Why doesn't this address validate?
Question
Last Updated: March 18, 2013Occasionally I have addresses that fail validation and I can't determine how to fix it. Do you have some examples that might help?
Answer
| Input Address | Explanation |
|---|---|
Sabanera del Rio Almacigo 436
|
Be sure to separate the recipient/company data from the address data. It should look
more like this: Sabanera del Rio --> This is the company, name, or recipient Almacigo 436 --> This is the address Curabo, PR 00778 --> This is the city, state, and ZIP |
6321 Pacific Coast HWY 128
|
This fails because an exact determination for the street name is unavailable. It could be "Pacific Coast HWY 128" or "Pacific Coast HWY" and then apartment 128. It is ambiguous. However, once a # is added in front of the 128, it validates perfectly. |
7800 Saulsalito Ave
|
This fails because the street name is misspelled. It should be "Sausalito". Once the spelling is corrected, it validates perfectly. (Apparently, trying to compensate for a mis-spelled city name in this case led to ambiguity that could not be afforded while meeting CASS™ requirements.) Variations of this typo do verify, however. For example: "Sauslito". |
7580 E Big Cannon Drive, Anaheim Hills
|
Bad primary number
(which can't be guessed), and "Anaheim Hills" twice confuses the parser, especially when
entered as a single-line address. Also, "Anaheim Hills" is a private community, not
a city name. Note that other services put the country into the "Firm Name" field or out front
of the address, or included Anaheim Hills as if it were valid. We're not sure
why they're doing this. However, these variants do
verify with LiveAddress: 7584 E Big Cannon Drive anaheim hills ca 92808 7584 bg cannon 92808 7584 big cannon ave aneheim hills ca |