Missed off censuses

[Trees]

Why are so many people missed off censuses?
for example Joseph and Sarah Lewis appear on the 1861 census RG 9/2047 fo 13 p19 but are no where to be seen on the 1851 or 1841 censuses
Similarly Benjamin and Jane Flavell are on the 1861 RG 9/2186 fo 66 p18 and 1871 RG10/2892 fo111  p10 but not the 1851
I have several other examples but for the moment these two couples are my principle concern
I know several of my Oxfordshire people are not on the 1861 census but this has been explained as the census is indeed lost but the above examples are not in a similar situation
I have tried to think of all the variations the names can be mis-transcribed as and I have tried just surname and birth date and place and Surnames with out first names I confess I am well and truly stumped

[Jomot]

I can't speak for your specific families, but it seems likely that there will have been a significant number who simply didn't complete/return their forms.   

The target for the 2011 census was around 95% I seem to remember, but even with a 99% rate, with a population of around 20m in the 1800's, that's still a huge number of 'missing' households.  Throw in errors and omissions by the enumerators when copying the information over, and the number increases even further.

[Yonks Ago]

I have a family "missing of census" 1901 and I know that they were there as I have a letter with the address on and their family members all lived close by and they where not with them. The couple had a new born so don't think they would have gone too far at that time.
My guess...forms got lost..didn't fill them in..not at home..enumerator missed them..
Yonks

[stanmapstone]

See Under-enumeration in the census http://www.rootschat.com/links/01l6r/

Stan

[Yonks Ago]

Stan,

Yes so TRUE, but what I should had said was family lived next door and others in the same street.

Just one of those Genealogy wonders that will never be answered.

Cheers
Yonks

[Trees]

Interesting link thank you Stan and everyone for your input I just seem unlucky to have a lot of missing folk

[Sloe Gin]

I've got a case where the family is recorded at the end of the enumeration district, where it's clear by the addresses and house numbers that they should have come somewhere in the middle. 

I imagine the enumerator copying the forms into his book, coming to the end of the pile and then finding their form on the floor under the table.  Or something like that.  There must be a fair number of cases where a form just got lost somewhere along the way.

[stanmapstone]

Each enumerator had a "Memorandum Book". When the enumerator distributed the schedules in the week before the census he entered the Schedule Number and the address details on the front of the form, and made a record in his instruction and memorandum book of the road or street in which every house was situated the name or number of each house and the number of schedules left at each house. So he should know by the schedule numbers if any were missing.
You can see examples of entries in an 1891 Memorandum Book at  http://www.rootschat.com/links/0yy5/
Stan

[ThrelfallYorky]

Interestingly ... but only to me, I suspect, most of my "Missing persons" on censuses are from the 1861 census - was that perhaps a very sloppily done one? Did loads of records go missing or get destroyed, I wonder?