Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GRO missing indexes.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GRO missing indexes.

    "Readers also reported that when they'd complained about the missing records, the GRO had told them that their query had been investigated but no amendment was required."



    This has happened to me so many times now it's not worth bothering to report it. I would say though that we probably come across the problem far more often than someone who just manages their own tree - we are continually searching and therefore find more.

    In GRO's defence I must say this index is invaluable, a great resource, as flawed as it may be. I don't know how I ever managed before it was released.
    Kat

    My avatar is my mother 1921 - 2012

  • #2
    Have you read about this in the Lost Cousins newsletter. It seems like a few whole sections of a few volumes are missing and others are duplicated. Looks as though it stemmed from the initial digitisation. Apparently the GRO response about 'no amendment needed' is because they can't find the entry!! Durrrr .... its not there LOL.
    Anne

    Comment


    • #3
      Peter on Lost Cousins has highlighted that there seems to be an issue with missing/copied volumes for certain places/years, which is of some concern.

      But you need to be certain what you have reported is actually an error or missing record and not just a difference between the new GRO index and the ""old" index (as seen on FreeBMD).

      GRO have used different rules to compile the new index, so the old/new will not be exact copies of each other. If your report is one of these examples, they will check their copy of the register entry (not the old index), and if it has been indexed correctly under the rules used, then you will get the "no amendment necessary" reply.
      Last edited by AntonyM; 16-11-18, 08:19.
      Retired professional researcher, and ex- deputy registrar, now based in Worcestershire. Happy to give any help or advice I can ( especially on matters of civil registration) - contact via PM or my website www.chalfontresearch.co.uk
      Follow me on Twittter @ChalfontR

      Comment


      • #4
        I agree Kat, it's better than nothing, lol.

        For many years I thought it was just a peculiarity of Lancashire records. Time and time again I would find a record in the local bmd site which wasn't reflected in the (then) GRO indexes. Someone told me it was because certain Lancashire ROs were very lax about sending in their quarterly returns. Now it looks as if it was the GRO at fault and not the other way round.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          In case you don't get the newsletter - JBee has posted the latest one:

          Caroline
          Caroline's Family History Pages
          Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

          Comment

          Working...
          X