RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Nick_Ips on Thursday 07 November 19 17:38 GMT (UK)
-
Apologies if this isn't new, but I've just noticed a message on the GRO Online Index website saying:
We are currently adding to our online indexes which will help you identify and apply for copies of our records. We have now added online indexes for deaths registered between 1984 to 2019.
This is certainly new to me :) and the search does produce death results as recently as 2019.
There is still a gap between 1957 and 1984 though. :(
The search page has different functionality as per the thread started by keyboard86
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=821178.0
-
That is interesting, Thank you.
I did a trial on it for a 2015 death which did show but was surprised to see this comment on the page
If the index is incorrect and GRO are unable to locate an entry a refund will be provided minus a £3.50 administration fee.
-
The added index entries provide a bit less detail than the versions available on microfiche at certain libraries.
Only the year of birth rather than a full date is given, and only the quarter of registration rather than the month. Some only show the year.
I've also found one entry missing online which I had already transcribed from the fiche. The same fiche had others with the same surname.
It's still a very useful addition to our list of resources.
Do remember that the GRO has a gap between 1957 and 1984, so FreeBMD will still get a fair use.
-
That is interesting, Thank you.
You're welcome. Glad it seems to be a genuinely new facility, and not a case of me being caught napping. :)
-
Do remember that the GRO has a gap between 1957 and 1984, so FreeBMD will still get a fair use.
Agreed. Not least because the GRO online search facility has so far retained rather strict criteria (+/- 2 years, no wildcards in names) which makes FreeBMD a near-essential tool if you don't already have a very good idea when the event took place, or if mis-transcriptions make it difficult/impossible to find the record in the GRO Online index.
Normally I tend to look for the record on FreeBMD first, then use the results to find the entry in the GRO Online index.
...and of course FreeBMD has a significant advantage when it comes to finding marriages. ;)
-
Does anyone have any idea what the additional bits of data are in the reference? By that I mean the character code prefix and the character code suffix on the district name.
Example:
BROWN, BERTIE CHARLES 1898
GRO Reference: DOR Q4/1984 in NORTHAMPTON (6701C) Volume 7 Page 2482
When adding a record to your basket, the district suffix (eg 6701C) gets included in the district name but the prefix (eg DOR) doesn't seem to be used.
Looking on FreeBMD and FindMyPast, neither have these bits of data, so they seem to be internal codes to the GRO.
Also, has anyone seen any other prefixes other than 'DOR'?
-
That is interesting, Thank you.
I did a trial on it for a 2015 death which did show but was surprised to see this comment on the page
If the index is incorrect and GRO are unable to locate an entry a refund will be provided minus a £3.50 administration fee.
I would suggest anyone who purchases a copy of an entry using the GRO index that the GRO are unable to locate and is charged a £3.50 fee should query the fee as being unlawful, as it is what is legally termed an unfair condition.
Cheers
Guy
-
DOR = Date of Registration
The letter on the end of the district code identifies the register (districts have more than one register being used at the same time) so 6701C = Northampton (670) Register 1C
-
Thank you Antony.
-
That is interesting, Thank you.
I did a trial on it for a 2015 death which did show but was surprised to see this comment on the page
If the index is incorrect and GRO are unable to locate an entry a refund will be provided minus a £3.50 administration fee.
I would suggest anyone who purchases a copy of an entry using the GRO index that the GRO are unable to locate and is charged a £3.50 fee should query the fee as being unlawful, as it is what is legally termed an unfair condition.
Cheers
Guy
I quite agree. They made the mistake and they want to charge their users £3.50 for making it.
I had to swallow a £3.50 charge recently as I'd accidentally requested a marriage cert from 1952 rather than 1852, fair enough, but institutions are milking the idea that the majority of people won't be bothered to argue with such modest charges. Amazon got my ire the other day - there was no way to return an item to them without paying a £3.99 charge (or lying about my reason for return). Very surprised Martin Lewis etc. aren't on that one with a blaze of fury.
-
I had a good look at both the GRO post 2007 death indexfiche at the British Library today and searched the indexes online.
The GRO results online do not show the full date of birth, only a year.
The GRO results online do not show the specific month the death was registered, only the corresponding quarter.
Interestingly, once you have identified the death entry for your person of interest, you can click on the radio button to the left of the details which then takes you straight through to ordering, so you don't have to fiddle around entering the registration spellings (right or wrong), entry numbers and dates of registration.
However, the death indexes on fiche at the 7 host sites do contain the date of birth as provided by the informant and the actual month of registration.
So if you are happy just with the index details rather than the specifics then this is a way of killing of those distant twigs on your trees until you get a chance to go the the 7 host sites for more of the registartion details.
