I tried using the link when I got the email but the discount had not been applied. I have emailed them. Actually they sent me two emails, with two different codes! (Neither worked) Penny On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Nivard Ovington via <[email protected]> wrote: > PS in the original email with the code offer, if you clicked the link in > it, it should apply the code for you > > I do agree the place to enter the code manually is rather odd, it took > me a while to find it a few days ago for someone else > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 05/11/2015 09:48, Penny Trueman via wrote: > > Now I'm Really annoyed: I couldn't find the 'discount box' on my first, > > curiosity led perusal of what was available. > > I left it until today and ended up having a look at the 'faq's' page, > > discovering that the 'voucher box' was on the home page, near the bottom, > > not, anywhere on the 1939 register pages. > > I entered my given code and got 'No longer valid'. > > ????????????????? > > > > Penny > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello Robin: Could it be that your Grandma either died before 1939 OR perhaps remarried OR emigrated ? Do you have a date of death ? or do you know that she was at 32 Garden Street after 1939 ? Could you share your Father's first name and birth date, as well as his brother's names and birth dates ? I had one of my elderly ancestors pop up one time, while I was searching for one of her children. Bonus ! Barb, Ontario, Canada. >>>>>>>>-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] via Mt grandmother Elizabeth KING (born 1976) should be at 32 Garden Street Accrington in 1939. But She does not appear to be indexed nor does No32 Garden Street appear in an address search. Any suggestions about the missing numbers in Garden Street? BTW Grandma was a widow my father had moved away to Slough and is indexed there, elder brother is in the Navy and thus not in the register and younger brother was born in 1917 so no other family member to search with. Frustrating as my other grandma and family have shown up in the index with revelation that two uncles had moved away from Lancs.<<<<<<<<< :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

PS in the original email with the code offer, if you clicked the link in it, it should apply the code for you I do agree the place to enter the code manually is rather odd, it took me a while to find it a few days ago for someone else Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 05/11/2015 09:48, Penny Trueman via wrote: > Now I'm Really annoyed: I couldn't find the 'discount box' on my first, > curiosity led perusal of what was available. > I left it until today and ended up having a look at the 'faq's' page, > discovering that the 'voucher box' was on the home page, near the bottom, > not, anywhere on the 1939 register pages. > I entered my given code and got 'No longer valid'. > ????????????????? > > Penny

Then email them Penny Unless you have used it the code should still be valid The code I received says its valid until the 30th November 2015, I see no reason why yours would be different Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 05/11/2015 09:48, Penny Trueman via wrote: > Now I'm Really annoyed: I couldn't find the 'discount box' on my first, > curiosity led perusal of what was available. > I left it until today and ended up having a look at the 'faq's' page, > discovering that the 'voucher box' was on the home page, near the bottom, > not, anywhere on the 1939 register pages. > I entered my given code and got 'No longer valid'. > ????????????????? > > Penny

Hi - I am writing up an ancestor who was a wheelwright from about 1861 to before 1891. The 1891 census shows a change of profession from wheelwright to grocer. I am wondering why the change. Could it be because wheels went from being made of wood to being made of iron? Just wondering because it seems like such a extreme change of profession in middle life. Thanks for any thoughts. Carole

Now I'm Really annoyed: I couldn't find the 'discount box' on my first, curiosity led perusal of what was available. I left it until today and ended up having a look at the 'faq's' page, discovering that the 'voucher box' was on the home page, near the bottom, not, anywhere on the 1939 register pages. I entered my given code and got 'No longer valid'. ????????????????? Penny

At 09:17 AM 3/11/2015, Nivard wrote: >Whilst you are at it (checking for wills etc) >Have a look at the latest release on Ancestry >Scotland, National Probate Index (Calendar of Confirmations and >Inventories), 1876-1936 Thanks Nivard, I can use that! Certainly can. Don't have a sub to Ancestry (as yet), but can book in at my State Library during the week. Marvellous. Graham

