TNA- The hundred year rule

[Terry_Reeves]

The hundred year rule regarding the opening of  files containing sensitive information, particularly about individuals can be found below . Of particular interest is the method of calculation.

 

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/closure-periods.pdf

 

TR

 

 

 

 

 

 

[keithmroberts]

Thanks Terry, that is interesting.

 

[Alan24]

Just out of interest...how did the 1939 Register come into the public domain?

If you assume all the adults were aged 16, it was still well before the 84 year rule. 

 

Regards

 

Alan.

 

[jonbem]

1 minute ago, Alan24 said:

Just out of interest...how did the 1939 Register come into the public domain?

If you assume all the adults were aged 16, it was still well before the 84 year rule. 

 

Regards

 

Alan.

 

I guess if I read this correctly as the 1940s is 90 years then the 1930s is 100 years

"Calculating the closure period: For closure, periods of 10 years are applied from the date of the record, not the date of application, therefore round figures are used: 40 years, 50 years, 60 years and so on. Regardless of when records are reviewed, periods of 10 years should be applied. In order to save time working out closure periods – the following can be used as examples, based on the creation dates of the records. Decade of file end date Closure period 1990s 40 years 1980s 50 years 1970s 60 years 1960s 70 years 1950s 80 years 1940s 90 years"

[petwes]

I thought that the 1939 register is available because records of individuals who are not proven to be deceased or over 100 years old are redacted?

Peter

Edited 9 September , 2019 by petwes

[Alan24]

10 minutes ago, petwes said:

I thought that the 1939 register is available because records of individuals who are not proven to be deceased or over 100 years old are redacted?

Peter

 

Ok, so if all those born after 9th Sept 1919* are still redacted, I can see how it fits the 100 year rule.

 

(*As it's been around a few years maybe the cut off date was around 1915). 

 

However, here's one born 1927...

Edited 9 September , 2019 by Alan24

[jonbem]

Just now, Alan24 said:

However, here one born 1927...

 

Might have died young(er)?

[petwes]

I think there is  an ongoing process where the register is cross checked against the register of deaths.  This takes a while,you can also manually request a record to be released if you can provide proof of death.

Peter

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

4 minutes ago, Alan24 said:

Ok, so if all those born after 9th Sept 1919* are still redacted, I can see how it fits the 100 year rule.

Leaving aside the start date, as Petwes states, the entries of individuals who are not proven to be deceased or over 100 years old are redacted.

So someone born as recently as September 1939 will have an open record, if they are deceased, AND the NA has a record of their death.

 

[jonbem]

My uncle will still be redacted, he is older than Mrs Queen!

[Matlock1418]

A lot of people have beaten me to the 1939 Register issue.

Having viewed it for known addresses at which a number of known people (visible) and the logically also included residents {Not visible/"officially closed" so must make an assumption - and yet at the same time known to me to have been living there} but now all known to be dead for a long time [at least 20 years and the rest - and can easily be formally proved to be dead] - why aren't those "officially closed" records now opened up?

13 minutes ago, jonbem said:

older than Mrs Queen

Akin to my point - they would be older than HM, were they alive, but they are now ALL dead.

So why not open?

???

14 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

AND the NA has a record of their death.

How a they going to get those in order that records are opened up?

and what process??

Edited 9 September , 2019 by Matlock1418

[Matlock1418]

30 minutes ago, jonbem said:

Might have died young(er)?

I doubt younger than the 1939 Register ;-)

But of an age that could have served and/or died during WW2 or later [but before the Register was released]

Its the closed records that frustrate me now.

Pre-empting the possible process for updating the Register and i can easily imagine NA wanting enquirers to produce a DC at their own expense - a nice litle earner for GRO methinks.

[jonbem]

I suppose going through all the original files gain (probably several million!) is a painstaking process. Unless someone could tell me of any in built automation on the files by the NA, it would be a manual effort by them and the family history sites, or whoever the job is contracted to, and thus no doubt a costly one too. I reckon there would perhaps be an upload every few years, once they had been gone through. As it is just less than 4 years since FMP released it firstly online, I think it will be a little while before a major update, but individuals may be done at NA

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

[jonbem]

3 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

I doubt younger than the 1939 Register ;-)

 

If someone was born less than 100 years ago, and has died, their record may still be closed if their death was not notified and recorded in the register. Deaths that occurred outside the United Kingdom are unlikely to have been notified. These include the majority of Second World War deaths.

[Matlock1418]

jonbem - without copying your last two posts - thanks for those by the way.

I would note you need either:

a FMP subscripton and a DC [Cost as expected in my post as above]

Or

at NA = £24.35 and probably a DC too

Shame the NA and GRO can't have a joined up service

And as for automation [rather than south asia] - heaven forefend!

