Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
National Postcodes to be introduced
Options
Comments
-
I've nothing but anecdote to back it up, but I'm deeply suspicious of that figure. I worked in an office where communication was very important to the business function. We typically had 30 outgoing and maybe 5 - 10 incoming pieces of post per day, from about 2001 to 2009.
Rare was the day when post for some other address was not put through our letterbox. We missed important incoming mail, and I certainly thought that if we were getting other people's mail, they might be getting ours. We also had a significant number of customers who were adamant that they did not get post that we had a clear record of sending, I'd say mabye five per cent.
All of our outgoing post had printed addresses, with very high quality data, but I can't say the same for the incoming post, certainly hand-written addresses were over-represented in the misdelivered post that we got.
To be honest, I don't think that Eircode will have a big impact on any of that. The real benefit will be in rural areas, where I suspect 'delivery' means sticking it in the neighbour's, brother-in-law's or whoever's door.
Yes indeed, I think general consensus on two points can be assumed, firstly that 98% may not be an exact figure, though we must acknowledge that it is monitored by COMREG, and secondly that the new postcode is unlikely to have any impact on improving that figure.
My own previous thoughts on the matter, suggest that there is a calculation at executive level that initial customer reaction to the postcode may well have the potential to reduce that figure on a localised basis but is unlikely to do so on a persistent basis. One would presume that there is agreed tolerance for this amongst COMREG officials. Further to this, there appears also to be a calculation that it has not the capability to improve systematic efficiency and accordingly postal operations have not been adjusted to embrace it and nor has a full technological commitment been invested in.
In conclusion therefore, the Irish postal service would appear to have decided that the new postcode will be of undetermined benefit to it and accordingly will not be supporting full engagement with it throughout its organisation or encouraging public mandatory commitment to it for mailing purposes.
The additional perspective currently abroad that continued use of established Dublin postal districts in addresses is testament to a purposeful commitment to the status quo postal address system, also has noteworthy merit. This would appear to be further enhanced at departmental and legislative levels.
Coupled with my input surrounding the questionable usefulness of the routing keys, I am happy to invite and encourage the presentation of new evidence that would convince fellow interested parties that the new postcode has benefits to our postal system in the first instance or to other commercial or civil purposes in the wider instance. In the absence of such, one cannot help but question the initiative in its totality.0 -
TheBustedFlush wrote:An Post's next-delivery targets are set on properly addressed mail - so it's 98% of properly addressed mail.
This raises an interesting point. If the common address of a building is substantially different to the official postal address, does adding a postcode to it (the common address) mean it is now "properly addressed"?flushed busted wrote: »I think general consensus on two points can be assumed, firstly that 98% may not be an exact figure, though we must acknowledge that it is monitored by COMREG, and secondly that the new postcode is unlikely to have any impact on improving that figure.
If yes, then it will either improve overall deliverability of mail or alternatively, that 98% figure will start reducing. (Hopefully the first one!)
I hope An Post have commissioned an app they can give to postmen which will OCR the postcode from an envelope and show its location on map. Most of Ireland has 3G coverage now and even where a destination doesn't, I'm sure all the local sorting offices do. Most postmen know most of their route, so it would only be needed for items that the postman was unsure about.0 -
This raises an interesting point. If the common address of a building is substantially different to the official postal address, does adding a postcode to it (the common address) mean it is now "properly addressed"?
If yes, then it will either improve overall deliverability of mail or alternatively, that 98% figure will start reducing. (Hopefully the first one!)
I hope An Post have commissioned an app they can give to postmen which will OCR the postcode from an envelope and show its location on map. Most of Ireland has 3G coverage now and even where a destination doesn't, I'm sure all the local sorting offices do. Most postmen know most of their route, so it would only be needed for items that the postman was unsure about.
I think what may happen is that it will reduce An Post's ability to argue that the mail wasn't correctly addressed since you could argue that the eircode giving an exact location and using the very routing keys they asked for is right there in black and white. I wouldn't be surprised if it's decided in some future court case.0 -
This raises an interesting point. If the common address of a building is substantially different to the official postal address, does adding a postcode to it (the common address) mean it is now "properly addressed"?
If yes, then it will either improve overall deliverability of mail or alternatively, that 98% figure will start reducing. (Hopefully the first one!)
