Liz wrote: > Hello Brad > > I was just starting to respond to your earlier email when I noticed this one > coming in and, yes, that is why I was putting this on the list and querying > how they managed to do this. It was obviously found immediately on the day > the information was provided by the government so, like you, I have no idea > where or how they did it and I want to know as it would be useful to all of > us to know how they did this having just ordered the second batch of 6 Death > Certificates. I don't mind paying my £7 per certificate but I would love to > be able to order online. Certs aren't allowed to be downloadable online or by email and won't be until an Act of Parliament allows them to be *but* for firms who do such jobs as in Heir Hunters, insurance companies, etc, it is possible for them to access the information online. It's all to do with attempts to prevent ID fraud. Firms can sign up to receive all the latest deaths at regular intervals. IIRC, this is weekly. Thus such firms do have the access they claim but it's very misleading for family historians and genealogists who'd love to be able to do the same. Only those who have a legitimate reason for requiring the data can sign up for it and the fee is quite steep. Family history doesn't count. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:04:00 +0000 Charani <familyhunter@family-hunter.co.uk> wrote: Hello Charani, > It's all to do with attempts to prevent ID fraud. Firms can sign up Ah, that old chestnut.... > to receive all the latest deaths at regular intervals. IIRC, this is > weekly. Thus such firms do have the access they claim but it's very If the law says they can't be put online, with out exception, how come there's an exception? A rhetorical question, that. Good 'ole Inglish (deliberate) law, eh? Seems a bit like the Mock Turtle; It means exactly what I want it to mean. No more, and no less. > misleading for family historians and genealogists who'd love to be > able to do the same. Only those who have a legitimate reason for > requiring the data can sign up for it and the fee is quite steep. I'll bet it is. :-( > Family history doesn't count. Of course, that's a given. :-) -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent"

Brad Rogers wrote: > If the law says they can't be put online, with out exception, how come > there's an exception? A rhetorical question, that. <G> There's an exception because it's for the protection of the people - and costs less than it would to refund the money to innocent victims. It would be interesting to know how many cases of ID theft the system has thwarted but I doubt that informtion would be available even under the FoI Act. > Good 'ole Inglish (deliberate) law, eh? Seems a bit like the Mock > Turtle; It means exactly what I want it to mean. No more, and no less. :)) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk