1939 Register to be published on line by FMP

[rockyfowler]

Good News the reg is to be published in 2 years time http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/2014/new-p ... me-online/

[Antie Em]

Really good news Rocky - might change to FMP for that

[snoopysue]

Wonder when they'll start to make them available?

[nelly]

Started today:

http://www.findmypast.co.uk/1939register

Just had a small go on it, only found a few relatives (0 results for folk I know were very much alive at the time!).

[mallosa]

Not used FMP before but have found what I wanted - it looks like I've used 60 credits to view 1 address, is that right?

[peterd]

think they drop a clanger here unless they release the info of people they know are dead ?

Harold Dorricott 1930 Warrington C.B. Lancashire Preview

[peterd]

also left a comment at the bottom of the page

https://blog.findmypast.com/new-project ... 78155.html

[peterd]

wonder if you could get the info for nowt under a freedom of information request ?

[mumbles]

I would note as follows :-
a) Use advance search as you will pin down relative easier as normal search gives too big a choice and may not find relative
b) Transcriptions were wrong on date of birth on two of households I checked as against BMD or Census records
e.g. my grandmother was born in 19/4/1874 and 1939 Register shows 19/4/1879 which is 3 years after her father died in 1876
c) a lot of relatives are not noted as "entry is noted as closed" for anyone under 100 years old . This when you know they are dead and only way to open records is to provide proof in form of death certificate or other means

[sparkstopper]

Just 'keyed' myself into it, and I'm on it....It would cost me £6.95 for my father & mother
and about £25 for extra info: and I'm a member of FMP:
Luckily I am in possession of this data....

[mallosa]

e.g. my grandmother was born in 19/4/1874 and 1939 Register shows 19/4/1879 which is 3 years after her father died in 1876

My mothers birth date is also wrong, it says 23/4/1916 instead of the actual date on the record 23/8/1916. thankfully only the month and not the year

[mallosa]

Just 'keyed' myself into it, and I'm on it....It would cost me £6.95 for my father & mother
and about £25 for extra info: and I'm a member of FMP:
Luckily I am in possession of this data....

That's scandalous, I think members should have a discount dont you Sparks? KRO

[Guy]

also left a comment at the bottom of the page

https://blog.findmypast.com/new-project ... 78155.html

You can get the information free go to the National Archives and access it there.

You are wanting access in your own house but forget someone has to pay to enable that.
Why should taxpayers have to fund your hobby?

Have you any idea how many millions Findmypast has had to pay out to scan, transcribe, check, index and host the records that is before you even take into account the royalty fee they have to pay and the hosting costs.
The have taken a huge risk, as they did for the 1911 census and deserve to be refunded for their outlay.

Cheers
Guy

[SRD]

But the information is our information, it belongs to us, to have to pay for it, either by laying out travel expenses, and in my position that is impossible anyway, or by pouring funds into a company that makes large, untaxed profits (due to being based offshore) on our information, may well be considered iniquitous.

Records are being digitized anyway for the Governments benefit, making that info available to citizens of the country involved shouldn't need to involve foreign businesses who are prepared to sell to anyone anything they can lay their hands on in order to make profit for shareholders.

Many other aspects of government information is freely available why shouldn't census records be?

There may be an argument for a charge to be made for transcribed documents (but given how poor commercial transcriptions often are making the large charges they do might be considered daylight robbery especially if those records are the result of a monopolistic deal) but most of those who have genealogy as a hobby prefer to look at original documents anyway.

The idea that FMP took a commercial risk in buying this information on a monopolistic basis is ludicrous, like most government transactions it was greatly underpriced in a desperate effort to generate a few quid to the Treasury, and, like most purchasers of government selloffs, commercial interests are only interested in dead certs (if you'll excuse the pun).

[peterd]

totally agree SRD the file would of had to been transcribed sooner or later for government use,

also you could say giving tax breaks to charities that rescue people that do mountain climbing, hill walking in winter, caving, sailing is that indirectly funding people hobbies ?