I hope An Post have commissioned an app they can give to postmen which will OCR the postcode from an envelope and show its location on map. Most of Ireland has 3G coverage now and even where a destination doesn't, I'm sure all the local sorting offices do. Most postmen know most of their route, so it would only be needed for items that the postman was unsure about.
I did anticipate that my contributions would offer insight into the practical realities in relation to postal sortation. However, it seems that expressions of aspiration are set to abound in this discussion rather than testimony of fact.
Again I invite testimony of actual commitment shown by the postal service to the new postcode to counter my own insights which indicate the direct opposite.0 -
flushed busted wrote: »Yes indeed, I think general consensus on two points can be assumed, firstly that 98% may not be an exact figure, though we must acknowledge that it is monitored by COMREG, and secondly that the new postcode is unlikely to have any impact on improving that figure.
My own previous thoughts on the matter, suggest that there is a calculation at executive level that initial customer reaction to the postcode may well have the potential to reduce that figure on a localised basis but is unlikely to do so on a persistent basis. One would presume that there is agreed tolerance for this amongst COMREG officials. Further to this, there appears also to be a calculation that it has not the capability to improve systematic efficiency and accordingly postal operations have not been adjusted to embrace it and nor has a full technological commitment been invested in.
In conclusion therefore, the Irish postal service would appear to have decided that the new postcode will be of undetermined benefit to it and accordingly will not be supporting full engagement with it throughout its organisation or encouraging public mandatory commitment to it for mailing purposes.
The additional perspective currently abroad that continued use of established Dublin postal districts in addresses is testament to a purposeful commitment to the status quo postal address system, also has noteworthy merit. This would appear to be further enhanced at departmental and legislative levels.
Coupled with my input surrounding the questionable usefulness of the routing keys, I am happy to invite and encourage the presentation of new evidence that would convince fellow interested parties that the new postcode has benefits to our postal system in the first instance or to other commercial or civil purposes in the wider instance. In the absence of such, one cannot help but question the initiative in its totality.
Nope, I disagree.
If a postie is not motivated enough to read the unambiguous address on the envelope, they are hardly likely to be motivated to read the postcode either, on that we agree, but Eircode is a weapon for a different war, it is just not supposed to solve that problem any more than it is supposed to solve climate change or drain the Shannon or enforce the Peace or Westphalia.
There are a number of areas where it will have an immediate impact:- Resolving the 40 per cent of addresses that are ambiguous - posties typically know by heart the surnames in rural areas, but run into trouble where there are new residents, or residents who share last names or even full names
- Emergency services in rural areas, along with occasional deliveries like furniture - Eircode website > Google maps > brings you to the door, no more counting houses after the turn with the red barn
- Tax, social welfare, insurance and other types of fraud - addresses can be verified as real, unique and not used for other policies/claims in seconds, eliminating a huge swathe of opportunities for fraud, the cost of which inevitably falls on the consumer / taxpayer
- Data analysis - people researching everything from vaccination levels to cancer rates can very accurately put that data on a map and see patterns that might not otherwise be evident
This last point needs careful management of data protection; it shows up as a disgrace the previous DPC's hand-waving attitude and vague statements that there were 'issues', without saying what might be, let alone doing his actual job of developing rules and practices to make the best use of the data without breaching anyone's privacy.
Finally, the issue that eircode won't solve, careless or lazy misdelivery. Eircom isn't perfect, but it is light-years away from what it was in the bad old P&T, wait-seven-years-for-a-phone days. That is what competition has done. For most people, competition for letter delivery basically doesn't exist. Eircode brings this competition a step closer, so it might motivate An Post to improve their service.0 -
Advertisement
-
An Post does not have anything like a 98 percent next day delivery rate.
http://www.askcomreg.ie/post/measurement_of_an_post_performance.96.LE.asp
This figure is gotten from doing test mailings.0 -
I think what may happen is that it will reduce An Post's ability to argue that the mail wasn't correctly addressed since you could argue that the eircode giving an exact location and using the very routing keys they asked for is right there in black and white. I wouldn't be surprised if it's decided in some future court case.
