SORRY MARTIN, PREMIUM BONDS NOT SO SAFE AFTER ALL.

surreysaver

Didn't you spend all this time wondering why you didn't win anything on the Premium Bonds?
For that, you are silly. 

elsien

I am curious, though.  Why would a change of postcode mean the post going elsewhere?

If I live at 1 Bridge Street,
                 x town
I would still expect my post to come to 1 Bridge Street X town unless there was an identical house and road number in the new postcode? 

People get postcodes wrong all the time, but the post still arrives.

GrubbyGirl_2

elsien said:

I am curious, though.  Why would a change of postcode mean the post going elsewhere?

If I live at 1 Bridge Street,
                 x town
I would still expect my post to come to 1 Bridge Street X town unless there was an identical house and road number in the new postcode? 

People get postcodes wrong all the time, but the post still arrives.

It doesn't follow that it will come even with the wrong or missing postcode.  I had a letter the other day with no postcode that was addressed to 3 xxxxx Place, YYYYY Lincolnshire.  My address is 3 xxxxx Avenue ZZZZZ Kent, nearly 200 miles away.  The only similarity was the first 2 items, the house number and name of the street.  I looked up the postcode and added it and put it back into the post box.  Many people wouldn't bother

Section62

Doidle99 said:

...
I was going to buy a large number of bonds for my grandchildren this Christmas but I have reconsidered as my money is (was) not as safe as Martin has claimed.

Your grandchildren (or their parents on their behalf) would no doubt enthusiastically set up an online account and check their bonds on a regular basis to see if they had won anything.

It seems improbable that they would find themselves in the same unfortunate position you have found yourself in.  Therefore, for them, Premium Bonds would be perfectly safe.

But you could help ensure this by also giving them the best gift they could have this Christmas... i.e. explaining the importance of keeping personal records up to date, and not leaving money in any type of financial product without checking on it from time to time.

pseudodox

Another example of lack of self responsibility so not surprising there is no sympathy here.  I have amongst my PBs 2 that are 65 years old & still showing on my account despite 7 changes of address.  It has always been up to me to contact NS&I to keep my record up to date, along with any other banks, doctor, DVLA, tax office etc etc.  And now it can all be done online it is so much easier, & every month I can check the app which tells me if I have won or not.  So never more than 31 days goes by without checking my account.  To leave it for 50 years shows a lack of self interest.  I remember that before the internet winning numbers for an area were published in local papers - even then I used to check every month.

Section62

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

elsien said:

I am curious, though.  Why would a change of postcode mean the post going elsewhere?

If I live at 1 Bridge Street,
                 x town
I would still expect my post to come to 1 Bridge Street X town unless there was an identical house and road number in the new postcode? 

People get postcodes wrong all the time, but the post still arrives.

It doesn't follow that it will come even with the wrong or missing postcode.  I had a letter the other day with no postcode that was addressed to 3 xxxxx Place, YYYYY Lincolnshire.  My address is 3 xxxxx Avenue ZZZZZ Kent, nearly 200 miles away.  The only similarity was the first 2 items, the house number and name of the street.  I looked up the postcode and added it and put it back into the post box.  Many people wouldn't bother

I suspect that was down to the operative (I think based overseas) who keys in the sorting details for postal items where the computer cannot read the full address correctly.  If there is no postcode on an item I guess they will start typing the address, and quite possibly pick the first one which comes up on the list.  The automated systems will then send the letter to the address the operative has entered, not what it says on the envelope.

Unless the OP's change of postcode was a massive one, I'm like elsien and don't really understand how a change in postcode would lead to this issue.  If the AB1 2xx part of the postcode didn't change then it is unlikely (though not impossible) for there to be a street with exactly the same name in that area.  If there were, it would be unusual enough that if there was a risk of people's post going to the wrong address then Royal Mail wouldn't have made that change, or at least made sure the affected customers absolutely understood the importance of updating their postcode with anyone who sends them mail.

The OP says they don't know where their post was delivered to instead, which perhaps suggests there isn't an identical address with the old postcode?

Local Authority street naming and numbering and Royal Mail work closely together to make sure addresses are uniquely identified - proposed changes are checked to make sure they don't create ambiguity.  If this change slipped through then the OP might have some grounds to complain to Royal Mail... but that complaint should have been made 35 years ago.

Grumpy_chap

It seems very unusual that an individual as meticulous to have all their bank statements from 29 years ago would not also have very detailed records of all other funds they held and keep those funds under regular review.

If I understand correctly:

• In 1975, the OP purchased 40 Premium Bonds (£40 ?)
• In 1990, the OP's post code (but nothing else in their address) changed.
• In 1996, the account was cashed in and closed (at a value of £2,2k)
• In 2025, the OP recalled these forgotten funds and sought to draw them out only to be advised that was not possible because of the funds being drawn in 1996.

For the £40 to increase to £2.2k, the OP must have received some winnings and must have selected for the winnings to be reinvested in Premium Bonds at the outset.
Given the timelines, it is possible but not probable that all the winnings were in the period 1990 (post code change) and 1996 (account closed).  If any of the winnings were in the far longer period between 1975 (purchase) and 1990 (post code change), the OP would have received a letter advising of the same.

Now, when someone else at elsewhere did receive the letter with the winnings notification, that individual did not simply put back in the mail "not known at this address" but opened the letter, and then made a claim to access the account, and then cashed in the funds. 
If we assume that the individual making this claim was not also called Doidle99 (or very similar), that would have required the individual to intentionally impersonate the OP to access the account to get the cheque sent.  Once in receipt of the cheque - assuming it was not crossed "account payee only" - the individual could have signed the back of the cheque to re-assign.
BUT, the very greatest number of people are honest and would not access a.n.others account in the event of such an opportunity.
So, something seems rather amiss here.

What was it that made the OP consider these 40 Premium Bonds this year that they have never considered in the past 29 years?

In the years since the post code change in 1990, what other correspondence has the OP not received by failure to update the records?
Again, for an individual as meticulous as to keep the bank statements for as far back as 1996, I would be surprised if there is anything that the OP did not update the records.

Wheres_My_Cashback

Grumpy_chap said:

So, something seems rather amiss here.

Is the OPs real name Jack A Nory I wonder ?

Martico

All Caps are still a useful signal

Frequentlyhere

Well, I for one am going to learn some lessons from this and schedule my investment checkups for slightly less than every third of a century from now on, just to be on the safe side.