PS. This may get you direct to the search page. https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/#wills You will need to click onto the Wills and Probate 1858-1996 as outlined in blue or go to another search such as soldier's wills. Graham

While I acknowledge the usefulness of the 1939 register and was eagerly awaiting its release, as a subscriber to FMP I was a little surprised to find it costs that much, but then all that digitising etc. has to be paid for by someone. Frankly, I won't be using it - except maybe once or twice for an odd look - because I can get more useful information from wills, which are available from the probate office 1858-1996. Even the extremely useful online index (if the person made a will or an administration was given) will often tell me who was still alive during 1939 and upwards and the cost of the will is only a few dollars more than one download from FMP's 1939 register. Of course, the probate would not inform me of their movements during 1939, but even so I've found some fabulous information about other relatives from probate, such as female children's married names and addresses, also cousins of the deceased who were executors and not living in the same county. Once in a while probate only gives the wife or the husband's name, so sort of 'bombs out,' but for the majority of what I have received I have been extremely grateful. One probate of 1893 on my mother's side listed all of seven children plus a grandson, the married surnames of the four daughters and the addresses of seven houses the deceased had left to his children. Another gave an abundant stack of information about land and houses, nieces, and the names and addresses of two first cousins, both of whom were then found to have married and had children. This then led to the discovery of living relatives. Have a bo-peep at: https://www.gov.uk/wills-probate-inheritance/overview Cheers Graham Melbourne, Oz

Every little helps as they say A keyword search for names or counties or even countries brings up a surprising number of very varied hits Ireland, England, Australia or New Zealand even The page images for said hits are similar to the probate calendar books for England & Wales and can be very detailed Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 02/11/2015 22:25, Graham Price via wrote: > At 09:17 AM 3/11/2015, Nivard wrote: >> Whilst you are at it (checking for wills etc) >> Have a look at the latest release on Ancestry >> Scotland, National Probate Index (Calendar of Confirmations and >> Inventories), 1876-1936 > > Thanks Nivard, I can use that! Certainly can. Don't have a sub to > Ancestry (as yet), but can book in at my State Library during the > week. Marvellous. > > Graham

Whilst you are at it (checking for wills etc) Have a look at the latest release on Ancestry Scotland, National Probate Index (Calendar of Confirmations and Inventories), 1876-1936 In effect the Scottish version of the Probate Calendars A keyword search for Lancashire gets 296 hits Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 02/11/2015 22:12, Graham Price via wrote: > PS. This may get you direct to the search page. > https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/#wills You will need to click > onto the Wills and Probate 1858-1996 as outlined in blue or go to > another search such as soldier's wills. > > Graham

>From Jane at Bolton & District FHS: The next meeting of the Bolton branch of the Manchester & Lancashire Family History Society will be Wednesday November 4th at 7.30pm at the Bolton Cricket Club, Bishops Rd, Bolton, Lancashire, BL3 2JB . It is actually a "special" for all Bolton Wanderers fans as we have their secretary Simon Marland coming to tell us about how the Wanderers teams, families, and supporters were affected by the two World Wars. He is bringing some memorabilia and has invited more. it will also be the last of our discount sales tables of genealogical stationery etc, and our recycle desk for this year as it is our Christmas party next month, so if folk want anything now is the time. Anyone wanting to book for our pie and peas supper at our last meeting at Bolton Cricket Club on December 2nd should contact [email protected] or ring Barbara Owen on 01204 309515 before Nov 18th. Free to members, £2 to non-members. The Christmas talk is by Linda Sawley with a light-hearted look at Christmas traditions, and also a festive raffle. More details can also be seen via our newsletter on http://www.bolton.mlfhs.org.uk/Newsletter.php with a new one due out next week. Please note the December talk will be our last one at the Bolton Cricket Club. Green Lane Farnworth, Lancashire, BL3 2JB We start the New Year with a new venue at The MacKenzie Suite, Old Links Golf Club, Chorley Old Road, Bolton BL1 5SU January 20th. More to follow.