I think in making such a statement one must ask what is the legal position with respect to "properly addressed". From my own reading of this, the new postcode is not a statutory requirement and therefore could not be used to sustain an action by a counter party. Of course COMREG would be the statutory body from whom some clarification could be sought on this matter. In that regard, one would expect that the only clarity they could offer from existing case law is that the postal address, including persisting Dublin postal districts, is the extent of the legal requirement. One would also expect that management of a postal service that operates a predominantly manual operation on inward sort & delivery could demonstrate, as they successfully did before, that their operation is dependent on a visually readable postal address (OCR & Human) and cannot be held accountable for the consequences of 3rd party alternatives.0 -
That is an absurd criticism. It was absolutely prudent to raise the concern and is head-in-the-sand ignorance to suggest otherwise. Eircode is the first postcode in the world to potentially uniquely identify individuals, where every other postcode is anonymous. What is disgraceful is the contention held here among Eircode's fervent supporters is that there cannot possibly be any privacy risks associated with it.- Data analysis - people researching everything from vaccination levels to cancer rates can very accurately put that data on a map and see patterns that might not otherwise be evident
This last point needs careful management of data protection; it shows up as a disgrace the previous DPC's hand-waving attitude and vague statements that there were 'issues', without saying what might be, let alone doing his actual job of developing rules and practices to make the best use of the data without breaching anyone's privacy.0 -
Nope, I disagree.
If a postie is not motivated enough to read the unambiguous address on the envelope, they are hardly likely to be motivated to read the postcode either, on that we agree, but Eircode is a weapon for a different war, it is just not supposed to solve that problem any more than it is supposed to solve climate change or drain the Shannon or enforce the Peace or Westphalia.
There are a number of areas where it will have an immediate impact:- Resolving the 40 per cent of addresses that are ambiguous - posties typically know by heart the surnames in rural areas, but run into trouble where there are new residents, or residents who share last names or even full names
- Emergency services in rural areas, along with occasional deliveries like furniture - Eircode website > Google maps > brings you to the door, no more counting houses after the turn with the red barn
- Tax, social welfare, insurance and other types of fraud - addresses can be verified as real, unique and not used for other policies/claims in seconds, eliminating a huge swathe of opportunities for fraud, the cost of which inevitably falls on the consumer / taxpayer
- Data analysis - people researching everything from vaccination levels to cancer rates can very accurately put that data on a map and see patterns that might not otherwise be evident
This last point needs careful management of data protection; it shows up as a disgrace the previous DPC's hand-waving attitude and vague statements that there were 'issues', without saying what might be, let alone doing his actual job of developing rules and practices to make the best use of the data without breaching anyone's privacy.
Finally, the issue that eircode won't solve, careless or lazy misdelivery. Eircom isn't perfect, but it is light-years away from what it was in the bad old P&T, wait-seven-years-for-a-phone days. That is what competition has done. For most people, competition for letter delivery basically doesn't exist. Eircode brings this competition a step closer, so it might motivate An Post to improve their service.
My quoted contribution is responsorial and on the basis of the postal aspect only. Your widening of the argument to other areas introduces disparate issues but I'm sure your points would also require supporting evidence from related industries.
Sticking therefore to the postal aspect on which I offered comment and taking, therefore, your reference to the 40% non unique statistic, as you rightly have stated this is not a problem for the postal service as their manual system based on reading and remembering resolves the issue. Presumably it is for these reason that I have so far failed myself to uncover evidence of an organisational adjustment to embrace the new postcode. I was hoping to enlighten myself by inviting new evidence here but so far that has not been forthcoming.0 -
That is an absurd criticism. It was absolutely prudent to raise the concern and is head-in-the-sand ignorance to suggest otherwise. Eircode is the first postcode in the world to potentially uniquely identify individuals, where every other postcode is anonymous. What is disgraceful is the contention held here among Eircode's fervent supporters is that there cannot possibly be any privacy risks associated with it.
Raise what concern? What did he say, exactly?
Of course the highly-granular level of Eircode has data protection implications. Eircode, as you say, can identify a single individual, not just where there is a single-occupant household but, for example, statistics relating to gynecology could only relate to one person in a house that only has one adult female.
The previous DPC's response was just to recommend against any workable postcode system. He should have been front and centre making sure that data protection was included from the design from day one. It's not like it's impossible - in the UK the postcode + house number gives a similar level of granularity.
But that would have involved actual work. This guy was a Bertie 'friend' appointee who was concerned only with not doing any actual work. He didn't 'raise concerns'. That would have required work. He stated that there 'were concerns', without even bothering to say what they might be.
