Request for WW2 Army Service Records - being told i will have to wait until 2029

[River Tyne Lass]

I think it would be far better if the TNA just said you might have a long wait as they might not have the staffing or whatever - rather than come up with seemingly codswallop excuses in my opinion! 
This is very sad that your parents will be denied access to their own deceased Fathers' war records until 115 years after their birth.  Ridiculous!
Does anyone know how to start a poll on here?  Perhaps this and this thread could be forwarded to TNA.  I think they are being very unfair and this is very bad form shown by them.  Surely 100 years and if someone can be proved to be deceased that should be sufficient for a release of records to kin.
I heartily sympathise with you in this plight Blue Army.

[WelwynGC1]

Quote Greenrig - "We need some statement from (T)NA regarding the reasons for this policy". - OR someone who has a vested interest in the records of an ancestor to submit a FOI.

I bet if that Snow chap, or someone from a tv project wanted access, they would get hands-on with no gloves in the archive stores!

I completely agree Copper1, and more to the point this is a real block to the wonderful adventure of researching. I can`t imagine how else you are going to get through this but yes, some sort of explanation from TNA would be a help.
Sure some second rate celebrity on Who Do You Think You Are will have lots of help from the BBC and there will be no restrictions.
Always irks me when you see celebrities getting flights on Spitfires etc., bet they don`t have to pay the thousands it would cost us mere mortals.

[AntonyMMM]

This was discussed only recently at an AGRA group meeting. The advice from a researcher who had recently had the same problem was to submit a FOI (Freedom of Information) request to TNA ... that should get you the record, but they may still redact medical information

[Copper1]

I've just dis/un-covered some very illuminating information which may be of use to this emotive topic. It took some digging
First off this is the link to a FOI ('Graham Woolgar') in 2012 followed by a critical paragraph which may explain the current circumstances.

However, since neither I, or anyone else thus far has found a public announcement - particularly from the head of TNA [don't hold your breath on a civil servant being accountable!], I reiterate the options to interested parties,but not wholly,were posted earlier in this thread.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/review_of_world_war_ii_service_r

Point '8':-
The agreed policy between MOD and The National Archives is that service
records will be transferred to The National Archives at the point that the
majority of the subjects of the record have passed their 100th birthday
as, until that point, the record relating to any one subject will be
closed.  Whilst MOD and The National Archives have not discussed in detail
the transfer of Second World War service records it seems likely that the
records will become publicly available in the mid-2020s given that an 18
year who enlisted at the mid-point in the war would have been born around
1924.   

To round off, here is a link to the people at TNA representing US, the public, in various capacities for TNA, and upon the shoulders of at least one individual is the accountability to inform precisely the nature of transfer from MOD, basis of acceptance at TNA and actual process of release is being undertaken.
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/about/our-role/executive-team/

By the way, if Graham Woolgar is out there - many thanks for your efforts a decade back in time.

[Ruskie]

I just did a quick initial scan of the above, but did that reply to Graham Woolgar’s letter say that the “116” year rule is in place IF a death certificate is not provided? 

[Copper1]

The issue regarding "116 years" is mentioned - above the paragraph i copied & pasted, BUT only in the context that was a stipulation at the time the documents were held by the MOD.

It is my contention that TNA must make a clear and unequivocal public statement what their ruling is on the matter.

I have presumed that all applicants would, by the very nature of dealing with government employees (MOD or TNA civil servants), would naturally submit a death certificate to back up their claim and at the same time, avoid giving them an excuse for delay. I didn't read that the initial post, Thursday last, that proof of death accompanied an application.

We go back to the point(s), when were the files transferred, how much prior notice did TNA have of the procedure and what plans had they prepared in advance to smoothly incorporate them into their system.

Perhaps someone with a similar investigative nature might use the TNA 'executive-team' link in today's post which should have been noted as it provides access to their "Minutes". Could there be a useful piece of information within those meetings?

As time passes, the deadline for submissions to family history publications moves on, as does losing time not contacting an MP who represents your home address.

[Bluearmy1875]

Many thanks to all who have replied, and in many cases investigated. All very much appreciated !
I have tried replying to the emails from the Archives, but i havent even received an acknowledgement email back.  It does mention an address to send a complaint to - but i was hoping to give the Archives a second chance first.  The thing is - when we applied to the MOD we sent the cheque AND the death certificates - but they sent them back (2 years later) with the notification that the request had been passed to TNA - but the MOD returned the death certificate - so i don't even know if TNA know that both fathers/grandfathers have passed away.   

The bit that gets me is - quote " Please be aware that requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 have to be treated as applicant blind. Therefore, being next-of-kin can have no bearing on the outcome of this request for information. Information released under FOI is released to the public at large, not just to a requester. This is why we have to review these records for sensitivities."
 

[Copper1]

Again refer to link for TNA executive staff (earlier post) Prepare your account of how you've been mis-treated for the highest possible person and post it F.A.O. them by name  'Next Day 9am' delivery. Don't stand for this disrespectful nonsense from a civil servant. Inform your M.P. as well.
Nearly forgot - all interested parties need to have written to the family history magazine editors too.

[Ruskie]

" Please be aware that requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 have to be treated as applicant blind. Therefore, being next-of-kin can have no bearing on the outcome of this request for information. Information released under FOI is released to the public at large, not just to a requester. This is why we have to review these records for sensitivities”

  But if you apply for your relative’s service records, they are copied and posted to you in a brown envelope. This information is NOT released to the “public at large” - it is only sent to the applicant upon payment of a quite hefty £30 (and supplying a copy of the d/c.)

Surely in the case of deceased serviceperson’s records TNA’s claim of possibly sensitive information being released to the public is irrelevant / does not apply. 

As an aside, who decides what is sensitive information and what is not?

Added: Further to Copper1’s post above …. It can sometimes happen that there are grey areas with the release of information, especially with these MOD records being moved to a different authority - rules and regs may not be clear, they are busy, understaffed etc, so dealing with a different employee may yield a different/better result. It is always worth asking again. I have seen this a couple of times (but with Australian records and in a different situation) where people were able to get records released due to close family connections.

I wonder if some records may be misfiled, or lost during the processf moving?