At 08:00 22/09/2011, Diana Bouglas wrote: >Following Else's post about the impending Friday closure at the LMA, >a further reduction in services for visitors to London record >offices is the withdrawal this week of the one hour copy service for >wills at the Principal Probate Registry at First Avenue House, High Holborn. > >They say this is 'until further notice' but they have also >redesigned their application form and the only two options are now >to collect in five working days or to receive copies by post, which >can take about three weeks. (This postal service is not to be >confused with the one operated from Leeds which, I understand, also >takes quite a long time these days.) If an A&E department at one of our hospitals announced that the waiting time had been increased from one hour to five 'working days' there would be a national outcry. Does the Principal Probate Registry think it will save staff costs by taking this measure? Or are they just hoping to decrease demand, so that they can meet it with fewer staff? Unhappily Don Montague

Loss of one hour service at Holborn is hardly life threatening. J On 22 September 2011 11:18, Don Montague <[email protected]> wrote: > If an A&E department at one of our hospitals announced that the > waiting time had been increased from one hour to five 'working days' > there would be a national outcry. >

"Don Montague" <[email protected]> wrote : Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Principal Probate Registry One Hour Service > At 08:00 22/09/2011, Diana Bouglas wrote: >>Following Else's post about the impending Friday closure at the LMA, >>a further reduction in services for visitors to London record >>offices is the withdrawal this week of the one hour copy service for >>wills at the Principal Probate Registry at First Avenue House, High >>Holborn. <snip> > If an A&E department at one of our hospitals announced that the > waiting time had been increased from one hour to five 'working days' > there would be a national outcry. > > Does the Principal Probate Registry think it will save staff costs by > taking this measure? Or are they just hoping to decrease demand, so > that they can meet it with fewer staff? This really is not a fair comparison. I can't imagine that many applications for probate records are potentially life-saving, if any. There must also be far fewer people affected by the changes to the probate service than would be by a dramatic reduction in A & E services. The reduction in service is, nonetheless, regrettable but also inevitable given the state of government budgets. The real answer is surely to make the probate records, along with BMD certificates, available to download thus eliminating any delays in service. Sadly, this also has a cost which is unlikely to be one that can be met at the moment or in the foreseeable future. That said, I was contacted by the GRO a few months ago regarding possible changes to their certificate service; does anyone know if anything has happened more recently ? John B Leic., Eng