Rather than doing an analysis and recommendations, his total contribution was two words - 'Forget it'.0 -
Advertisement
-
flushed busted wrote: »My quoted contribution is responsorial and on the basis of the postal aspect only. Your widening of the argument to other areas introduces disparate issues but I'm sure your points would also require supporting evidence from related industries.
Sticking therefore to the postal aspect on which I offered comment and taking, therefore, your reference to the 40% non unique statistic, as you rightly have stated this is not a problem for the postal service as their manual system based on reading and remembering resolves the issue. Presumably it is for these reason that I have so far failed myself to uncover evidence of an organisational adjustment to embrace the new postcode. I was hoping to enlighten myself by inviting new evidence here but so far that has not been forthcoming.
This is a straw man argument.
I didn't say that 40% non-unique addresses is not a problem, anyone with experience of it knows it is a serious problem, and Eircodes can contribute to solving it.
But you are trying to shoehorn the issue into a corner that you think suits your argument, asking for "evidence of an organisational adjustment to embrace the new postcode" on a project that is three weeks launched.
I don't think that you're "hoping to enlighten [your]self by inviting new evidence". I think that you are trying to establish a set of rules that exclude evidence that your position is wrong. But the trivial point, you are correct. An Post is a large, bureaucratic organisation that instinctively resists change and obstructs it when it can. Such organisations are never pro-active in reform. They only react when change has been internalised by others and their intransigence becomes embarrassing.
On the key point, you are wrong.flushed busted wrote: »In the absence of such, one cannot help but question the initiative in its totality.
If we accepted that, we would never change anything.0 -
pretty much what I said above. And he recommended an area based code iirc. The govt was free to ignore that advice, which they did. It seems silly now to be angry about it though.Raise what concern? What did he say, exactly?
That is still missing the point and wrong. The whole issue revolves around postcodes, the information that can be associated with them and how that information circulates from one organisation to another. House numbers have nothing to do with it. Bringing the comparison up (repeatedly) is only an attempt to wave away the concern.Of course the highly-granular level of Eircode has data protection implications. Eircode, as you say, can identify a single individual, not just where there is a single-occupant household but, for example, statistics relating to gynecology could only relate to one person in a house that only has one adult female.
The previous DPC's response was just to recommend against any workable postcode system. He should have been front and centre making sure that data protection was included from the design from day one. It's not like it's impossible - in the UK the postcode + house number gives a similar level of granularity.
I'm not here to stick up for the previous Data Protection Commissioner. Maybe he could have done more. I've no insight into how the project was run other than the fact that it emerged from a silo fully-formed. They were quite selective about who they consulted with.But that would have involved actual work. This guy was a Bertie 'friend' appointee who was concerned only with not doing any actual work. He didn't 'raise concerns'. That would have required work. He stated that there 'were concerns', without even bothering to say what they might be.
Rather than doing an analysis and recommendations, his total contribution was two words - 'Forget it'.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19365
Of course the highly-granular level of Eircode has data protection implications. Eircode, as you say, can identify a single individual, not just where there is a single-occupant household but, for example, statistics relating to gynecology could only relate to one person in a house that only has one adult female.
In the UK, the end of the postcode can be omitted leaving a larger meaningful size to point out the approximate area of interest. That is not possible with Eircode - it is individual house or the postal town sort code. That is a serious failing.0 -
antoinolachtnai wrote: »An Post does not have anything like a 98 percent next day delivery rate.
http://www.askcomreg.ie/post/measurement_of_an_post_performance.96.LE.asp
This figure is gotten from doing test mailings.This raises an interesting point. If the common address of a building is substantially different to the official postal address, does adding a postcode to it (the common address) mean it is now "properly addressed"?
If yes, then it will either improve overall deliverability of mail or alternatively, that 98% figure will start reducing. (Hopefully the first one!)
I hope An Post have commissioned an app they can give to postmen which will OCR the postcode from an envelope and show its location on map. Most of Ireland has 3G coverage now and even where a destination doesn't, I'm sure all the local sorting offices do. Most postmen know most of their route, so it would only be needed for items that the postman was unsure about.
The answer to your question about whether adding an eircode to an address makes it properly addressed - no it doesn't.
Monitoring is carried out on delivery times and targets (Comreg sets it at 94%) - it has never been met yet since surveys started 12 years ago. The method of addressing is one criteria used in conducting these surveys and measurements.
It suits An Post to have the survey measured on Properly Addressed (PA) as it's a smaller sample and their delivery accuracy is much better - they get fined for not meeting targets linked to how much they are off target.
