1939 Register. Queries on Insitutions and Closing an open identity

[wotcha]

I'm thinking about subscribing to FindMyPast to access the 1939 Register. So far I've searched the previews and have come across examples of two situations of closed records:

Situation 1: A household where some but not all members can be unlocked. As an example, I've searched under my maternal grandmother's name and the preview describes the family as the "Williams" household and gives the name of my deceased grandmother and her birth year. The preview also includes my grandfather's name (he's also deceased) and mentions one other person, whose record is officially closed.  I assume that the latter person is still alive or FindMyPast doesn't have evidence of death.

Situation 2: A household which is described as thus; "This household is officially closed" and where "The records for all the people in this household are officially closed, as everyone is either still alive, or not confirmed to have died."

I've unfortunately  come across three examples of situation 2 - even though the people I'm searching for are born well over 100 years ago and deceased.  FindMyPast provides this explanation: "You will find that some people who died prior to 1991 have closed records. This is down to the fact that not every death was added to the Register by the NHS. Unfortunately this is out of our control."

Question: I've got a hunch that the common link is the examples of situation 2 that I've come across is that the households are institutions. But if I'm right, what I don't understand why, in contrast with other households, are institution-households less likely to have at least one person born over 100 years ago/or confirmed as deceased? Did the NHS not add these deaths to the Register?

(2) Closing an open identity
FindMyPast guidance says that "All records of living individuals under 100 years of age in the 1939 Register should be closed."  My dad, who's alive and not over 100, is showing in the preview of the 1939 register and where the problem is that his birth year is incorrect.

In the FindMyPast "Takedown' form, there's no problem in him supplying the evidence requested of his address in 1939, plus his name and signature (e.g. his birth certificate and current driving license will suffice). But the real problem is this: not only does the FindMyPast preview give the incorrect year of my dad's birth but it also misspells his name - and where the misspelling has the effect of changing his gender!  To explain (and I'm not giving his real details) if he is Ian Noel Peterson b 1937, then FindMyPast is showing him as Jan Noel Peterson b 1917

Question: Given the mismatches, is it still possible to go down the route of completing the FindMyPast "Takedown" form, which asks for both name and gender? Presumably FindMyPast will not, on the face on the information my dad gives in the form, even be able to match him with the entry shown in their preview?

Sorry in advance if my questions have already been answered - although I've spend a while looking on Rootschat I could have missed these!

[chris_49]

I'll have a go at this. I'd check if your local library has FindMyPast and the 1939. If not, and you really only need a very few records, it may be cheaper to pay for them individually.

The first scenario is the simplest - if the search shows a household where only some of the expected people are present, it could mean that the others are redacted, or that some of them are absent. For example, either the father of the household or a young adult son could be either in the armed services already (so not on the register) or working elsewhere. Younger children might be evacuees (formal or informal) especially from a city.

So viewing the record might not show all the people you expect, even including redactions. As a general rule, the parents come first, followed by the children in age order, follwed by other relatives, lodgers and/or evacuees. (There are exceptions.) If a female married later, you might spot some hint of her married name even if you can't see hers.

I've not found a family where everyone is redacted, but I do have one where only children appear to be living there - one has died so is visible. I don't know where the parents are but the grandparents were very near. It would be unusual to find a household where all the adults are redacted, and that wil become vanishingly small over time as they seem to unredact each batch that would turn 100 that year - they did this Jan for example.

Institutions AFAICR  have a form with a different appearance. There should normally be more people than in any ordinary household, and even if it's for children I'd expect at least one adult in charge to be over 22, and hence not redacted. There is another possibility - at the end of each district there are often a lot of people who weren't found at the first count, so are added at the end - mostly redacted as this includes children born during the war, I think. Sometimes if unredacted they are cross-referenced with the main household, but I doubt if this is always the case.

As for your Dad, he has every right not to be visible. I've no experience of this, but other Rootschatters have and it seems to work. Fill in the form as best you can, provide extra proof if allowed, and if they reject it first, get back again. There was a rush of unredactions late last year and they got many wrong.

Chris

[chris_49]

Either you're a real night owl or amazingly early bird - or more likely you're in some non-UK timezone so won't have the 1939 at your library - sorry.

