Charge carried to dummy

[alf mcm]

The above expression appears on many of the Fold 3/WFA pension records. Any idea what it means?

 

Regards,

 

Alf McM

[David Tattersfield]

Please see the last few posts in this thread... 

 

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/267455-203383-pte-w-carruthers-koyli-also-31427-of-the-31-bn-nf/

 

David 

[alf mcm]

Thanks David,

  I've looked, but there is no definitive explanation.

 

Regards,

 

Alf

[Guest]

Hi, my husband's great grandfather has "6 to Dummy" handwritten in what looks like red crayon on his ledger with the date 25/1/34.

The other examples I've seen relating to Dummy are in 1934 and 1935, so maybe it's an administration move?...

[ss002d6252]

'Carried to Dummy' is sometimes also seen on Soldiers Effects entries. In my experience with those records it seems to be an army accounting term to write off a balance.

Craig

[David Tattersfield]

Thanks for this Craig. The 'Charge Carried to Dummy' (either in hand writing or by means of a stamp) is something that I've seen plenty of times, but have been unable to interpret. 

 

In terms of the use of this with the pension records, I'm still not clear how this applies. I can understand the 'writing off a balance' in terms of soldiers effects entries, but for this phrase to pre-date the death of the claimant is something I can't get my head round. 

 

If only we were able to talk to people who may have worked with these records !!!

 

Cheers

 

David

[ss002d6252]

5 minutes ago, David Tattersfield said:

If only we were able to talk to people who may have worked with these records !!!

 

Cheers

 

David

 

That would have taken away hours of fun that we've had though... !
 

Craig

[ss002d6252]

I can see it being used pre-death to write off official over-payments where awards were amended but without the full calculation details it would be very difficult to say exactly.

Craig

[Terry_Reeves]

I suspect it was a suspense account where a record was entered awaiting the correct amount to be decided.

 

TR

[alf mcm]

Craig, Terry,

  Both your suggestions sound reasonable, but I think we will have to wait until the pension record cards are released before we can get a definitive answer.

 

Regards,

 

Alf McM

[ss002d6252]

35 minutes ago, alf mcm said:

Craig, Terry,

  Both your suggestions sound reasonable, but I think we will have to wait until the pension record cards are released before we can get a definitive answer.

 

Regards,

 

Alf McM

I doubt that they will give us that. If the ledgers include insufficient details then the cards are unlikely to add much in that respect. The best hope, short of finding it in a MoP guide (and it's not been in any of the ones's I've read through) is likely to come from one of the surviving PIN pension files as that way there are some of the calculations to look at (albeit slightly earlier in date than the ledgers).

Craig

[Matlock1418]

 

On 03/04/2019 at 18:58, ss002d6252 said:

That would have taken away hours of fun that we've had though... !

Craig,

Thanks to the Western Front Association / Ancestry (Fold3) further new releases I know you have been having lots of fun ;-)

Have the new releases revealed any more on this phrase?

Here is an example of Ledger

and also a Card

which are clearly related to each other - but much separated in time it would seem

Any more ideas?

 

[ss002d6252]

Nothing more to add at present.

 

Craig

[Carmania]

When I was a Civil Servant, many years ago, 'Dummy' files where created when the original was requested by a Survey or Audit team who were based somewhere else. Would that have any relevance here?

Aled

[keithmroberts]

2 minutes ago, Carmania said:

When I was a Civil Servant, many years ago, 'Dummy' files where created when the original was requested by a Survey or Audit team who were based somewhere else.

 

That was my experience in my earlier days in the Civil Service when clerical papers had to leave the office for almost any reason. The creation of a dummy file  allowed work to continue  while the original was being examined elsewhere. When the original was returned the two files would then be merged.

 

Keith

[Matlock1418]

3 hours ago, Carmania said:

When I was a Civil Servant, many years ago, 'Dummy' files where created when the original was requested by a Survey or Audit team who were based somewhere else.

 

3 hours ago, keithmroberts said:

in my earlier days in the Civil Service when clerical papers had to leave the office for almost any reason. The creation of a dummy file  allowed work to continue  while the original was being examined elsewhere. When the original was returned the two files would then be merged.

 

Some 'inside knowledge' from you both - the wealth and depth of knowledge in GWF is always very encouraging.

Can see the reason for creating a "DUMMY" file if the original had been sent elsewhere

So ... how does that relate to "CHARGE CARRIED TO DUMMY"?

What is that saying about a ledger, like post #12 above, with that stamped upon it???

[NeuvilleLass]

Currently looking at a Private Thomas Wilson Makepeace 2nd Bn Yorks who has a number of Pension Files on record, one for his father who seems to have been on a dependents pension for his 2 sons killed in action and then Thomas's wife makes a claim for a widows pension which originally listed him as Ernest Makepeace, then a second card for his wife has him with his original name and is later marked "Charge carried to Dummy 18 Dec 1934" Could this discrepancy explain how this was used when a case was unclear or inaccurate or disputed as the posts above hint to when a file is examined? 

[Matlock1418]

On 04/08/2023 at 13:36, NeuvilleLass said:

Currently looking at a Private Thomas Wilson Makepeace 2nd Bn Yorks who has a number of Pension Files on record, one for his father who seems to have been on a dependents pension for his 2 sons killed in action and then Thomas's wife makes a claim for a widows pension which originally listed him as Ernest Makepeace, then a second card for his wife has him with his original name and is later marked "Charge carried to Dummy 18 Dec 1934" Could this discrepancy explain how this was used when a case was unclear or inaccurate or disputed as the posts above hint to when a file is examined? 

Not an answer but observations:

The 'Ernest' cited appears to be a figment of the Fold3 transcriber's imagination since Ernest does not appear, nor any other male forename appear, on the PIC for his widow's claim.

From the PIC and from the related/paired pension ledger page [without a "Carried to Dummy" stamp], as Thomas Wilson MAKEPEACE, we can actually see his widow, Lily Maud MAKEPEACE applied for a higher rated Alternative Pension Widow's [but we can't directly see if she was successful - however the Awards File for the APW was not destroyed until 1964, see reverse of PIC]

The "Carried to Dummy" stamp is used on the father's pension ledger page which names both his lost sons - this PLP has quite a few annotations and appears likely to pre-date the widow's APW claim.

M

Edited 14 August by Matlock1418
typo