I agree Penny.....I have subscribed to FMP on the understanding their data is available to me as a fully paid up Subscriber. The proposed discount offer to current Subscribers is tempting, but I’m afraid our A$ can't give me extra bites of my Family History cherry. Thankfully, most of my research overseas relates to earlier generations. Cheers, Robyn -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Penny Trueman via Sent: Wednesday, 28 October 2015 11:07 PM To: sally roberts; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] 1939 Register "FindMyPast said: “Because of the amount of work involved, and wealth of additional information we’re providing around the records"" That, is what we Already pay our subscriptions for. Regards, Penny --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Well put, Vern. Penny On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Vern Prescott via <[email protected]> wrote: > Certainly there is a huge cost in making this information available. But, > think about older databases that also involved great cost but which cost > has been recovered through years of subscription fees. The profits from > earlier databases should pay for the costs of delivering the new ones. If > we are to accept that extra fees are required to pay for producing this new > database, then surely the subscription costs for the old databases should > be significantly reduced as the production costs of those have already been > recouped. > On Oct 28, 2015 1:14 PM, "Adrian Bruce via" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Cash grab? Who do you think pays the camera operators? The guys who wrote > > the software? The companies who supply the hardware? Do you believe the > > employees of all these companies should work for free? FMP have laid out > a > > lot of cash on this, up front. > > > > (I have no idea about the licence to use the Register data itself - > whether > > FMP pays TNA for it, or TNA pays FMP to do the job, so I omitted it from > > the list above). > > > > The taxpayers can still do exactly what they did before, which is pay the > > government £49 per household. > > > > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > > fees! > > > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Don't forget that the cost of running the site is not just the one-off cost of creating the images and indexes but also the maintenance of the hardware and software. That lot needs to be upgraded periodically and if it's not done then the company has to do a big revamp such as New Ancestry or New FMP even more often than they do. It's a bit dodgy for me to try to remember but weren't both the 1901 and 1911 censuses on their own site to start with? Once they had recouped a fair amount of cash, then they were quietly bundled into the ordinary subs. "The profits from earlier databases should pay for the costs of delivering the new ones." Generally, they do. FMP did the WW1 Soldiers' Record (encouraging Ancestry to extend its own indexing); they're in the middle of Staffordshire PRs and Shropshire PRs, and the Electoral Registers have just gone up with hardly a murmur from the community (which is absurd, especially given that the WW1 Absent Voters' Lists are in there). All with no extra payment other than new customers. I suspect that somewhere in that lot, the camel's back got broken. The problem for me is not the principle of paying, it's the incredibly stupid way FMP didn't prepare the way for this. All we saw was pictures of people scanning. Big deal. I have a feeling there is a lot more behind the scenes than just the household schedules - for instance, how do they stop people born less than 100y ago being redacted? There must be other files brought into play that we don't know about. FMP could and should have told us about this.

