sadsac Posted 4 January , 2009 Share Posted 4 January , 2009 Hello All, seeking info on Stoker GOFFE-WOOD ( WOOD ? ) William Frederick RN No. D/K 65955 !! This will also be WW11 TALK as he was lost H.49 1940. Here because of number - I know that Stokers No. in ADM 188's only go up to 63500, and he was born 1907 so `too young' for `WW1 War Service', BUT could he just have crept-in for recognition as `Boy Service' at 15/16 ??? As in WW11 he was listed as `mobilized' 1940 could he have had service prior to 1940. T'is a long shot over the stern, but be most gratefull for any help / thoughts / direction pointing. Sadsac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 4 January , 2009 Share Posted 4 January , 2009 The RN had issued stokers numbers up to K.66973 before changing the numbering system in October 1925, so he would have enlisted pre-1925 (about 1,000 before the change) in (at a guess) 1923-24. His papers have not been released by MOD and are only obtainable by next-of-kin on payment of a fee of about £30. See the Veterans Agency website:- http://www.veterans-uk.info/service_record...ce_records.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadsac Posted 4 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 4 January , 2009 Many thanks, HORRY, thought it was something like that. Will see what family say. Nice to have `suspicions' confirmed tho !! Does seem a little silly of the MOD to issue details of rating in 1923 & only to `family' for thereafter !! Does the fact of `MONEY' smell around the place ! Sadsac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 4 January , 2009 Share Posted 4 January , 2009 Does seem a little silly of the MOD to issue details of rating in 1923 & only to `family' for thereafter !! Annoying for researchers it may be, but whether 1923 or 1943 or 1963, SADDO, you could make the same argument - documents have either been released to the public at large or they have not. If not, the rules for protection of personal data (and the fees that go with them) have to be observed. When would you think it would be appropriate for details of your life to be released to Kew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadsac Posted 4 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 4 January , 2009 Annoying for researchers it may be, but whether 1923 or 1943 or 1963, SADDO, you could make the same argument - documents have either been released to the public at large or they have not. If not, the rules for protection of personal data (and the fees that go with them) have to be observed. When would you think it would be appropriate for details of your life to be released to Kew? Point completley taken Horry, only thinking of difference 1923 to 1925 ?? Realise that although (say) I'm DD'd my family are not - so if I/they wish something `hidden' time of info release is ????????????????? BUT still begs the question if `journalist' finds something out about YOU (source not given) then he can print away in gay abondon !! So Government `Freedom of info' only goes so far !! Regards Sadsac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
per ardua per mare per terram Posted 5 January , 2009 Share Posted 5 January , 2009 The UKNA & MOD were consulting about making inter-war records available, but I haven't heard what was the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now