc.


On further research the postcode on the parcel appears to be wrong and should be SE22 9DX. Postcode finder records a longer address, but it does not appear to being used?

On James Barber's thread it has been suggested that the addresses being confused are 8 Underhill, and 8 Picketts Terrace - which is formed on 242 Underhill. So the problem arises in either mis-addressing letters or mis-sorting them. Perhaps a note to the sorting office (whilst it's still with us) alerting them to this confusion may help. But the address(es) and the postcodes are, in themselves, kosher. Just being confused.

Hi Penguin,


Yes, on further research it appears that someone is using a shorthand rather than the full address which is resulting in confusion for deliveries, post and taxis. I have written a note on the parcel for the resident requesting they use the full address. I will try the sorting office as well. Really don't want to be losing my mail etc.!


Hopefully it will sort itself out if the full address is used.

I feel for you - we had a similar issue when our house was built as we are one of the last houses on our street and there is a block of flats with the same number as our house which is next door to us, but technically its address is on the street which runs perpendicular to ours - so the numbers are the same and the houses are right next door to each other but we are on different streets if that makes sense.


Deliveries, pizzas, bills and even Southwark Council kept getting the two properties confused for the first couple of years but it hardly even happens now. Only when someone new moves into the block of flats and then only for a couple of weeks. Hopefully yours will be sorted when the other person starts using the full address.

How postal addresses happen at all can be discovered here:


https://www.royalmail.com/sites/default/files/Royal-Mail-PAF-Code-of-Practice.pdf


https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Applying_for_new_postal_addresses


It may be worthwhile writing a separate note (not just on the parcel) to the person at 8 Pickett's Terrace - also letting them know your name, address and proper postcode in case they get your misdelivered mail, as you have theirs.

I have a similar problem in the Horniman area


A block of relatively new build flats has the same post code as the individual

houses at the other end of the street.


So for instance, when a flat dweller orders good, cab or a takeaway they are asked for their post code and house/flat number. if they don?t correct the order taker to include the name of the block of flats at this stage, then the goods , cab or takeaway has an equal chance of being delivered to the individual house of the same number. This can be very annoying if the flat dweller likes late night takeaways.

Also although I have redirected deliveries, post and cabs on many occasions

I cannot be sure that the other party has done the same for me!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...