-
Dawn offered to look these up for people, at the BL I think. I didn't take her up on it, thought it'd be a lot of work for her - said I'd wait until I got a chance to go down to Manchester to look for myself. I'm glad I did neither, because...
I'm working my way through the GRO indices. Not finding so many of the ones I was hoping to - quite a lot missing - did these people emigrate, live to over 100, remarry, get their details given badly wrong at death (age, mistranscription)? Who knows?
Then I'll have a shorter day at Manchester looking up the ones I have found.
-
In this day and age of greater longevity, routine death searches for me now go up to age 105.
If they reach 111, they appear on the super-centenarians list
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_supercentenarians
-
I'm so pleased they have made this index available.
The search format is still quite restrictive and I'm not sure why they haven't published the DOB's, but it will do for now!
-
I'm so pleased they have made this index available.
The search format is still quite restrictive and I'm not sure why they haven't published the DOB's, but it will do for now!
The short answer is they believe they are not allowed to publish such information except on a certificate or now on a pdf file.
As far as I can tell this view seemed to come into being around 1879 when the GRO withdrew "their" registers from public viewing (without any change in the law).
The truth of the matter is if they publish the dates of birth they will miss out on sales.
Cheers
Guy
-
If you have an idea of the year of death it can be useful to also look for a corresponding entry in the probate index as this gives the full date of death and middle names.
https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/#wills
-
I am confused. Does this mean Free BDM will just cease to exist in the future?
-
I am confused. Does this mean Free BDM will just cease to exist in the future?
No, because it is a lot easier to search than the GRO index which you can only do 5 years at a time and male or female
-
I am confused. Does this mean Free BDM will just cease to exist in the future?
No, why would it? 1984 seems to have been chosen because FreeBMD full coverage ceases after 1983 - it's patchy after that. In fact a note on the site specifically refers to FreeBMD for the earlier period. Later deaths are only available on paysites like Ancestry & FindMyPast, though I find the former's index inaccurate.
As Rosie says, FreeBMD is much easier to use, not only can you search a wide range of years, but you can enter the person's birth year to narrow it down - as you can on the paysites, but not on the GRO.
-
I am confused. Does this mean Free BDM will just cease to exist in the future?
As Rosie says, FreeBMD is much easier to use, not only can you search a wide range of years, but you can enter the person's birth year to narrow it down - as you can on the paysites, but not on the GRO.
I also find FREEBMD very handy in that you can search by county too.
-
1984 seems to have been chosen because FreeBMD full coverage ceases after 1983 - it's patchy after that. In fact a note on the site specifically refers to FreeBMD for the earlier period. Later deaths are only available on paysites like Ancestry & FindMyPast, though I find the former's index inaccurate.
1984 was when the GRO went all computerised, so the data was already available, so low cost. They could have done the same with births and marriages if it was not for their rule about being too close to the present.
They also changed to monthly reporting rather than quarterly. FreeBMD doesn't show that in the search results; you have to click the "spectacles" link to see the month of registration, so it is struggling to fit it in the existing structure.
-
I also find FREEBMD very handy in that you can search by county too.
...and you don't have to log in to FreeBMD just to be able to do a search.
1984 was when the GRO went all computerised, so the data was already available, so low cost. They could have done the same with births and marriages if it was not for their rule about being too close to the present.
My memory might be playing tricks on me, but I remember there was a computer (or two) on the ground floor of the Family Records Centre that had the most recent available BMD records, possibly all the 1984 onwards data?
When you think of all the technological changes since then it is astonishing it has taken something like 12 years before (a portion of) the same data has become available online from an official source.
-
My memory might be playing tricks on me, but I remember there was a computer (or two) on the ground floor of the Family Records Centre that had the most recent available BMD records, possibly all the 1984 onwards data?
Those were the days, travelling up to London just to look at the indexes. Then lifting those heavy books off the shelves and browsing them. I spent a day there once just listing births for one of my more unusual surnames - I have thrown the list away now ;D
-
I spent a day there once just listing births for one of my more unusual surnames - I have thrown the list away now
Likewise, I was there nearly every day of the last two weeks they were open, going through records I'd found on FreeBMD that appeared to have errors or contained uncertain characters (many of the FreeBMD scanned images were of rather poor quality and no help).
Then life got in the way of family history research and all those notes were filed away... and by the time I looked at them again there was far more online and FreeBMD had much clearer images.
But it was fun, and I have fond memories of queueing up to order certificates whilst busily writing my name and address on the supplied envelopes. :)
-
When you think of all the technological changes since then it is astonishing it has taken something like 12 years before (a portion of) the same data has become available online from an official source.
