2 million more records opened on the 1939 Register

Originally Posted by kiterunner

Original data: GreyPower Deceased Data. compiled by Wilmington Millennium, West Yorkshire.

I found a blog post which says that "The data apparently comes from funeral directors and obituaries."

http://elizabethwalne.co.uk/blog/201...13-from-v.html

Thanks Kiterunner, I was just about to check; Ancestry doesn't give much detail.

I have found it useful but yes for your purpose it would have to have a GRO index reference.

[Kit]

Originally Posted by kiterunner

Original data: GreyPower Deceased Data. compiled by Wilmington Millennium, West Yorkshire.

I found a blog post which says that "The data apparently comes from funeral directors and obituaries."

Thank you

[kiterunner]

I came across the May 2016 TNA Advisory Group minutes online and was interested to see that they say that the required 98.5% accuracy rate was not met when the 1939 Register database was originally launched. I don't remember seeing that officially acknowledged anywhere else?
(para 6.3 of this PDF)
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/d...es-2016-05.pdf

[Merry]

Quote me:

(I have just sent them a query about my outstanding issues with page 1616a 006 and the surrounding pages, asking how much longer I have to be patient - as they requested in their last reply in May 2016!)

Quote Kate:

Hope they actually fix it this time round.

I have just had a reply telling me that Liam is looking in to what is "a complex problem" Maybe another 14 months??

[Kit]

Originally Posted by Merry

I have just had a reply telling me that Liam is looking in to what is "a complex problem" Maybe another 14 months??

Please don't hold your breath.

[kiterunner]

I've had an email from the Information Commissioner's Office (formerly known as the Data Protection Registrar) in reply to my contacting them about this issue. Here is an extract from the email:

You are concerned that FMP have opened records without the consent of the individuals concerned despite it stating on FMP’s website that records are only opened if individuals are deceased or 100 years or older.

This raised data protection concern is in relation to the first principle, which says that processing must be fair and lawful. In order to comply with the fairness aspect of the first principle, organisations need to be clear about the way in which personal data will be processed.

In most cases this is achieved by providing fair processing information, typically in a Privacy Policy or in Terms & Conditions.

In this case it would appear as though Find My Past are not processing personal data in accordance with the 100 year rule they apply on their web site.

We will now raise this matter with Find My Past and ensure that personal data is being processed fairly and lawfully.

As your personal data does not appear to have been disclosed we will not contact you again regarding this matter however we thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and assisting us in improving data protection practice in the UK.

[Phoenix]

Could Merry get her mother to complain......?

[kiterunner]

I don't think they are saying that they need somebody to complain about their own personal data, just that they don't need to report back to me on what happens when they contact FMP about it. I'm not certain what they mean by "it would appear as though Findmypast are not processing personal data in accordance with the 100 year rule", though. Hopefully they mean that is the conclusion they have drawn after looking at all the stuff I sent them? In which case we can feel vindicated!

[Phoenix]

Most certainly vindicated, but the only way we will know whether action has been taken is if names disappear - and will that be across the board, or on an adhoc basis?

[kiterunner]

We'll have to wait and see, I suppose. Hopefully it won't be just the examples I sent them!