nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Eircode - its implemetation (merged)

beveragelady

I called An Post today to try to sort out a problem with deliveries. The customer service chap was very helpful and I think it all got sorted.
The thing is, I tried to give him my Eircode because I live at a vague rural address but he said that they're not using them because the system isn't set up.
Amazed!
It's bad enough that they're no good to users of satnavs or google maps, but this is just astonishing. Can anybody explain how this could have been launched to such fanfare when it's all but meaningless?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Bacchus

Sorry for multiple posts. This topic quiet interesting and it's far more complex than I originally thought.

I was coming from the POV that an address is a publicly available piece of information, therefore a postcode is no different. However, because this database is publicly searchable and the eircode will specify an exact location, there is the potential to use the eircodes in conjunction with other data, and this might reveal some personal data about an individual. In that case, all addresses should also be protected but I guess the distinction is that they are not in a searchable database.

To go slightly off topic, I wonder have the same considerations been given the property price register? From that, if you know someone who bought recently in a county (but not the specific area), you can go online there and narrow down what houses sold in around that time period. My point here is that, addresses are such a public piece of information that while they can be considered to leak personal data, they are vital to how services are delivered. If postcodes can't be listed in a directory, then shouldn't we be burning all the phone books out there? Again, the key difference appears to be that eircodes are searchable.... but if they're not searchable... how do you find your own eircode? How does that work in the UK or elsewhere?

Sorry for rambling... as I said, it's an interesting challenge. On the one hand, an effective searchable postcode system is very useful, on the other hand, there is the potential for the system to reveal personal data when used in conjunction with other data.

MBSnr

GJG wrote: »

Um, no.

I think you don't know how to use Google

Hmmm.
It isn't as much as you think.

Search for “Dublin D02”

After page 16 you get this.

"In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 155 already displayed.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."

If you search again with the omitted result, there are duplications of the same Eircode repeatedly appearing.

Also there's only 187 (20 pages) for "Dublin D01"

In the 1000s perhaps. Certainly no way near 17,000 anyhow, so let's not band that figure about any more as proof....

L1011

An Posts Christmas stamp booklet uses eircodes on all address examples. Some inconsistency in their refusal to use them!

oscarBravo

gizmo555 wrote: »

The point is that Eircode deny on their website that they hold any personal data, not what the possible consequences are. Clearly they, you and Oscar know better than the Data Protection Commissioner.

They don't hold personal data, and the DPC hasn't said that they hold personal data. There is no contradiction.

Bacchus

oscarBravo wrote: »

They don't hold personal data, and the DPC hasn't said that they hold personal data. There is no contradiction.

Though it is actually worth noting that recommendation of the DPC is that it "should" be considered personal data.

Under the data protection acts...

"Personal data means data relating to a living individual who is or can be identified either from the data or from the data in conjunction with other information that is in, or is likely to come into, the possession of the data controller"

It is the "in conjunction with other info" bit that I think is relevant when talking about the Eircodes.

As I said earlier though, the scenarios where you use an Eircode are the same as where you use an address (which reveals the same information) so it is interesting that Eircodes are deemed to be personal data but addresses aren't. Again, as I said, the distinction must be because the Eircodes are on a public searchable database whereas addresses are not.

I'm very much pro-Eircode and hope it gets wider adoption but there are some valid questions about the privacy of personal data there.

View

Using Dublin examples to prove or disprove the existence of support for Eircodes is poor as most of Dublin already had post codes. The real test is whether the areas outside the previous Dublin post code areas are using them or not.

anothernight

Bacchus wrote: »

but if they're not searchable... how do you find your own eircode? How does that work in the UK or elsewhere?

In the countries I've lived in with a postcode (including the UK), there was no need for the average user (i.e., not businesses) to look up your postcode* because it was a compulsory part of the address, so you just know it. To me, having to look up your own postcode online is akin to looking up your house number, or the name of your county. Not saying it was the wrong way to implement it, but it does seem really weird. I don't understand how they allowed Eircode to go ahead without making it a compulsory part of people's addresses. But I am biased by all my previous postcode experiences.

*There are look up services online for the places I've lived which used postcodes, but they are so irrelevant to me that I never even knew of their existence until about 2 minutes ago, when I googled it.

GJG

MBSnr wrote: »

Hmmm.
It isn't as much as you think.