Having sat in on many of the 'now defunct' GRO business user group meetings, putting the indexes online has never been on their 'to do' list, citing data protection and lack of funds.
The GRO's remit is to provide certificates and be part of the Passport service. The actual registration process is under the control of local authorities although there are still many registrars who were employed in those days way back when.
The demise of the DOVE and MAGPIE projects shows just how little they thought of digistisation and computerisation.
But the winds of change must be a-blowing there now. The availabilty of pdf's must have generated some extra revenue which they may be using wisely for our benefit. The cost of the certificates does not generate a profit, the GRO are not supposed to.
-
I notice they have now added BIRTHS from 1984 to 2004.
I'm hoping they bring that forward to the present day like they have with the deaths as it would help a lot with locating current relatives!
-
I notice they have now added BIRTHS from 1984 to 2004.
I'm hoping they bring that forward to the present day like they have with the deaths as it would help a lot with locating current relatives!
Thanks, I hadn't noticed that. They also have births for 1919, i.e. over 100 years ago. I'm sure they previously only went to 1918.
-
I've just looked in the newer births 1984 - 2004 and they don't give the mother's maiden name. So if you wished to know the MMN you would have to buy the cert. No pdf offered.
-
I don't get this. Births after 1919 are withheld, presumably on privacy grounds (you'd expect those to 1957 to be available for publication) yet we get these modern ones - people presumably mostly alive and well. I don't really need these (family history not supposed to be about living people?)
If they wanted to give us something useful, how about death records for the period 1958-69 which is the only period there are no middle names available on any index? So many of my people with common surnames can't be distinguished on these records from other people with the same forename and initial and approximate age.
-
I've just looked in the newer births 1984 - 2004 and they don't give the mother's maiden name. So if you wished to know the MMN you would have to buy the cert. No pdf offered.
I thought that as well. BUT if you make a search and include a MMN, it will come up with all those who match.
For example, when I searched for myself (born 1993), I came up without a MMN. But when I searched for myself and included a MMN in the search, it appeared next to my name on the results.
-
I don't get this. Births after 1919 are withheld, presumably on privacy grounds (you'd expect those to 1957 to be available for publication) yet we get these modern ones - people presumably mostly alive and well. I don't really need these (family history not supposed to be about living people?)
If they wanted to give us something useful, how about death records for the period 1958-69 which is the only period there are no middle names available on any index? So many of my people with common surnames can't be distinguished on these records from other people with the same forename and initial and approximate age.
There are many topics on rootschat mentioning the projects for digitising records which were not completed, presumably that is why only certain years are available.
-
GRO started to digitise their records from 1984 so it was easy to download them for us to use. ;D
-
There really isn't anything to be gained by using the GRO site for birth searches up to 2004
You can use familysearch.org with a username and password to do a free search up to 2007 if you don't have a sub to the other sites. Results include mmn. Rechecked my daughter born 1998.
-
See my reply #24 re the DOVE and Magpie projects
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Register_Office_for_England_and_Wales
See quite a way down this page
-
1984 was when the GRO went all computerised, so the data was already available, so low cost. They could have done the same with births and marriages if it was not for their rule about being too close to the present.
They also changed to monthly reporting rather than quarterly. FreeBMD doesn't show that in the search results; you have to click the "spectacles" link to see the month of registration, so it is struggling to fit it in the existing structure.
Sorry but this is not correct, the GRO is not yet “ all computerised” but has the following digital records available:-
Births: 1837 – 1934 and 2007 on
Deaths: 1837 – 1957 and 2007 on
Marriages: 2011 on
Civil Partnerships: 2005 on”
The DoVE (Digitisation of Vital Events) project, which provided the early records noted above was not initiated until 2005 and the contract expired at the end of July 2008.
Cheers
Guy
-
GRO Indexes Updated
Births now available 1837-1934, 1984-2019
Deaths now available 1837-1957, 1984-2019
-
GRO Indexes Updated
Births now available 1837-1934, 1984-2019
Deaths now available 1837-1957, 1984-2019
Thanks very much for this, useful to have another 15 years of births.
Deaths stay at 1957, meaning we still have that awkward decade where there are no middle names
-
There's a bit of an oddity for the new birth records for years 1920-1934. The mother's maiden surname isn't shown in the search results. However, if you enter the MMN in the search input, then the search results will include the MMN where it matches.