Either you do or you don't. They don't care ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vern Prescott via" <[email protected]> To: "David Railton" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [LAN] 1939 Register > Funny how ancestry can keep adding records without additional charges. > I'm > sure it takes just as much work for them to provide their information. > > > > On 28 October 2015 at 06:25, David Railton via <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> FindMyPast have just announced that the 1939 Register will be available >> on-line from 2nd November. I had assumed that as a subscriber to >> FindMyPast >> the Register would be available as part of the package I pay for by >> annual >> subscription. >> >> WRONG! I can’t have read the small print. >> >> FindMyPast say that: >> “Records will be available to purchase for £6.95 per household or £24.95 >> for >> our 5 household bundle (£4.99 per household). >> As an early 1939 signup, we will send you an exclusive code soon which >> will >> entitle you to 10% off our 5 household bundle.” >> >> When asked if these charges apply to those who are currently subscribed >> FindMyPast said: >> “Because of the amount of work involved, and wealth of additional >> information we’re providing around the records, we’re unable to include >> the >> 1939 Register in our users’ subscriptions.” >> >> David Railton >> >> >> >> >> >> >> :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: >> >> Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No >> fees! >> >> The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] >> >> :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Adrian I didn't see a post mentioning a "cash grab" but echo your thoughts in that it costs a huge amount to bring out these new databases I believe they pay a hefty sum to the NA for the licence, as Ancestry would for their projects, its usually an exclusivity contract for a number of years, often three or five but someone has posted that this one is to 2024, how true that is I can't say They are also taking a risk that they make their investment back, if no one uses the database, or not enough then they will make a loss NB I think the charge via the NHS is currently £42 not that it makes that much difference I already know where my lot were in 1939 and what they were doing so it has limited interest to me, but am sure it will be of great use to many and there will be plenty of people bashing their credit cards come Monday Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 28/10/2015 17:08, Adrian Bruce via wrote: > Cash grab? Who do you think pays the camera operators? The guys who wrote > the software? The companies who supply the hardware? Do you believe the > employees of all these companies should work for free? FMP have laid out a > lot of cash on this, up front. > > (I have no idea about the licence to use the Register data itself - whether > FMP pays TNA for it, or TNA pays FMP to do the job, so I omitted it from > the list above). > > The taxpayers can still do exactly what they did before, which is pay the > government £49 per household.

Cash grab? Who do you think pays the camera operators? The guys who wrote the software? The companies who supply the hardware? Do you believe the employees of all these companies should work for free? FMP have laid out a lot of cash on this, up front. (I have no idea about the licence to use the Register data itself - whether FMP pays TNA for it, or TNA pays FMP to do the job, so I omitted it from the list above). The taxpayers can still do exactly what they did before, which is pay the government £49 per household.

I was just saying this on another message board today - there's precedent that if we just wait, it will be included in the normal membership. They did the same thing with the 1901 and 1911 census and the British Newspaper Archive. I will be sitting tight - I don't have much cash but I do have time to wait out the initial credit period of 2-3 years. Concetta On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 5:37 AM, sally roberts via <[email protected]> wrote: > That is extremely disappointing to hear, but thanks very much for the > heads up. I have so many people in my tree that I'd be interested to find > out about that it makes it a very expensive option to take up. > > I wonder what "wealth of additional information" actually means? > > Regards, > Sally > > > > > FindMyPast have just announced that the 1939 Register will be available > > on-line from 2nd November. I had assumed that as a subscriber to > FindMyPast > > the Register would be available as part of the package I pay for by > annual > > subscription. > > > > WRONG! I can’t have read the small print. > > > > FindMyPast say that: > > “Records will be available to purchase for £6.95 per household or £24.95 > for > > our 5 household bundle (£4.99 per household). > > As an early 1939 signup, we will send you an exclusive code soon which > will > > entitle you to 10% off our 5 household bundle.” > > > > When asked if these charges apply to those who are currently subscribed > > FindMyPast said: > > “Because of the amount of work involved, and wealth of additional > > information we’re providing around the records, we’re unable to include > the > > 1939 Register in our users’ subscriptions.” > > > > David Railton > > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Certainly there is a huge cost in making this information available. But, think about older databases that also involved great cost but which cost has been recovered through years of subscription fees. The profits from earlier databases should pay for the costs of delivering the new ones. If we are to accept that extra fees are required to pay for producing this new database, then surely the subscription costs for the old databases should be significantly reduced as the production costs of those have already been recouped. On Oct 28, 2015 1:14 PM, "Adrian Bruce via" <[email protected]> wrote: > Cash grab? Who do you think pays the camera operators? The guys who wrote > the software? The companies who supply the hardware? Do you believe the > employees of all these companies should work for free? FMP have laid out a > lot of cash on this, up front. > > (I have no idea about the licence to use the Register data itself - whether > FMP pays TNA for it, or TNA pays FMP to do the job, so I omitted it from > the list above). > > The taxpayers can still do exactly what they did before, which is pay the > government £49 per household. > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message