An Post have consistently said that:
a) people should continue to use their full postal address
b) mail will be delivered with or without the eircode.
This makes sense in the light of how their performance is measured.
The introduction of eircode will improve their sorting/mailing operations with Improperly Addressed (IA) mail, and save them money. However, An Post is unlikely to be admitting this out loud as it could lead to demands to Comreg for reduction in mailing prices.
Use of eircodes on mail is likely to be one of the new measurements that Comreg will introduce for Ipsos to conduct their survey for the next annual report. It'll be interesting to see what they might decide to do once they have the results.0 -
TheBustedFlush wrote: »The introduction of eircode will improve their sorting/mailing operations with Improperly Addressed (IA) mail, and save them money.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on how you believe this is actually going to be achieved? (by this I mean at every stage in the outward and inward sortation process)0 -
This is a straw man argument.
I didn't say that 40% non-unique addresses is not a problem, anyone with experience of it knows it is a serious problem, and Eircodes can contribute to solving it.
But you are trying to shoehorn the issue into a corner that you think suits your argument, asking for "evidence of an organisational adjustment to embrace the new postcode" on a project that is three weeks launched.
I don't think that you're "hoping to enlighten [your]self by inviting new evidence". I think that you are trying to establish a set of rules that exclude evidence that your position is wrong. But the trivial point, you are correct. An Post is a large, bureaucratic organisation that instinctively resists change and obstructs it when it can. Such organisations are never pro-active in reform. They only react when change has been internalised by others and their intransigence becomes embarrassing.
On the key point, you are wrong.
If we accepted that, we would never change anything.
I am a little confused therefore. Are you or are you not saying that the new postcode will or will not be beneficially used by the postal service?0 -
pretty much what I said above. And he recommended an area based code iirc. The govt was free to ignore that advice, which they did. It seems silly now to be angry about it though.
No, he recommended what the Department of Communications civil servants, An Post management and the CWU recommended. An code based on English-language place names; and almost all properties with identical addresses would get the same postcode as each other. So largely useless, and guaranteed to arouse strong opposition. You'd almost think they intended it to fail...Sam Russell wrote: »In the UK, the end of the postcode can be omitted leaving a larger meaningful size to point out the approximate area of interest. That is not possible with Eircode - it is individual house or the postal town sort code. That is a serious failing.
That's a bit of an oversimplification. Different data needs to be aggregated at different levels. Aids and measles statistics, for example, probably need different granularity.
The advantage of eircode is that this can be done by mapping the coordinates to different size areas, as appropriate, but this should have been done from the start. The DPC simply didn't do the work. That's a pity, but not the fault of Eircode; certainly not a reason not to have postcodes.0 -
I may have misread the intent of the challenge, but it was hardly shifting the goalposts since I was raising the same complaint I’ve been raising since my first posts in this thread – namely that it isn’t obvious on visual inspection where locations are with reference to each other. You can do that with postcodes, Loc8, OS grid, GPS, any geocode, etc., but you cannot do that with Eircode.marmurr1916 wrote: »There was a very specific challenge set - identify a geographical area from an eircode without looking it up.
As somehow who spends a sizeable portion of their week planning deliveries I know first-hand exactly how valuable that functionality is. That Eircode made the deliberate decision to remove that functionality is insane to me.
Getting to know where postcodes are isn’t anything special if you are working with them week in and week out. You pick that stuff up pretty quickly if you are in certain trades. It’s like how Publicans get to know their 88-times tables simply because they using them repeatedly.
To be fair you’ve been ignoring this specific point all thread. This lack of functionality was a slap in the teeth to those in the trade, so yeah I’m kind of irritated that this (quite relevant and substantive) point has been continuously ignored.Nothing mentioned in my post about relating adjacent codes. Did not mention it.
It might have something to do with the myriad of reasons I’ve highlighted about how it fails to serve most other people in the country. Consider the very side-step you have just done with regard to Eircode’s lack of locational reference information. That you can tell, quite easily, with postcodes where locations are with reference to each in a manner that you cannot with Eircode is a great reason to be upset with Eircode. That Eircode can only serve indexed locations is another serious defect. That the code isn’t open is another defect. That the code isn’t founded on a geocode, and thus is stripped of a huge amount of functionality that such brings, is another serious defect (seriously, using pseudorandom digits was a crazy decision).In not sure why people are upset that our national postcode suits the needs of our national postal service.