Example:
Desmond Ernest George Caves - born:1924, died: 1976, mother's maiden surname: Franklin
Search without the MMN, result:
1924 Q1 Desmond Ernest George Caves (mmn: ); Watford; 03A; 1342;
Search with MMN "Franklin", result:
1924 Q1 Desmond Ernest George Caves (mmn: Franklin); Watford; 03A; 1342;
FreeBMD and other sources that use the original birth indexes show the MMN as Franklin.
(Note: Desmond isn't in my tree, I was just looking for someone with a distinct name that I could test this with)
Another oddity is that when searching with a MMN, the results will also include records where the MMN doesn't match, and is blank in the results.
-
There's a bit of an oddity for the new birth records for years 1920-1934. The mother's maiden surname isn't shown in the search results. However, if you enter the MMN in the search input, then the search results will include the MMN where it matches.
Example:
Desmond Ernest George Caves - born:1924, died: 1976, mother's maiden surname: Franklin
Search without the MMN, result:
1924 Q1 Desmond Ernest George Caves (mmn: ); Watford; 03A; 1342;
Search with MMN "Franklin", result:
1924 Q1 Desmond Ernest George Caves (mmn: Franklin); Watford; 03A; 1342;
FreeBMD and other sources that use the original birth indexes show the MMN as Franklin.
(Note: Desmond isn't in my tree, I was just looking for someone with a distinct name that I could test this with)
I believe this is due to their self-imposed "100 year rule".
Records under 100 years old will show limited details, but will display extra info (eg MMN) if entered into the search parameters.
-
I wondered about illegitimate births, so to test it I put in a suspected one
June 1929 St George Hanover Sq 1a 533
Hooper, Philip J.
mother Hooper
I searched just for Philip Hooper, male, born 1929
And for that one it came up with a dash for mother's maiden surname!
As cuffie said, the two other Philip Hoopers born in 1929 had no maiden name shown for the mother.
-
Tried to find people in my tree born 1920-45 for who I've only a middle initial so far - since actual relatives are well-researched these tend to be those who married in, so of less interest to me - apart from a dimly-remembered spouse of a first-cousin-once-removed who never told us he was a Peregrine.
But I agree that you don't get the MMN unless you specify - except if they were born precisely in 1920. I suppose since 2020 is nearly over (loud cheers) I expect the 100-year rule was not applied. But if you have found the person via FreeBMD, say, you probably know their MMN anyway.
-
Tried to find people in my tree born 1920-45 for who I've only a middle initial so far - since actual relatives are well-researched these tend to be those who married in, so of less interest to me - apart from a dimly-remembered spouse of a first-cousin-once-removed who never told us he was a Peregrine.
If any of the people you seek have died,you will often get their full name and date of birth too.
-
Tried to find people in my tree born 1920-45 for who I've only a middle initial so far - since actual relatives are well-researched these tend to be those who married in, so of less interest to me - apart from a dimly-remembered spouse of a first-cousin-once-removed who never told us he was a Peregrine.
If any of the people you seek have died,you will often get their full name and date of birth too.
I know, and I had those that died in the last 50 years and on record, but these were people whose deaths could not otherwise be found - died between 1957 and 1967, or otherwise missing - might have died abroad, in WW2, record just garbled or age at death wildly out, or might still be alive (unlikely in most cases).
-
GRO Indexes Updated
Births and Deaths now available for Q4 2020 (but for some reason Q4 2019 and Q1, Q2, Q3 2020 still not searchable... ???)
-
But the complete fiche 2019, 2020, and first 2 quarters 2021 are available at the 7 GRO host sites around the country.
-
GRO Indexes Updated
Births and Deaths now available for Q4 2020 (but for some reason Q4 2019 and Q1, Q2, Q3 2020 still not searchable... ???)
There are a few on there for Quarter 3
-
GRO Indexes Updated
Births and Deaths now available for Q4 2020 (but for some reason Q4 2019 and Q1, Q2, Q3 2020 still not searchable... ???)
There are a few on there for Quarter 3
Ah yes you're right. But seemingly only for Births. My best guess is they are currently uploading them onto the system in a staggered way.
-
Another oddity is that when searching with a MMN, the results will also include records where the MMN doesn't match, and is blank in the results.
I have just found another oddity: searching for my father's death in 1995, it was necessary to select the Male choice. Searching for father-in-law's in 1987, the gender choice made no difference, you got the lot either way.
Personally I think choosing gender should be optional - it can only halve the catch, and occasional records are wrongly tagged anyway.
-
All of 2019 and 2020 now available on GRO
-
2021 now available from the GRO website (for Births and Deaths)
-
2021 now available from the GRO website (for Births and Deaths)
Thanks. I had seen my father's 2020 death on the list. I registered the death, so was one of the informants on the BMD certs we always see due to being genealogists.