On reflection I fear that opening the household where everyone is redacted would tell you nothing much. If you have proof that one of these people has died you can ask for it to be opened - sadly you have to pay a non-trivial amount for this, which seems unfair as you are expanding FindMyPast's database, but there you go.

[wotcha]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

With my second query about redacting my dad's details, I will do as you suggest and bung in the form as best I can.

With my first query, I didn't realise that institutions had a different forms, so thank you for letting me know about this.

The reason I though about institutions this; in the cases I'm currently looking at, one was an unmarried nurse living in England and away from her home in Wales, and I thought she might have been in nurses accommodation at the time.  With the other, he seems to be in the area of GCHQ Bude, so was possibly a civilian in RAF Cleave.  Also I hadn't thought before about your point that even if I unlock these households, then I won't get much because everyone else will remain  redacted! (Although I should get the addresses and occupations of the people I'm tracing.)

There are 2 things I still find odd:
a.  The people I'm currently tracing would now be about 125 years old.  Had I been correct in my hypothesis that they were living in nurses/military civilian accommodation, I'd have expected there to be at least one other adult over 100 - rather than have a "This household is closed" message.   But perhaps this is further evidence that they are not in the type of accommodation I thought  - and that everyone else in their households is under 100.

b.  I understand that FindMyPast asks for evidence of death via  proof that a person is no longer living.  But this seems to be for deceased people under the age of 100. But as my people are showing in FindMyPast as born in the years 1891 and 1893,  then given the 100 year rule, why would FindMyPast still need evidence of death?


Thanks again

Liz

PS  I'm a Welsh night owl so I can go to my local library!

[carol8353]

Have you read the help pages on the 1939 site?

http://www.findmypast.co.uk/1939register/1939-register-getting-started

[chris_49]

Hi Liz, thanks for the extra info.

It seems either FindMyPast have mistranscribed these entries, in which case write and point this out to them, should cost nothing - or the original entries show a wildly incorrect birth year, in which case I suppose you have to show some proof - difficult if they insist it's some different person.

If one of the places is a nurse's home (not necessarily an institution) then it is possible that all the other people there may still be living. How sure are you that you've got the right addresses for them? There are people I've found in unexpected places. Are the surnames common?

If it's any consolation I have some people that I just cannot find, and I've tried everything. I can understand why someone might dodge a census, but going without a ration book?

[groom]

With regard to your father, they may not accept a request from you, it may have to come from him. In September 2016 I found that the record of my aunt, who was born in August 1916, had been opened, although she was still alive. I emailed FindMyPast who said that they were legally allowed to open a record after 100 years and a day, but would close it again if my aunt requested them to do so. She decided that it wasn't worth the bother as it didn't show anything that couldn't be found elsewhere anyway.

[wotcha]

Thanks all

Groom:  Good point! The request will come from my dad (who is a bit miffed at his inclusion) - I just type faster than he does, hence I'm the form filler!

carol8353: Yes, I have read the FindMyPast guidance in the link but I'm not convinced it answers my query.  The advice focuses on two areas; 
(i) "How do I know I have the right person"  - which I do know, as I'm entering their names and exact date of births into the search box.  But when I click on the entry in the 'results' page, I get the "This Household is Closed" window.
(ii)  "Officially closed records".  But the latter advice only discusses what to do with people born less than 100 years ago and who are now deceased. And this contrasts with my people, who although they show in the FindMyPast results page, still have officially closed records despite being well over 100.

Chris:   I don't know the addresses, as this is what I'm trying to find out but I'm pretty sure that in both of these cases, I've found the right people - for the FindMyPast 'results' page only give me the one option for each of my people.  The first person is Florence Gertrude Mary Dyke, dob 20/02/1898  (she's listed as Florence G M Dyke). The second is Wilson John Charles Yates Dyke, dob 09/11/1891 (he's listed as Wilson J Dyke).

In both cases, I've done the search with the dates of birth and this is the puzzle  - how can FindMyPast closed the records due to a mistranscribed of both of their dates of birth (i.e. treated them as under 100 years old) when I've searched with the correct dates of birth and where there are entries in the results search?

Sorry if I'm being thick!

Liz

[dawnsh]

You may also find you can't view the records as you don't have a valid subscription or correct credits so you may not be able to go forward with this until you're at the library using their account.