I’m pretty sure you have confused me with another poster because I’ve never claimed, nor even held, that to be true.You can't have it both ways, it's either of no use to An Post…..
I fully agree this is a strawman. Take how you felt about this sort of strawman and maybe you’ll start to realise just how I feel every time I wander into this thread.oscarBravo wrote: »More to the point, why are people so keen to construct straw men like this?
There are plenty of instances in rural Ireland where this fails. Outhouses, quarries, fishing on rivers/lakes, walk routes, etc. that don’t have Eircodes. I’ve got some anecdotal evidence that a good number of farm accidents don’t occur at the home house (which has an Eircode) but in the outhouses, in fields, bogs and a myriad of other places that don’t have Eircodes.Emergency services in rural areas, along with occasional deliveries like furniture - Eircode website > Google maps > brings you to the door, no more counting houses after the turn with the red barn
As I said before in this thread, we actually do deliveries to rural Ireland and thus far a sizeable portion of our deliveries aren’t to places with an Eircode. We done another delivery today of supplies for fencing off a field to prepare for digging foundations, and Eircode couldn’t be used because it wasn’t an indexed location.0 -
-
Outhouses, quarries, fishing on rivers/lakes, walk routes, etc. that don’t have Eircodes. I’ve got some anecdotal evidence that a good number of farm accidents don’t occur at the home house (which has an Eircode) but in the outhouses, in fields, bogs and a myriad of other places that don’t have Eircodes.
No other postcode in the world gives specific postcodes to buildings in rural areas.
It's simply unreasonable to expect Eircode to do it.0 -
Advertisement
-
...Eircom isn't perfect, but it is light-years away from what it was in the bad old P&T, wait-seven-years-for-a-phone days. That is what competition has done. .
Competition had nothing to do with that since it was brought down hugely during the 80's after the Govt invested a huge amount more0 -
Nope, I disagree.
If a postie is not motivated enough to read the unambiguous address on the envelope, they are hardly likely to be motivated to read the postcode either, on that we agree, but Eircode is a weapon for a different war, it is just not supposed to solve that problem any more than it is supposed to solve climate change or drain the Shannon or enforce the Peace or Westphalia.
If the postcode is supposed to support delivery, then it should be a bit more meaningful to a post delivery agent. The truth is that the one we've implemented has routing keys which in a lot of cases may cover large areas or large numbers of houses. The 4 character random reference is zero help in this respect. I've yet to find an intelligent answer to "why do it that way."
There are a number of areas where it will have an immediate impact:Resolving the 40 per cent of addresses that are ambiguous - posties typically know by heart the surnames in rural areas, but run into trouble where there are new residents, or residents who share last names or even full names
We didn't need the current postal code system to do this. A house numbering system might be more useful in terms of resolving that ambiguity. If we're able to assign a unique random postcode, then arguably, we should be able to develop a postal address that matches geographic reality. We didn't do that and the postcode while useful in database terms is useless unless you have access to or a copy of that database. Maps become no more useful with the postcode simply because the routing keys cover a large-ish area and the four character random code is meaningless in hierarchical terms. The only way this becomes half useful is if properties put their post codes on their gates somewhere. At least an linear numbering system makes sense to most humans more than a random alphanumeric system does.Emergency services in rural areas, along with occasional deliveries like furniture - Eircode website > Google maps > brings you to the door, no more counting houses after the turn with the red barn
House numbering does this as well. I'm aware that a common objection to this was "man, huge job, cost a fortune, people be annoyed etc etc", but being someone from a rural community myself, I know more than me who think a house numbering/addressing exercise would have helped on a lot of fronts.Tax, social welfare, insurance and other types of fraud - addresses can be verified as real, unique and not used for other policies/claims in seconds, eliminating a huge swathe of opportunities for fraud, the cost of which inevitably falls on the consumer / taxpayer
Again, you don't need a postcode for this because postcodes are not the sole method by which you can remove ambiguities. Problem is again, we didn't want to do it properly. My guess is the postcode isn't going to fix things for you too much on this front. Also worth knowing that the amount of social welfare fraud is relatively little and other measures - such as the need for photo ids - will be as effective if not more.Data analysis - people researching everything from vaccination levels to cancer rates can very accurately put that data on a map and see patterns that might not otherwise be evident
The postcode system in Ireland as implemented by Eircode wasn't necessary to do this. In fact, Eircode, on account of the larger routing key areas and lack of hierarchical geographic information is less useful for this than a system whereby there was some meaningful geographic hierarchy in the closing four characters.