Search for “Dublin D02”

After page 16 you get this.

"In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 155 already displayed.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."

If you search again with the omitted result, there are duplications of the same Eircode repeatedly appearing.

Also there's only 187 (20 pages) for "Dublin D01"

In the 1000s perhaps. Certainly no way near 17,000 anyhow, so let's not band that figure about any more as proof....

You're just not correct; you seem to be confusing the total number of results that Google displays with the total number of results finds. Google are well aware of the adage that "the best place to hide a body is on Page 2 of Google's search results", so they don't waste resources showing you the results after the first few pages. This feature is well documented.

This fits a pattern of the Eircode begrudgers; strident claims of anything negative about Eircode, based on hasty assumptions, misunderstandings or just plain falsehoods. We've had claims that the Rock of Cashel or UCD won't get any or enough Eircodes (false), that the database would take up 2GB (it's 1 per cent of that) that Eircode forgot to give a code to 50,000 houses (they didn't).

I think that the fact that I can rebut two false claims with a few seconds googling before lunchtime shows that some people are so anxious to knock Eircode that they will believe - or at least say - almost anything.

oscarBravo

Bacchus wrote: »

Though it is actually worth noting that recommendation of the DPC is that it "should" be considered personal data.

Yes. I consider it personal data, because I store it in a database in conjunction with a person's name, and as such the precautions I'm legally required to take to protect personal data apply.

Eircode don't store personally-identifying information in the ECAD. Therefore it's not personal data, which is what they've said. There is no contradiction.

MBSnr

GJG wrote: »

This fits a pattern of the Eircode begrudgers;.

Right. You obviously don't know I am a fan of them....

Anyhow there aren't 17K unique Eircodes in "Dublin D02" on company websites. That we agree on right? I said in the 1000s. Did you read that bit?

GJG

MBSnr wrote: »

Right. You obviously don't know I am a fan of them....

Anyhow there aren't 17K unique Eircodes in "Dublin D02" on company websites. That we agree on right? I said in the 1000s. Did you read that bit?

There are 17k unique pages with "Dublin D02" on them, which is what I said in the first place.

plodder

Bacchus wrote: »

Sorry for multiple posts. This topic quiet interesting and it's far more complex than I originally thought.

I was coming from the POV that an address is a publicly available piece of information, therefore a postcode is no different. However, because this database is publicly searchable and the eircode will specify an exact location, there is the potential to use the eircodes in conjunction with other data, and this might reveal some personal data about an individual. In that case, all addresses should also be protected but I guess the distinction is that they are not in a searchable database.

To go slightly off topic, I wonder have the same considerations been given the property price register? From that, if you know someone who bought recently in a county (but not the specific area), you can go online there and narrow down what houses sold in around that time period. My point here is that, addresses are such a public piece of information that while they can be considered to leak personal data, they are vital to how services are delivered. If postcodes can't be listed in a directory, then shouldn't we be burning all the phone books out there? Again, the key difference appears to be that eircodes are searchable.... but if they're not searchable... how do you find your own eircode? How does that work in the UK or elsewhere?

Sorry for rambling... as I said, it's an interesting challenge. On the one hand, an effective searchable postcode system is very useful, on the other hand, there is the potential for the system to reveal personal data when used in conjunction with other data.

Exactly, and there's another interesting angle. People may expect that personally identifying information is protected when you click the little check box when you set up accounts on websites. But a lot of these websites won't know that Eircodes are potentially identifying and their privacy policies often say that non identifying information such as postcodes may be shared with "carefully selected" third parties. So, your Eircode (ie your address) could end up in all manner of supposedly anonymised statistics that get bought and sold on the internet.

oscarBravo

plodder wrote: »

Exactly, and there's another interesting angle. People may expect that personally identifying information is protected when you click the little check box when you set up accounts on websites. But a lot of these websites won't know that Eircodes are potentially identifying and their privacy policies often say that non identifying information such as postcodes may be shared with "carefully selected" third parties. So, your Eircode (ie your address) could end up in all manner of supposedly anonymised statistics that get bought and sold on the internet.

That's a potential data privacy breach on the part of the website operator, not Eircode.

ECAD still doesn't contain personal data.

gizmo555

oscarBravo wrote: »

ECAD still doesn't contain personal data.

