GRO digital images £2.50

[Tickettyboo]

try searching recent orders by date to see if its there?

Boo

[rosie99]

try searching recent orders by date to see if its there?

Boo

or your spam box, that is where one of mine ended up last week 

[Mildred298]

So, I had received the World Pay email but not the GRO email with link to the DC. I went to GRO.Gov site and there was an option to My Recent Orders and when I put in the order date in a range box. My order came up it was there saying dispatched the same day. In that box I am able to go a highlighted digital image part message and when I click on it the image comes up. So, I have my record, but not as I've had it before from an email link.
Mildred

[BarbW]

Yesterday, Find My Past came up with a possible hint for a birth for my direct ancestor who was illegitimate. 

I tried ordering the £2.50 version but it didn't show in the search.  So I went back to FindMyPast and it was their copy of a birth index giving volume and page number but it still said no such record.

However the .pdf version was available using the volume and page number.  Most strange as it was from 1860.

[Tickettyboo]

Yesterday, Find My Past came up with a possible hint for a birth for my direct ancestor who was illegitimate. 

I tried ordering the £2.50 version but it didn't show in the search.  So I went back to FindMyPast and it was their copy of a birth index giving volume and page number but it still said no such record.

However the .pdf version was available using the volume and page number.  Most strange as it was from 1860.

Perhaps someone had ordered the digital image previously and it had been misaligned when scanned so part was missing.
I don't know for sure but as these have no human intervention, I get the feeling they would refund but remove the option from the search so they don't have to keep on refunding if anyone orders it?

Boo

[BarbW]

Yesterday, Find My Past came up with a possible hint for a birth for my direct ancestor who was illegitimate. 

I tried ordering the £2.50 version but it didn't show in the search.  So I went back to FindMyPast and it was their copy of a birth index giving volume and page number but it still said no such record.

However the .pdf version was available using the volume and page number.  Most strange as it was from 1860.

Perhaps someone had ordered the digital image previously and it had been misaligned when scanned so part was missing.
I don't know for sure but as these have no human intervention, I get the feeling they would refund but remove the option from the search so they don't have to keep on refunding if anyone orders it?

Boo

It came today and unfortunately it's not what I had hoped it would be. The wrong mother.  Sigh.

[Nova67]

Was it the same surname though as I am assuming you checked mother’s maiden name on the FindMyPast or GRO index before ordering?

[BarbW]

Was it the same surname though as I am assuming you checked mother’s maiden name on the FindMyPast or GRO index before ordering?

Here's the weird thing.  The father's name is given, one William Jolly, no occupation yet in the index the mother's maiden name was given as -.

Which made me think I was on the right track for the illegitimate birth. 

On the BC her name is Grace Pritchard, a domestic servant, which is unusual in itself to see an occupation.  Today I fiddled around on the indexes and the birth is also registered as William John Jolly, the same volume and page number.  It doesn't really matter as it's not who I had hoped it would be but I've not come across a double registration before.

[Dundee]

It is not a double registration, it has just been indexed twice as the named father and mother were not married.  This is also why her occupation is given.  If they were married, or pretending to be, her name would be recorded as Grace JOLLY formerly PRITCHARD.

Debra