As it happens, I have quite a lot of interest in geo data. Personally feel that the Irish postcode system is a lost opportunity in that respect - we would most likely get more useful information out of a postcode that was more precise hierarchically past the route keys than one that has a unique code for every single household. Put simply, the grain is at the wrong place in the Irish postcode system. It's too broad at routing key level and and far too granular at the individual level.This last point needs careful management of data protection; it shows up as a disgrace the previous DPC's hand-waving attitude and vague statements that there were 'issues', without saying what might be, let alone doing his actual job of developing rules and practices to make the best use of the data without breaching anyone's privacy.
I'm not best pleased with how the last DPC dealt with the matter. However, it's fair to say that the current one needs to get their act together as well given issues around the primary schools database, another exercise, which, if managed properly, might have had benefits for the country.Finally, the issue that eircode won't solve, careless or lazy misdelivery. Eircom isn't perfect, but it is light-years away from what it was in the bad old P&T, wait-seven-years-for-a-phone days. That is what competition has done. For most people, competition for letter delivery basically doesn't exist. Eircode brings this competition a step closer, so it might motivate An Post to improve their service.
The postcode doesn't bring this competition closer to be frank. The competition is already here. You might argue that the postcode might make life easier for the competition but there's enough evidence to suggest they're not overly happy with the random four characters and the unclear routing keys which are An Post focused.0 -
I didn't see any postings on this but why the very odd numbering on the unique districts and in particular, the high numbers? For example, I think Stillorgan is A94 but I don't see an A01 for any area and similarly for other districts. Is this prevent Eircode snobbery? "Oh, you live in T09 while I live in T04".0
-
I didn't see any postings on this but why the very odd numbering on the unique districts and in particular, the high numbers? For example, I think Stillorgan is A94 but I don't see an A01 for any area and similarly for other districts. Is this prevent Eircode snobbery? "Oh, you live in T09 while I live in T04".
There are a lot of routing key numbers in the "nineties". Galway is "H91", Waterford is "X91", There are "V92", "V93", "V94" (Limerick et al.) and V95 as well.
I'm not sure about the rationale for this but maybe someone will do an analysis on the distribution of numbers and identify a trend.0 -
Trouwe Ier wrote: »There are a lot of routing key numbers in the "nineties". Galway is "H91", Waterford is "X91", There are "V92", "V93", "V94" (Limerick et al.) and V95 as well.
I'm not sure about the rationale for this but maybe someone will do an analysis on the distribution of numbers and identify a trend.
I've noticed that there's maybe a possible pattern to the Cork city area ones:
T 12,23,34,45,56 - but I can't see any meaning in it other than 12,23,34,45,54,45,56 or maybe 1(2,2)(3,3)(4,4)(5,5)6
I don't know. It doesn't look completely random though. I haven't really looked at the other ones around the country.
0 -
Its interesting to look again at the last such court case, which happened before eircodes;I think what may happen is that it will reduce An Post's ability to argue that the mail wasn't correctly addressed since you could argue that the eircode giving an exact location and using the very routing keys they asked for is right there in black and white. I wouldn't be surprised if it's decided in some future court case.
sourceThe case arose after ComReg issued a direction in November requiring An Post to deliver post to a disputed address. The premises is owned by Patrick and Sandra O'Connell, who wanted to use the address: Blackstone Bridge, Watergrasshill, Co Cork.
The couple said this was their official address, and the most accurate geographical description of their location. However anything posted to that address was often delivered late.
An Post said that as part of their delivery system in that part of Cork the O'Connell's postal address is Blackstone Bridge, Rathcormac, Co Cork.
In 2011 as part of An Post's program to increase the use of correct postal addresses any packages received O'Connells had stickers placed on them indicating the packet had been incorrectly addressed.
The O'Connell's complained to An Post as items posted to then were delayed for several days and some of their post was returned to sender. They got no response.
In November 2011 ComReg, who asserted that An Post's legal obligation to deliver post related to the official address as determined by the local authorities and not to postal addresses, issued a direction to An Post to accept the O'Connell's address as being at Watergrasshill.