It's impossible for you to say that without knowing what other data is in or is likely to come into the possession of Eircode.

Even without knowing that, we can say they are categorically wrong to claim that their records relating to the premises of sole traders which include their names are not personal data.

oscarBravo

gizmo555 wrote: »

It's impossible for you to say that without knowing what other data is in or is likely to come into the possession of Eircode.

And it's impossible for anyone to say for certain that any company isn't lying through its teeth in its privacy statements.

There's a presumption in the absence of evidence to the contrary that a data controller is compliant with its legal obligations. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it's fair to assume that they are compliant.

Even without knowing that, we can say they are categorically wrong to claim that their records relating to the premises of sole traders which include their names are not personal data.

If only they made that clear on their website.

[Deleted User]

oscarBravo wrote: »

Resize the browser until it's as narrow as shown above, and the "Directions" button appears.

Yeah, that actually does seem to work! Delighted to have found that out! Cheers.

Now I might actually be able to use Eircodes if they're supplied to me

(I also notice that they're raised it from 15 searches per day to 50. Nothing a history-clear wouldn't sort out anyway, but good to see it being made less hassle.)

plodder

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a potential data privacy breach on the part of the website operator, not Eircode..

What if the website is outside this jurisdiction, and doesn't know anything about Eircodes?

oscarBravo

plodder wrote: »

What if the website is outside this jurisdiction, and doesn't know anything about Eircodes?

What if it is?

byrnefm

Now I'm sure this is just coincidence but I received a letter in the post today (handwritten) with my address and Eircode on it .. and it was postmarked in Athlone on 15.12.2015 .. and arrived in this morning's post. Now that is fast processing!

So even though the Eircode probably made no difference to the letter's speed of delivery, it certainly did not slow it down any!

oscarBravo

We kicked off a process today to systematically canvass all our active customers for their Eircode. We're sending each of them an SMS asking them to reply with their Eircode.

The response rate is fairly respectable so far (I don't have an easy way to get exact numbers, but I'll work on it), with a decent percentage (maybe 20% or so) replying more or less straight away with their Eircode.

On top of that, we've had one reply asking "what's an Eircode?", one saying "my Eircode is xxx, but you should be using Loc8 codes", and one saying "never use it and never will".

It's not a scientific poll by any means, but it tends to suggest a broad acceptance rather than a broad rejection of Eircode as a concept.

anothernight

oscarBravo wrote: »

It's not a scientific poll by any means, but it tends to suggest a broad acceptance rather than a broad rejection of Eircode as a concept.

If a business I normally use for a service (or whatever it is you do) asks me for non-personal information that is clearly used for admin purposes, I will give them that information. Nothing to do with whether I accept its existence. Did you think everyone who considers Eircode badly implemented would just refuse to give you theirs? That would be bizarre imo.

When a form asks me for my PPS number I don't refuse to write it down either, even if I don't think it's a particularly well-designed personal identification system. Same with loads of other bits of information. Hell, I think the Leap card payment system is terribly designed and yet I still have one in my wallet for when I'm in Dublin.

oscarBravo

It wasn't intended as a comment on how wonderfully designed people think the code is; it's a question of to what extent people know or can quickly access their Eircode and are willing to provide it on request.

For what it's worth, the number of "what's an Eircode?" replies has now reached a grand total of two.

anothernight

Fair enough. The fact that you included "broad rejection" as the other option made it sound like you thought people who disliked it would just refuse to give it to you or something. I suspect a lot of people (me!) would provide it not out of willingness per se, but simply because it was requested and there was no reason not to give it. More indifference than acceptance, I suppose.

My mother doesn't follow Irish media and she had no clue that Eircode was a thing because she never received anything in the post about it until well after it was implemented. I'm actually surprised you got two responses from people who didn't know it existed! I would've thought the number would be vanishingly small.

Sam Russell

How many of the 80% who did not reply had no idea what an Eircode was or had no idea what their own one was?

Also, have you verified the codes you received?

Personally, I would supply my Eircode to a company I dealt with if they requested it, but I do not live at an address that has a non-unique address. If a company has my address, they can look up my Eircode.

oscarBravo

Sam Russell wrote: »

How many of the 80% who did not reply had no idea what an Eircode was or had no idea what their own one was?

How on earth would I know that?

Also, have you verified the codes you received?

Of course.

