Moderator Control Panel ]

GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

A problem shared is a problem halved. Post your brick walls here and see whether you can offer advice to others

GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AdrianB38 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 8:18 pm

A few days ago I sent for a PDF of a birth certificate from the GRO (England & Wales) site, using their indexes. Today I received a refund with the message:
Birth Certificate: IVY MANNING born in LIVERPOOL
We have been unable to process your application, please refer to the paragraph below.
There is an inconsistency in the indexes which occurred when the index was compiled; we are therefore unable to trace an entry with the details supplied.
A full refund of ...

Anyone care to suggest what the possible problem might be? (Apart from the obvious "index is wrong"...)

Details:
1. This is the GRO site index that I used to send for the PDF:
Name: Mother's Maiden Surname:
MANNING, IVY DELAPHINE, RENNIMORE
GRO Reference: 1918 D Quarter in LIVERPOOL Volume 08B Page 113

2. This is the FreeBMD index from the FreeBMD site:
Births Dec 1918 (>99%)
Manning Ivy D Rennimore Liverpool 8b 113

Looks like a good match to me. And the FreeBMD image looks like that. So that seems to make it unlikely that there's a misread of name, volume or page, because it's been done twice (note that the GRO site index gives the full middle name, so it's not a copy of the FreeBMD data).

3. If I use FreeBMD to list v.8b p.113, then there are 5 entries, which I think is the normal number.

4. The local Registrar's BMDs are on http://www.lancashirebmd.org.uk/, which seems to have indexes for around her entry - it does not have a birth index for Ivy Manning in Lancashire in 1900-1925 apart from one in Preston in 1901. Not plausible.

5. You can use Lancs 'BMD to list off entries on a page in the local Registrar's book, providing you have a name to start with. The GRO entries for v.8b p.113 & thereabouts appear to come from the Abercromby sub-district of Liverpool district. The local Registrar's pages are ABE/41/9 to /11 and /9 (the best bet for Ivy) seems a bit messy - I've only found 7 entries so far.

I did the above to double check if there were any "obvious" name problem created between Liverpool and the GRO. Can't see one.

Adoption?
OK, I know. Formal adoption didn't start until 1927. But as well as Ivy's BC, I also sent for her mother's death certificate. And the informant is "Ivy Kielema, adopted daughter...". (Kielema is the married name of Ivy Manning)

Could it be that Ivy's 1918 BC (which surely did exist to be indexed - twice!) was actually her biological(?) birth certificate but was marked up (informally?) as an adoption from birth, showing the adopted surname (Manning). In which case someone from the GRO today has seen that, thought that's not supposed to be there but should be in the Adoption Register (despite it being before it came into use) and forbidden access in the same way that access to the Adoption Register proper would be??? Is that likely?

Any alternative suggestions welcome. (And yes, this is the family from http://www.whodoyouthinkyouaremagazine.com/forum/topic17539.html - still throwing up weirdness!)
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby ianbee » Wed Apr 17, 2019 9:36 pm

AdrianB38 wrote:5. You can use Lancs 'BMD to list off entries on a page in the local Registrar's book, providing you have a name to start with. The GRO entries for v.8b p.113 & thereabouts appear to come from the Abercromby sub-district of Liverpool district. The local Registrar's pages are ABE/41/9 to /11 and /9 (the best bet for Ivy) seems a bit messy - I've only found 7 entries so far.

Hi Adrian, not much help with your actual problem, but it looks as though..
Lily Crozier referenced on FreeBMD as 8b 113, should be 8b 115
and
Florence Dalrymple, 8b 115 on FreeBMD should be 8b 113

So really the five names in the GRO index 8b 113 are
Robert J Conroy, Florence Dalrymple, Anthony P Garvey, Ivy D Manning, Alice Metcalfe

And the local indexes have four of those five referenced as Liverpool/Abercromby ABE/41/9, with Ivy being the one missing (which you Know!)

The five on GRO with the previous page ref (8b) 112 are all there on Lancashire BMD as ABE/41/8
Ditto the five referenced on the next page (8b) 114, they are all on Lancs with reference ABE/41/10

But why Ivy's birth is missing on the Lancashire site - and which may be connected to the failure of the GRO to supply you with the pdf - I do not know
Ian
ianbee
 
Posts: 2292
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby ianbee » Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:11 pm

New GRO index
HARRIS, IVY DELAPHINE MANNING
Mother's maiden surname WHITE
GRO Reference: 1918 D Quarter in LIVERPOOL Volume 08B Page 126

Sub-District Abercromby on LancsBMD
Was the first registration struck off, so to speak, but still found it's way into the original GRO index?
ianbee
 
Posts: 2292
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AdrianB38 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 6:49 am

Harris! Well!!!

It must surely be something like that. Ivy gets registered first under Manning - perhaps by Edith, her adoptive mother. Then, by some process, the local Registrar says, "That's not supposed to happen..." and Ivy is registered again under her biological birth details, albeit based round her Manning name (Delaphine is a bit distinctive!). The first registration is "cancelled" by Liverpool somehow but when the Quarterly copies go up, the cancelled entry goes up with it. Who knows - maybe the Quarterly copies were compiled at the same time as the originals, one at a time, rather than altogether in one big rush? (Never thought about that...)

Then, when both the old paper and the new digital GRO Indexes are produced, the indexer failed to notice the cancellation of the first entry and indexed it. But the staff this week did notice it and decided that I couldn't be given a copy of a cancelled entry. Probably reasonably so.

Seems like a good theory to me. So it was to do with the adoption, but not in the way that I first speculated. If we're right.

I wonder if Antony can comment on the circumstances a registration might be cancelled??? He said hoping...

And yet again I am impressed by your searching Ian!

PS - the only disappointment in what is yet another fascinating addition to Edith's story, is that I was using Ivy's birth as part of the estimate of when Edith herself might have been been born and I'd got quite a tight timescale for that. Now it turns out she could be much older when Ivy was born.

Sent from my Moto G6 Play using Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine Forum mobile app
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AntonyM » Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:33 am

I think there is good chance that you have identified the issue.

As she described herself as the "adopted daughter" when registering the death of her mother then you know that she knew she was not her biological daughter, and so the registration indexed as MANNING cannot really be correct.

My guess would be that this child was fraudulently/mistakenly registered by the adoptive mother as her own, and at some point later (after the quarterly returns had been submitted) the deception was discovered or admitted to and the entry cancelled. The GRO entry is probably marked as such, but this wasn't picked up properly by the transcriber during the digitisation process and so found its way into the on-line index.

But that is still only a guess - you need to find the evidence to support it. You could ask the Superintendent Registrar in Liverpool to help - the entry will still be in their original register, and probably annotated with some sort of cancellation. They may or may not be willing to provide a copy.

The birth in the name HARRIS found by Ian looks like a good match for the actual birth.... so you should certainly get a copy of that, there might just be a marginal note linking it to the MANNING one, or some other hint e.g. the words "on the Authority of the Registrar General" mentioned in the informant column.

Cases such as these can be found in the Registrar General correspondence (RG 48) files at The National Archives.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AdrianB38 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:38 pm

Thanks Antony - I will order the Harris BC from Liverpool - a bit more expensive but if they do a photocopy of the original, rather than a transcript, then it's the original rather than a copy with potentially its own issues. If the Harris BC doesn't explain it, then I can try to see what the Liverpool SR says about the original Manning BC on its page.
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AntonyM » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:15 pm

AdrianB38 wrote:Thanks Antony - I will order the Harris BC from Liverpool - a bit more expensive but if they do a photocopy of the original, rather than a transcript,


A certificate is very unlikely to produced using a photocopy of the original register - you can ask, it can be done and very occasionally they may agree, but normal practice would be to transcribe the entry onto a blank certificate form.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AdrianB38 » Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:57 pm

Oh that depends Antony. It may be something that's only done in a limited area but someone worked out how to photocopy the desired line of entry onto a genuinely Certified Copy of an Entry blank. Not all Offices do it round here - Cheshire East won't, they just do handwritten transcripts onto the certified blank, but all the historical stuff that I've had recently from Staffordshire Newcastle under Lyme is a photo of the relevant line onto a certified blank, some Cheshire West is, and a few others besides.

Having tried myself in the past to photocopy stuff into a specific spot on a non blank sheet of paper, I know it's not easy - I have an idea that the originator worked out templates for positioning but it's some time since I read about it.

Sent from my Moto G6 Play using Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine Forum mobile app
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby ianbee » Thu Apr 18, 2019 11:00 pm

Adrian, do you know what happened to Ivy after she remarried?
ianbee
 
Posts: 2292
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: GRO Refund for "an inconsistency in the indexes"

Postby AdrianB38 » Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:25 am

Err - off the top of my head, without delving into my notes this early in the morning - no. My notes may indeed simply be the other thread.

She married a 2nd time, presumably after a divorce since Mr K is still around. And I think that her new name was rather more common, so I haven't even looked yet.

I also can't find her in FMP's 1939 Register nor can I find her husband to be, Mr K in it. He may be a sailor, I remember thinking, so he might have been at sea then, but I was uncertain if he was the guy with the same name who appears on crew lists.

Sent from my Moto G6 Play using Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine Forum mobile app
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Next

Return to General research queries


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests