RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Annie65115 on Tuesday 04 May 21 19:45 BST (UK)
-
I thought that entries on the 1939 register were only available to view if the person was by now dead.
However I've just realised that my mum's details have been opened - and she's still very much alive.
Can this be altered, and her details redacted again?
-
Sometimes mistakes do happen. You don’t say on which site you saw this, if it was Findmypast, on provision of proof they will redact her. I can’t say about Ancestry.
-
if it was Findmypast, on provision of proof they will redact her.
When I discovered that my aunts details had been uncovered while she was still alive I contacted FindMyPast and asked them to supply me with the information they had used to uncover her details, in view of the fact that I’d seen her only a few days previously, and she was very much alive.
Her entry was redacted pretty rapidly.
-
Sometimes mistakes do happen. You don’t say on which site you saw this, if it was Findmypast, on provision of proof they will redact her. I can’t say about Ancestry.
What sort of proof do they demand?!
-
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Now this is silly.
I cannot submit a request to FindMyPast without supplying "proof of life", which they suggest needs to be a copy of passport or driving licence with a signature.
My mother is elderly, has no scanner, is not confident with a computer, and I cannot access the hard copies of the suggested documents - and even if i could, I would not want to send such items to an unknown person in an office, just so that they can correct an error generated by their employer.
Surely, as the record has been opened in contravention of the DPA, the onus is on the companies to provide proof that this is appropriate -- ie proof of death --rather than on me to try to provide proof of life?! Never mind the fact that seeing a copy of a passport doesn't prove that anyone is alive!
-
Have you read my reply#2?
Simply do what I did. Ask them to provide you with the proof they used to uncover the record.
-
JenB, I've sent them an email basically saying this. I can't use the "report an error" form anyway because it wont send without the mandated "proof of life!"
-
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=820898.msg6834005#msg6834005
-
My sincere apologies for this BUT - what has your mother got to hide? Sorry I cannot understand why someone would wish to be hidden away, unless :-\ :-\ After all we are talking about information that was taken 82 years ago.
Unfortunately I'm not old enough be appear on the 1939, but I certainly would have no problem with my record being available - we're not talking about current information, are we? :-X
-
When I first checked the 1939 register, my dad, born 1936 and still very much alive was on there. Later when I went back to look again, he had been redacted.
-
Appreciate the 1939 gives an exact DOB & residence but her (and your) approximate birth details will still be viewable on all GRO indexes. If you wish to close there is an alternative way, whether they subsequently ask for proof by email, no idea:
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/#9-living-individuals-and-closed-records
9.3 How to close an open record of a living individual
If you see a record that is open, but which you believe should be closed because the person is still alive, you can ask for the record to be closed using the ‘close an open record’ button on the respective transcription page on Findmypast. If you do not have access to Findmypast, you can make a request direct to The National Archives using our Your views form. [link]
-
Surely, as the record has been opened in contravention of the DPA, the onus is on the companies to provide proof that this is appropriate -- ie proof of death --rather than on me to try to provide proof of life?! Never mind the fact that seeing a copy of a passport doesn't prove that anyone is alive!
Although it isn't clear from what you are saying, it is possible there is an element of them wanting to verify you have the authority to request re-closure of the record.
The law on data protection isn't just about the publication of information, but also covers the appropriate handling and processing of it. Rights in connection with personal data are held by the individual, not the public at large.
Therefore it could be a breach of the legislation for an organisation to 'process' an individual's personal data on the say-so of a third-party. The onus should be on the requester to verify that they have the right to make the request.
I'm with BumbleB in terms of being happy if it were my record inadvertently opened. I would be very unhappy to discover a meddling third party had taken it upon themselves to have my record closed without my consent.
So, even if they aren't consciously doing it, I think FindMyPast should really be seeking some evidence that a request for re-closure is being made by or with the consent of the subject. A copy of the passport or driving licence might be a reasonable proxy for consent as they aren't documents someone unconnected to the subject would normally have access to.
-
As others have said there are those who slip through the net and are visible when they shouldn't be as it is not 100 years since they were born.
There is a lady I know whose details are visible as she has gone past the 100 year rule. Currently 102. I wonder how many other centenarians plus have been opened due to the 100 year rule?
Depends on how much you mind about a living relative being visible on the 1939 Register.
-
I found a couple of my clients open on the register as children recently ... they were quite interested in seeing themselves.
I dont think it is that unusual, I've heard many similar reports.
-
The record for my mother was closed until I requested it be opened & giving the evidence they required, she would have been 98 if still alive. Her brother who was 2 years younger has also passed away & his record is still closed. The next two younger brothers who are still alive at 90 & 83 both their records are open.
I have come across quite a few other members of my family who are still alive & children at the time, have their records open & been very pleased to have a copy of the record. I dare say this has happened in a lot of cases.
-
After all we are talking about information that was taken 82 years ago.
Unfortunately I'm not old enough be appear on the 1939, but I certainly would have no problem with my record being available - we're not talking about current information, are we? :-X
Good strong point. Perhaps now we are no longer governed by the instigators (Brussels or the EU) Johnson 's government can usefully repeal this stupid cumbersome overarching rubbish of a data protection system, and replace it with something intelligible and fit for purpose.
-
Sometimes mistakes do happen. You don’t say on which site you saw this, if it was Findmypast, on provision of proof they will redact her. I can’t say about Ancestry.
What sort of proof do they demand?!
A signed and witnessed request from the living person is all the proof they require.
That also stops any busybodies who are trying to close records that the subject of the records is happy to have open.
Cheers
Guy
-
I take exception to comments about "meddling" and"busybodies". You don't know me or my mother, you don't know our feelings, and I think that if you didn't intend those comments to apply to me, you should make that clear ---- or apologise. >:(
-
I take exception to comments about "meddling" and"busybodies". You don't know me or my mother, you don't know our feelings, and I think that if you didn't intend those comments to apply to me, you should make that clear ---- or apologise. >:(
Seconded >:(
-
I replied to your question "What sort of proof do they demand?"
I then added a general reply to other posters regarding the closure of records that the person concerned did not mind being open.
However if you think the records should not be opened for 100 years the perhaps you should consider whether it is hypocrisy to view a dataset that is not 100 years old in the first place!
Cheers
Guy
-
When I found my mum's entry unredacted, I emailed FindMyPast telling them that although she had no objection to her details being on view, they might want to use her line to improve the method they use to filter the data.
I couldn't work out how they unredacted her entry; her married name is not in the part of the record I could see, and there's no matching death under her maiden name in the registers.
The record disappeared from view in a couple of days.
-
My father is very much alive. For some reason, the black line saying that the "record is officially closed" has been removed from the 1939 image. The transcript still says that the record is closed, and his information is hidden from searches (he can't be found using name/date etc).
This seems like a simple mistake to fix - the record is still closed (as it should be), but the black line on the image has incorrectly been removed at some point. Ancestry just has to put the line back.
For some reason, I can't get Ancestry to understand the problem. I have been contacting them by email - but I get useless "stock" replies from them.
This is my favourite so far....after clearly telling them the problem was with the 1939 UK Register.....
"While census records are not considered protected information, we do understand the need to protect information. The images from the census are provided by the Canadian governement, so we don't have a great deal of control over that, but we can make that line unsearchable. Due to the image being provided by the Canadian government we may not be able to black out the line but if it is possible you would need to make the request via email to customersolutions@ancestry.com."
I am taking a little break from dealing with Ancestry (too much frustration). Perhaps I will try a phone call in the next couple of days.
RK
-
The daughter of a friend of my mother's who was born 1919 is still crossed out. Good reason, still with us at 102. That road in Boston Lincs has produced at least three centenarians and many have lived into their late 90s including my mother (99)Something in the water?
-
I take exception to comments about "meddling" and"busybodies". You don't know me or my mother, you don't know our feelings, and I think that if you didn't intend those comments to apply to me, you should make that clear ---- or apologise. >:(
Hi Annie,
As I appear to be the person who used the word "meddling" I guess I am one of those your comments are directed at.
Having used the words "I" and "my record" ("my" also being in bold in the original) I would have thought it was obvious that I was referring to a hypothetical situation to emphasise the point that the records 'belong' to the subject (the hypothetical 'me'). This is an important point in data protection law which explains why the organisations referred to in this thread need some form of 'proof' of a connection.
Since you and I don't know each other, and the probability of you finding my hypothetical unredacted 1939 record is infinitely small, I would think it was self evident that my comment had no relation whatsoever with either you or your mum. As such, I'm unsure what wording it was you felt would make it any clearer that I didn't intend those comments to apply to you. How could you "meddle" with my record?
As a general point (I.e. not applying solely to you) I do sometimes wonder what has happened to this forum. It used to be a friendly place where people chatted about family history and got on with each other. Now it seems some folks hang out here seeking any offence they can take.
Throwing 'angry faces' at other forum members because a point isn't clear or has been misunderstood seems entirely uncalled for. Whatever happened to the common courtesy of giving other people the benefit of the doubt and not assuming the worst of them? Has the era of social media and the internet forum really killed off such niceties?
That might be a discussion for another thread (and i don't wish to add anything here), but having much respect for the site's owners and mods it is not something I am going to take the initiative and start. But I do hope for the future health of this site that is something people will take a moment or two to consider before posting their angriness in future.
Finally, please accept my best wishes, and be absolutely assured I was in no way suggesting you were "meddling".
Seconded >:(
Please see the above JenB.
-
My father is very much alive. For some reason, the black line saying that the "record is officially closed" has been removed from the 1939 image. The transcript still says that the record is closed, and his information is hidden from searches (he can't be found using name/date etc).
This seems like a simple mistake to fix - the record is still closed (as it should be), but the black line on the image has incorrectly been removed at some point. Ancestry just has to put the line back.
For some reason, I can't get Ancestry to understand the problem. I have been contacting them by email - but I get useless "stock" replies from them.
Have you checked whether the record is also showing like that on FindMyPast. My understanding was that Ancestry does not update the register themselves and that is only done by The National Archives/FindMyPast. The register is continually updated by these two and then handed to Ancestry around once a year