To be annoyed at people who live in a London Borough but insist they don't (i.e Im in Surrey, Kent etc)

[Rosehip10]

As in people in places such as Richmond, Kingston (insisting they live in Surrey) or places such as Bromley (insisting they are in Kent).

These places may used to have in a different county but have been part of greater London and a London Borough since 1965.

Is is snobbery? They usually drone only about postal towns which also no longer exist.

Richmond sits on the outskirts of West London (not snobbery - it's lovely, expensive, and rather smart) but you'd have to whizz down the A3 a bit to get to Kingston so I think of it as verging on Surrey.

If I were to explain to a British person that I'm from Barrington, USA, they'd say 'where's Barrington?' and eventually we'd agree that I'm broadly from Chicago.

If I were to meet someone from Chicago here in London, I'd tell them I was from Barrington, because no one from Chicago would think Barrington is Chicago.

If my mum thinks somewhere is less naice, she will definitely say it's part of London, not Surrey/insert county! Greater London is a good catch all.

I live in Epsom and despite TfL busses we are definitely Surrey. We don't have an 020 post code and we only just got oyster. A lot of people resist & dislike being swallowed by London, me included (although the tfl thing is nifty). I'm a Surrey girl, as much as I buzz off up to Town a lot.

Also, to answer a Pp, unless you're taking about somewhere like Manchester as your nearest town centre, up to Town/in to Town means London proper, I thought? If I go into Kingston, Wimbledon or Guildford similar, I say the place name. Seeing friends from about Putney onwards is up to Town/in Town.

People view Epsom very much as Surrey, I think, proximity to London or not. If anyone in London proper asks where I live, they definitely view it as the sticks despite me being able to get to Waterloo, Victoria or LB in the same amount of time or possibly faster than people on the ends of some of the further out tube lines.

The American has it! That's exactly how it works.

@hopefulhalf

I was born in Hammersmith, and back in the 70s that wasn't considered very central at all! We used to talk about going "up west" for central London

Middlesex university does exist but it’s an hour from my old house in Enfield, and you cross through another county to get there.

I read on wiki last night that they only kept the old Middlesex postal areas and codes because it was cheaper to do so. Hence Enfield is both N and EN.

I grew up in Twickenham, Middlesex and, because I'm old, still refer to it as that. I actually feel very sad that so many places are being swallowed up by Greater London.

I live in Lincolnshire and have a Nottinghamshire postcode.

If someone said they livedin/ from Richmond I would first presume North Yorkshire and have to clarify they meant London Richmond, unless the conversation has happening in London.

Greater London boroughs without London postcodes aren’t ‘London’ in the way it’s talked about or known as, that’s just the way it is. Greater London isn’t proper London, it just isn’t because it’s so vast. Surrey isn’t known as London. Kent isn’t known as London. Essex isn’t known as London. They are greater London boroughs but known by their counties. The proper boundaries may be there but if you’re a Londoner you known how it works. You have got it all wrong!

I agree, a London postcode is proper London.

But you are wrong. Plenty of areas that only became part of Greater London in 1965 (in the same way as Kingston) have London postcodes. Ones I can think of off hand are W3, W4, W5, SW19 & 20, E17. Part of Lewisham (London since 1889) has a Kent postcode. Part of E4 is in Essex.

The modern postcodes were set between 1958 and 60s so most likely pre-date the 1965 boundary change.

No most postcode post date the change. My cousin was one of the first to get one just after the change. She lived in Merton but got a Croydon postcode.

I lived in Ewell. We had a 020 phone number and a KT postcode. I never thought it would ever be considered as London.

I'm outskirts Epsom now. I think that's definitely Surrey.

It is the fault of the postal service and of government for being high handed and telling people they have changed boundaries when people never asked for it to happen

Putting counties in addresses is nothing to do with boundaries and is just adding in extraneous information. You may as well include your parish, ward or any other official boundary that exists. It still doesn't belong in an address.

Enfield isn’t widely known as Middlesex by anyone really though, except people who lived here in the 60’s, everyone says London Borough of Enfield.

I lived in one of those areas for ten years and the postal address is surrey. If you say it london a proper londoner say its not london. Yabu its not london.

But if live in Bromley you have a br postcode whereas to be in London you would be in catford say with a se postcode! I grew up in a London borough with a London postcode (se19)

I llive in a London Borough but my address still uses the postcode from before it was in London (over 50 years ago!!) It drives me mad when friends in the same area claim we don’t live in London.

No your area wouldn’t have had a postcode. Postcodes came after the the founding of the GLC. London both LCC and parts of what would become the GLC already had postal districts eg the first 3 to 4 characters of the postcode.

Gpatz, Epsom and Ewell are both definitely Surrey.

The Oval Cricket Ground - the home of Surrey County Cricket - is in London.

Yes but before 1889, it was in Surrey. I wonder if people were still insisting it was still Surrey by the 1940s

I grew up in Bromley/Beckenham/West Wickham - Kent is the postal address for all those places. They ARE in Kent, and also part of the overlap of Greater London. Don't understand the point of your post?? There used to be a Kent magazine and I remember one of their front pages being a feature on the Kentish town of Bromley, so they obviously class it as Kentish too. What an irritating post OP.

"Greater London isn’t proper London"

In what way?

Upminster's connection to London

• Pay tax to a London Borough
• Covered by the London Metropolitan Police
• Vote for the Mayor of London
• Modern maps
• The name "Greater London"

Upminster's connection to Essex

• Used to be a part of it before 1965
• Um, that's it.

It's London. Unless you're going to say that "proper" London is just the bits within the old Roman City then you've already fully accepted the fact that London grows and takes over more areas. Southwark used to be a part of Surrey and Westminster was Middlesex.

The only thing that makes people believe that somewhere like Upminster is Essex is just that it's a relatively brief period of time ago that it was.

i worked in Kingston in the 70's it was in surrey then.

I grew up in Bromley/Beckenham/West Wickham - Kent is the postal address for all those places

No it isn't. Kent isn't in any postal address anywhere.

I have experienced the reverse . Someone who lives in Surrey telling everyone they live in London. She hates it there and I think is refusing to accept the reality that they don't live in London anymore.

I was born in Hammersmith, and back in the 70s that wasn't considered very central at all! We used to talk about going "up west" for central London

Yes I love this as the direction of travel is due east!

I remember meeting up with some people and at one point the conversation came round to places and I happened to say Southall was in London.
I got looked at like a mad woman and told it categorically is not London