On Monday, 2 November 2015 17:46:10 UTC, Tickettyboo wrote: > On 2015-11-02 17:40:20 +0000, stainless said: > > > Just wondered if anyone could offer some ideas as to the following > > initial anomalies I have spotted: > > > > 1. It appears my father's record is closed for both searching and > > viewing on the transcriptions/images. He was born in 1930, so I thought > > it might be because he was thought to be possibly still alive (which he > > isn't). However, my mother, who was 8 at the time (born in 1931), is > > searchable and on the images, so her record is not closed. Any ideas > > why? > > Presuming your mother is also deceased, did she died before your > father? I read somewhere that till the early1990s -not sure of that > date , the document was still a working document for some govt purpose. > Sorry, I can't for the life of me remember the details or where I read > it > > > > 2. Now for a really strange situation for my mother's entry. She is > > with her family and recorded, obviously, with her maiden name, as she > > was only 8 years old. She did not marry until 1954. However, above her > > name on the image, in her name box, her married surname has been added. > > So this looks like the entry was updated after 1954. There is no > > logical reason for the correct marriage name to be known in 1939 (time > > travel was yet to be invented...). How could her married name have been > > added so much later and why? > > see above, if a govt dept was referring to this document for whatever > reason it may have been annotated at a much later date. Have you viewed > the image? if her married name is in different writing or doesn't look > like part of the original form completion then I'd guess that its been > amended/annotated much later > -- > Tickettyboo My mother is still alive so not sure why she is shown (personally I am pleased she is as there is nothing requiring secrecy regarding her entry - however does make me wonder if there are entries for other living people who would rather not have their info available). However, the fact that this was deemed a working document will explain why her married name was later annotated. I did forget to mention that the handwriting for the original entry and her married name were different. Cheers

On 2015-11-02 20:00:36 +0000, stainless said: > On Monday, 2 November 2015 17:46:10 UTC, Tickettyboo wrote: >> On 2015-11-02 17:40:20 +0000, stainless said: >> >>> Just wondered if anyone could offer some ideas as to the following> > >>> initial anomalies I have spotted: >>> >>> 1. It appears my father's record is closed for both searching and> > >>> viewing on the transcriptions/images. He was born in 1930, so I >>> thought> > it might be because he was thought to be possibly still >>> alive (which he> > isn't). However, my mother, who was 8 at the time >>> (born in 1931), is> > searchable and on the images, so her record is >>> not closed. Any ideas> > why? >> >> Presuming your mother is also deceased, did she died before your> >> father? I read somewhere that till the early1990s -not sure of that> >> date , the document was still a working document for some govt >> purpose.> Sorry, I can't for the life of me remember the details or >> where I read> it >>> >>> 2. Now for a really strange situation for my mother's entry. She is> > >>> with her family and recorded, obviously, with her maiden name, as she> >>> > was only 8 years old. She did not marry until 1954. However, above >>> her> > name on the image, in her name box, her married surname has been >>> added.> > So this looks like the entry was updated after 1954. There is >>> no> > logical reason for the correct marriage name to be known in 1939 >>> (time> > travel was yet to be invented...). How could her married name >>> have been> > added so much later and why? >> >> see above, if a govt dept was referring to this document for whatever> >> reason it may have been annotated at a much later date. Have you >> viewed> the image? if her married name is in different writing or >> doesn't look> like part of the original form completion then I'd guess >> that its been> amended/annotated much later >> -- >> Tickettyboo > > My mother is still alive oh pleased about that :-) > so not sure why she is shown (personally I am pleased she is as there > is nothing requiring secrecy regarding her entry - however does make me > wonder if there are entries for other living people who would rather > not have their info available). However, the fact that this was deemed > a working document will explain why her married name was later > annotated. I did forget to mention that the handwriting for the > original entry and her married name were different. > > Cheers Well, as with all things there are errors and mistakes. It really can't be helped I suppose, whenever rules are made then errors happen that contravene them, but on the whole, like your Mum, people don't usually mind too much -- Tickettyboo