An Post argued in its High Court proceedings that in order to comply with the direction it would need to restructure delivery routes, and that other people in the area would have to change their postal addresses to include a reference to Watergrasshill.
Opposing the proceedings, ComReg argued that it is empowered and obliged to direct An Post to deliver post to the customer's actual geographical address. It also claimed that An Post is trying to establish itself as the addressing authority of the State, which it was not entitled to do.
In his judgment Mr Justice Hedigan said that An Post "has a complex web of delivery routes" to fulfill its obligations as "Ireland's' designated Service Provider". It has designated post distribution centres, called post towns, close to delivery points.
An Post's system means that customers in rural areas are served their mail via a post town that can be located some miles from their exact geographical location. In order to ensure a quick delivery some people have postal addresses different to their actual geographical location. There are many examples of this in Ireland, the judge noted.
This use of the postal address is an "essential part of An Post's delivery web," which he said seemed to be accepted by the State and the EU.
If people wished to use An Post's postal services it was necessary for them to use the name of the postal town from which mail will be distributed. While it maybe "an irritant to some customers" the inconvenience was outweighed by the benefit of how An Post delivers post.
A couple of interesting points are raised;
An Post harassed the people who used their correct address by delaying their post and putting stickers on their letters. The judge found this to be acceptable behaviour due to An Post's special position as the universal postal provider.
Comreg's assertion that "An Post is trying to establish itself as the addressing authority of the State, which it was not entitled to do." was not upheld by the court, so we can assume that An Post now has that mantle, at least for the purposes of all postal deliveries.
Since then, enabling legislation for eircode went through the oireachtas. But the opportunity was not taken to specify the postcode provider as the official addressing authority of the State. Therefore An Post still have that authority.
Although the eircode designers bent over backwards to facilitate An Post by matching the routing codes to An Post depot areas (thereby reducing the utility of the eircode for other purposes) nevertheless An Post can still stand back and say "Its not our code. We may or may not use it".
So from their point of view, they can, and will, continue to dictate peoples postal addresses to them, with or without the eircode.
On the other hand, if that same case was being heard in court today, and the people were using Watergrasshill as their address with the eircode added it would be a lot less likely that a judge would say "If people wished to use An Post's postal services it was necessary for them to use the name of the postal town from which mail will be distributed."
So this legal authority which an Post currently have, to mess around with peoples addresses, was never granted to them as statutary power. They could easily lose it in the same way they acquired it; as a result of another court case which might go the other way.0 -
If I lived in Shannon i would go to the European court of human rights, because my area code is 061. That is incorrect, Shannon is Clare ,it should be 065. I get no phonecalls and it's all Eircom's fault. I will not rest until they change their entire system to suit ME!0
-
Why? Given how prominent GPS is (being the global standard and all) one of the recommendations that was made repeatedly during the submission process was to use a geocode basis. Making a postcode in the 21st Century that ignored this was an insane design decision – and stripped just this sort of functionality.It's simply unreasonable to expect Eircode to do it.
For the comparison, while the NI postcode doesn’t identify individual buildings it does identify their surrounding areas. Designing Eircode to have at least this same level of functionality is hardly ‘unreasonable’, and this is even more so given the numbers I crunched previously showing that 5mx5m resolution was possible.
I agree with your post, but I do want to correct this – it was perfectly possible to have unique codes using a geocode with a z-axis. Codes with non-zero z values would be used for assigning codes to houses and doing the database checks. I do agree that being hierarchical is more useful than unique codes, but I do want to emphasise that there was no barrier to having both.As it happens, I have quite a lot of interest in geo data. Personally feel that the Irish postcode system is a lost opportunity in that respect - we would most likely get more useful information out of a postcode that was more precise hierarchically past the route keys than one that has a unique code for every single household.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19365
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »If I lived in Shannon i would go to the European court of human rights, because my area code is 061. That is incorrect, Shannon is Clare ,it should be 065. I get no phonecalls and it's all Eircom's fault. I will not rest until they change their entire system to suit ME!
No, you just get a mobile. Problem solved.
On the other hand, Shannon IS in County Clare no matter what An Post and Eircode say.0 -
Advertisement
-
Why? Given how prominent GPS is (being the global standard and all)
GPS is a USA Govt standard, not an international standard. The US govt can change the standard if they wish. Like they're having a meeting in December about
http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/meetings/2015/0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement