Missing GRO Death - 1945

[RW1]

Hi

I have found a death entry on freebmd.org.uk -
Charles W Butler; March 1945; (age) 56; Ilford; 4a; 523

But I can't find it on GRO (there are 4 other entries for 4a, 523, same period, which I can find).

I did a "Missing entry in the death index" report, which came back from GRO -
"Investigated – No amendment required" and "Indexed data is correct."

I tried to contact GRO, but halfway through the contact form it outlined in RED with the message "THERE IS A PROBLEM" - it kept doing this, even after disconnecting from the internet and starting again.

So, I resent the missing report - this time putting a fuller message in the free text.  GRO came back again, this time with -
"Investigated – No amendment required" and "Indexed data not available."

Can anyone else find this, please?

Many thanks.

[Jon_ni]

Don't see it but if you are after the cert you could order from the local district rather than the quarterly copy.
Iflord registers seem to be held by Redbridge or Barking & Dagenham now.
https://www.ukbmd.org.uk/reg/districts/ilford.html

[AntonyMMM]

I did a "Missing entry in the death index" report, which came back from GRO -
"Investigated – No amendment required" and "Indexed data is correct."

That response suggests they have the entry in the online index, but indexed as something else ( if there is more than one name on the entry perhaps), or more likely the transcriber has come up with an alternative spelling of the name.

Because of the way the GRO search engine is locked down, finding these missing entries (which are usually there somewhere) can be very difficult.

[Gadget]

F M P  are recording  two versions both with the same details

Charles W

William C


It looks as if GRO  might have indexed it as William C

Gadget

[MollyC]

No, I cannot find it.  It depends if this was a surname you were expecting to find.  A drawback of the GRO index is that if there has been an error in the surname there is no way of searching the GRO without entering a correct surname.  Unlike the very flexible FreeBMD.

I reported a similar case in December, same result.  It was peripheral to my interest so I haven't done anything further yet.  I fail to see how they can say "Indexed data is correct"  when there is no data!

Amended:  Those two entries are on different pages: 523 and 525.  They are separate entries even if they are the same person.  Do "new rules" allow the GRO to delete one of them?

[Gadget]

Snips from the registers


Also they are definitely listed as Butler.

[RW1]

[quote author=MollyC link=topic=879510.msg7517867#msg7517867 date=1705335743!

Amended:  Those two entries are on different pages: 523 and 525.  They are separate entries even if they are the same person.  Do "new rules" allow the GRO to delete one of them?
[/quote]

No, it is there. I think it's 523 but has been mistranscribed in freebmd.org.uk as 525 - look at the scanned image. It could be a 3, not 5.

Many thanks for all your replies.

[RW1]

But it's not on GRO as William, either?

[RW1]

There is a probate record that reads:

BUTLER William Charles otherwise Charles William of 22 Oaks-lane Newbury Park Ilford Essex died 27 January 1945 Administration Lluandudno 27 March to Alice Sarah Butler widow.
Effects £948 3s 6d.

I did already look for a admin/probate record for Charles Butler, but not for William Butler.  Even the record above is not cross-referenced in Probate Records as Charles William otherwise William Charles.