1939 - what have you found?

[LizzieW]

And obviously, in the case of my cousin, her married name was added in 1956.  So I wonder how long they carried on using the 1939 register?

[ScouseBoy]

Updated information was added to the 1939 Register for many years after it was taken because it was the central register first for National Registration purposes, and then for the NHS. So adding a person's new name was not pointless; it was never intended to be a static document like a census, it was created to be a live register with up-to-date name and address details (and more) of everyone in England and Wales, and this is the function it fulfilled for over 60 years until the paper-based system was replaced with an electronic database. 

Registering everyone where they happened to be on 29 September 1939 was just a way of capturing the whole population in one go and issuing everyone with an Identity Card. It didn't matter in the slightest whether someone was at their permanent address or was just visiting, because their address would also be updated whenever they moved, whether it was the next day, or decades later.

   But what about Merchant seamen and Merchant Navy Officers?   Why were they not registered at their HOME   address?

If you were to ask me, this 1939 register has been oversold,  or in the language of Insurance:   mis-sold

[msr]

I wouldn't have thought that it could be claimed that the register was being mis-sold as no-one needs to spend any money before knowing what is available, there has been lots of information out there for quite some time.

It is free to search as many times as required, and is then one's choice to unlock a household (or households) with credits if desired.
By searching the addresses option you can find out the names of the people who lived on a street or road.  I was curious as to whether an elderly couple I had lived next door to when I was very young had been there as early as 1939.  They were, but unfortunately miss-transcribed so I hadn't found them by name.  All cost me nothing to find this out.

As for the merchant navy question, I don't pretend to know, but would they not already be registered when joining the service?  The 1939 register was to record every civilian in the land.

[Guy Etchells]

Updated information was added to the 1939 Register for many years after it was taken because it was the central register first for National Registration purposes, and then for the NHS. So adding a person's new name was not pointless; it was never intended to be a static document like a census, it was created to be a live register with up-to-date name and address details (and more) of everyone in England and Wales, and this is the function it fulfilled for over 60 years until the paper-based system was replaced with an electronic database. 

Registering everyone where they happened to be on 29 September 1939 was just a way of capturing the whole population in one go and issuing everyone with an Identity Card. It didn't matter in the slightest whether someone was at their permanent address or was just visiting, because their address would also be updated whenever they moved, whether it was the next day, or decades later.

   But what about Merchant seamen and Merchant Navy Officers?   Why were they not registered at their HOME   address?

If you were to ask me, this 1939 register has been oversold,  or in the language of Insurance:   mis-sold

The simple answer is they would normally be away at sea so would not be enumerated at their home address.
Ships would have their own provisions for rationing

[James18]

No revelations as yet, but I have been able to find a number of DOBs, and by doing so narrowed down several spouses to be the correct people.

[Joy Dean]

Inaccurate date of birth given - day and month correct but the year was 20 years out!

[Ray T]

Today? - DoB 1901 mis-transcribed as 1907.

[BumbleB]

Today? - DoB 1901 mis-transcribed as 1907.

A very easy mistake to make 

[Joy Dean]

Inaccurate date of birth given - day and month correct but the year was 20 years out!

The year was given as 1881 and it took quite a while to identify the unknown person with my great-great-uncle but, eventually, I found her and her year of birth is 1901.
Why would she have given such a wrong year of birth?