RootsChat.Com
Beginners => Family History Beginners Board => Topic started by: fizzybubble on Sunday 17 April 05 13:23 BST (UK)
-
Do you have to show a birth certificate to get a death certificate or can a relative just tell the details orally.
Fizzy
-
No you do not need the birth certificate. All you normally need to do if you are purchasing the certificate from the local registrar (where your ancestor was born / married / died) is to fill out an application form stating all of their particulars that you are aware of and they will search for the death entry. They need to know their full name and at least quarter and year that they died.
Hope this clarifies.
Regards Jen :)
-
Its actually the birth cert I am having problems with. I have the exact date of birth and was told the place was Bournemouth but they say they cannot find it. They told me to get the death certificate and that would tell me where he was born. But the details on the death cert were likely to have been provided by the same person who told me the birth details, so unless a birth cert had to be shown for the death cert I will be no further forward and will be £7 out of pocket.
What do you think ?
Fizzy
-
Hi Fizzy
If the same person who told you the birth details is the same person who registered the death then, as you say, it is quite likely the same information. Who are you looking for and when/where did they die?
A birth certificate wasn't always a requisite for registering a death.
Best wishes
Casalguidi
-
The person is William Scott and he died at Yeovil Somerset in December 1979.
He was born 27.03.1903 and I was told that was at Bournemouth but Bournemouth Registry ofiice say they cant find it. Mind you I asked for a marriage too and gave them the date and that was def Bournemouth and they cant find that either !!!! the girl said its because they are not computerised !!!!
Fizzy
-
Hi Fizzy,
This is always the problem with the information provided by the informant of a death. The only person who could provide the correct information (consistently that is) is the person who is now dead.
You may need to check out both Dorset and Hampshire references for the birth certificate - the boundaries changed. Have a look at the Genuki page ( http://www.genuki.org.uk) for further information.
Nell
-
Hi Fizzy
I assume that you have got the date of birth from the GRO index (post 1969)?
If it continues to post such a problem, is there not a known sibling whose details you could trace which might lead you to him?
It's no surprise that Bournemouth couldn't supply you with a marriage as (like many other registry offices) they would have had to search through the register of every church & chapel in their district - quite some task! Imagine doing that yourself!
Best wishes
Casalguidi
-
William Scott was my hubby's grandad. I got his date of birth from his daughter (hubby's Mum). He was a base child so there were no siblings.
I have looked on the GRO via 1837online and cannot find a plain William Scott (no middle names) born anywhere near Bournemouth at that time. Perhaps the birth was never registered but then how did he manage all through life without a birth cert for things like work and pensions ?
Fizzy
-
Hi Fizzy
I would check the death indexes on 1837online just to make sure that his date of birth as given in the death index is the same - it will be in the index.
If he was baseborn I suppose there's always the possibility that he was registered with another surname. Have you tried searching freebmd with forenames William Scott without a surname? It's just an idea.
Again, there is always the possibility that his daughter wasn't properly sure where he was born - maybe not even William himself - it happens!
Best wishes
Casalguidi
-
I got his date of birth from his daughter (hubby's Mum).
I have looked on the GRO via 1837online and cannot find a plain William Scott (no middle names) born anywhere near Bournemouth at that time. Perhaps the birth was never registered but then how did he manage all through life without a birth cert for things like work and pensions ?
Fizzy
Hi,
have you looked through all the months either side of the year he was supposed to be born for him too? 1902, and 1904.
Why I am saying this is because when we were trying to get my hubby's grandfather's birth cert, my father-in-law swore blind his father was born in 1900, but we couldn't find him anywhere on 1837 for that year.
we found out he was actually a year out on the year he was born.
His mum was born in 1900, and he always strongly maintained that his father was born in 1900 too as they were always the same age the same year. Even though we had them as children/babies in the 1901 census and his father was younger than his mother on the census - Father-in-law threw so much doubt on our findings because he swore it was 1900 he was born in , and we thought perhaps this isn't him in the census and we have the wrong child /family ( even though the parents were the right names too)
we ended up getting his mum and dad's marriage cert first to see if it could through any light on it - and sure enough he was a "year" younger than his wife , and the person we found in feb 1901 in the births was his father.
father in law was wrong about his father's birth year of 1900, he was born in early 1901 as we had maintained. But Father in law was right in his own way too , he would have been showing the same age as his wife who was born late in year of 1900 for a couple of months of each year.Until she hit her next birthday of course.
That's probably why he thought that his father was born in the year he swore blind by - for example, they would have both been 30 for a few months of the year, but then later in the same year she would have been 31 and him 30 until the following Feb when he had his next birthday and they'd be back to being both the same age again for a few months of the year.
Just an idea
:)
-
Thanks everyone its ideas that I need.
When I looked up the death entry on 1837online, there was no date of birth - just his name and where he died.
Fizzy
-
Hi Fizzy
Are you certain of this?
That would certainly lead me to believe that there was something perhaps more than a little odd going on there.
From 1969 the date of birth (as supplied by the informant) is given in the death indexes. If the date of birth isn't in the index then that is strange! Why I wonder ???
Casalguidi
-
I rechecked and yes the date of birth was there - I think I must have thought it was a ref number for something -deerrrrrr. The date on there is the date I have but then the same person would have supplied the two.
I suspect that Bournemouth was the right place as that is where he married and where his children were born.
I doubt that 1903 will be on FreeBmd yet. I will have another look taking the suggestion of using William Scott as his christian names.
Thanks
Fizzy
-
Hi Fizzy,
It is worth considering that people used to be fined if they registered a birth more than six weeks after birthdate - to avoid this parents would give a fictitious date inside the six week limit. This would give a date later than the real birthdate which might push the registration into another quarter. Also any Male Scotts registered in Bournemouth at the right time - he might not have been named when registered. Regards Jan
-
I must admit I was beginning to wonder if the date was fictitious. Or the date he knew was real but a fictitious date was registered. It doesnt help that the name is so common, not even any middle names to help.
I shall plod on.
Thanks
Fizzy