A CHANGE of sign sparked confusion in Bournemouth after a contractor removed the wrong place name.

BCP Council commissioned a contractor to install a ‘Welcome to Littledown & Iford’ sign at the same location as the current ‘Welcome to Springbourne’ sign in Holdenhurst Road.

However, residents were left questioning the decision when the ‘Welcome to Springbourne’ sign was removed.

Resident Martin Corb, 53, said: “They took down the ‘Welcome to Springbourne’ sign, dug up the pavement and put up a ‘Welcome to Littledown & Iford’ sign.

“Now they have come back again and put up the original sign. Surely, they must have known we weren’t in Littledown & Iford?

“For most the morning I saw them digging up the pavement.”

The ‘Welcome to Littledown & Iford’ sign initially replaced the original sign, meaning people read it as they entered Springbourne.

However, contractors then turned the sign around and put the Springbourne sign back up.

Mr Corb continued: “I reckon it is because they are part of BCP, I imagine that is probably the reason, but it seems a waste of money.

“I have sent them an email about it. In the meantime, it seems someone has been and put the sign back up.

“How many times does it take for a worker to come back and correct a problem that didn’t need to happen anyway?

“The council has wasted thousands of pounds having new signs made up, and for what reason, no one was bothered by the old signs so why spend money unnecessary, especially given the current economic climate?”

A spokesperson for BCP Council said: “BCP Council commissioned a contractor to install the ‘Welcome to Littledown & Iford’ sign at the same location as the ‘Welcome to Springbourne’ sign.

“These were to be back to back with each other to reflect the two ward boundaries.

“Unfortunately, there was an error in the installation and initially the contractor removed the Springbourne sign and replaced it with the Littledown and Iford sign.

“As soon as this became evident, the contractor was instructed and has corrected this at their own cost. There was no cost to the council as a result of this mistake.”