I have integrated Eircode lookups into our internal systems. When I enter an Eircode on the customer details page, it shows me the address from the ECAD. If the address is obviously different from what's on file, it's likely that they've typo'd the code, and we can clarify with them.

Personally, I would supply my Eircode to a company I dealt with if they requested it, but I do not live at an address that has a non-unique address. If a company has my address, they can look up my Eircode.

The vast, vast majority of my customers have non-unique addresses, hence (a) the usefulness of Eircodes to me, and (b) why I'm asking customers for their Eircode rather than wasting time on an address matching process.

View

The main problem with having introduced an address code here is that we have no proper addressing system here.

What do I mean by "proper addressing system"?

In many other countries, the local authority maintains an official register of all addresses within its area. It, and it alone, has the power to approve new addresses and it typically has the power to officially order address changes if it so requires. Thus, within a local authority area, there is no duplication of addresses nor is there any confusion about what any given address is.

That is not the case here.

So, when a post code was created for a property here, no attempt was made to verify if the property's actual address was correct or if it was completely inaccurate.

Now though with the post code system, we are heading down the road of reverse engineering an address from given post codes. Thus, if your address is wrong or contains superfluous data, tough, as that wrong information will courtesy of IT become your address irrespective of its accuracy.

GJG

View wrote: »

The main problem with having introduced an address code here is that we have no proper addressing system here.

What do I mean by "proper addressing system"?

In many other countries, the local authority maintains an official register of all addresses within its area. It, and it alone, has the power to approve new addresses and it typically has the power to officially order address changes if it so requires. Thus, within a local authority area, there is no duplication of addresses nor is there any confusion about what any given address is.

That is not the case here.

So, when a post code was created for a property here, no attempt was made to verify if the property's actual address was correct or if it was completely inaccurate.

Now though with the post code system, we are heading down the road of reverse engineering an address from given post codes. Thus, if your address is wrong or contains superfluous data, tough, as that wrong information will courtesy of IT become your address irrespective of its accuracy.

I think you are correct that the haphazard nature of addressing is unfortunate. You say that introducing Eircode before what you regard as a 'proper addressing system' is the 'main problem'. Other than 'Don't start from here', what exactly is your suggested solution?

Reforming addresses, with or without Eircode, is likely to be impossibly difficult because of local attachment to anachronistic and contradictory place-names, with a variety of spellings, borders and social meanings. This is why people who were against Eircode for narrow commercial reasons demanded that everyone's address be changed before Eircode was introduced. They knew it would never happen, although they never explained why it might be necessary.

I think that Eircode has reduced or eliminated the need to reform addresses - it just sidestepped an issue that would have been politically impossible to address directly. If you don't agree, there is nothing about Eircode that prevents you from campaigning for such reform.

Sam Russell

GJG wrote: »

I think you are correct that the haphazard nature of addressing is unfortunate. You say that introducing Eircode before what you regard as a 'proper addressing system' is the 'main problem'. Other than 'Don't start from here', what exactly is your suggested solution?

The first step is quite obviously to appoint an 'Address Regulator' which should be the local planning office, or alternatively, the Revenue Commissioners as they collect property tax.

The next step is to define what an 'official' address is. Historically, it is, for rural addresses, House name (if it has one), Townland, Barony, County. This could of course be modernised, but a road name and house number would be relatively easy to add. Addressee offers a suggestion (in conjunction with others on the same road) and 'Address Regulator' agrees or suggests an alternative - for example should it be a duplicate.

To do this a start has to be made, and for a start to be made there has to be political will and that is sadly lacking.

oscarBravo

We got another reply today, containing an Eircode but also the message: "Please don't use Eircode. Nobody else is. There are much better systems."

Are there? In the sense of technically more useful for various reasons, it could be argued that there are. But "better" for me ultimately boils down to "more useful".

The level of response from our customer base to the question "what's your Eircode?" has been, on balance, pretty impressive. If the question had been "what's your Loc8 code?" or "what's your GoCode?", or even "what's your what3words code?" - would we have received such a response?

We're up to four "what's an Eircode?" responses. You think we'd only have received four "what's a Loc8 code?" replies? For better or worse, people have been informed of their Eircode.

What's the best system? The one that gives me the information I need.

[Deleted User]

How many of those "what's an eircode" would have answered correctly if you had asked for the postcode?