:-(

 

29 minutes ago, jonbem said:

Deaths that occurred outside the United Kingdom are unlikely to have been notified. These include the majority of Second World War deaths.

 

one for a quick quote this time

"These include the majority of Second World War deaths"

Are you suggesting for service deaths and/or civilian deaths in UK - majority?

Surely there must have been a few in UK that would be registered, even in wartime.

Actually I guess those UK wartime deaths are actually open - but it's the later 'Now dead' that are the really vexing ones

Edited 9 September , 2019 by Matlock1418
addition

[jonbem]

19 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Are you suggesting

Not me suggesting -that's from National Archives and point 6.1 -  https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

Edited 9 September , 2019 by jonbem

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, jonbem said:

Not me suggesting -that's from National Archives and point 6.1 -  https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

Apologies if it seemed a personal accusation ;-) :-)

[jonbem]

I think this may be in the vicinity, though accuracy, well it is wikipedia!

UK military deaths = 383,700; civilian deaths = 67200

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

 

[Matlock1418]

Deleted as not considered well written or now relevant

Edited 9 September , 2019 by Matlock1418
deletion

[Matlock1418]

Deleted as not considered well written or now relevant

Edited 9 September , 2019 by Matlock1418
Deletion of post

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, jonbem said:

I think this may be in the vicinity, though accuracy, well it is wikipedia!

UK military deaths = 383,700; civilian deaths = 67200

 

Re-write

Still doesn't differentiate between overseas and UK deaths

And I can't see why majority of UK deaths wouldn't have been registered as dead

[I can understand overseas military deaths not being done - different sort of system I think]

 

And of course there are the post-war deaths [including GW veterans of whom we are commmonly researching, incl. c.1939 on and their spouses & chldren etc. ] - those are the ones which are frustrating in that though they usually have been registered as dead by now [veterans, spouses & their children] they are often still being considered as "officially" closed" in the Register

I really think they could legitmately be open - but it seems the system is not up to it, yet?

Really frustrating

[David_Underdown]

3 hours ago, Alan24 said:

Just out of interest...how did the 1939 Register come into the public domain?

If you assume all the adults were aged 16, it was still well before the 84 year rule. 

 

Regards

 

Alan.

 

The 1939 Register includes dates of birth for those listed (and also changes of name on marriage etc).  The assumption of age 16 is only used if the person is known to be an adult, but there is no other information in the record.  Also, because of the subsequent use of the register by the NHS deaths were also recorded (in a part not in the final released version as this part also included medical information) so if the person is known to be dead, either through previous notification to the register, or matching against other records the record can also be opened - since the point of the 100 year closure is to be reasonably sure that the record subject is dead (at which point data protection is moot as it applies only to living persons).

 

When people joined the armed forces (which could be during or after the war) their original register entry was closed, on discharge/demob they were given a new National Registration number (and hence NHS number). Entries for these people on the original register were not then further updated, so would not include a record of the death. Emigration also caused closure of the original register entry, and again people were assigned a new national registration number/NHS number if they subsequently returned to the UK.  Even moving region within the UK could lead to the original entry being closed.

 

The paper registers finally stopped being used by the NHS by 1990 - the exact date varied by region as computerisation progressed, so deaths after that also won't have been recorded in the original register.  This would also apply to name changes after that cut-off, so if eg a woman (re-)married after 1990 the change of name would not be recorded, and so if she subsequently died matching against the death register would be harder.

 

Matching against the death indices is harder for deaths prior to (from memory) 1969 as until then the death index only included age at death.  From some point in 1969 the index includes the full date of birth so it is much easier to make a conclusive match against the information recorded in the 1939 Register (of course there are sometimes discrepancies between the date of birth recorded in the 1939 Register and that recorded when the death was registered).  Matching also has to take into account how common the combination of name and date of birth actually is.

 

Of course people do live past 100, and if such a person does not want their record opened they can request "takedown" and the entry would once again be redacted.

 

Opening is carried out on a rolling basis.

[PRC]

The register was taken on the 24th September 1939 and men already serving in the armed forces were exempt - so that would have been TA, RAFVR and RNR men as well as Regulars and recalled reservists. So a number of those who died in the UK will still not be reflected in the 1939 National Register.

 

Additionally the part of register made available via a freedom of information request only covers England and Wales .

 

See https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

for more information, as already referenced above.

 

An individual may not be on the 1939 Register simply because they are not there, not because the record is officially closed.

 

Cheers,

Peter

 

[petwes]

From a very limited sample taken from my family tree both Ancestry and FMP are picking up dates of death to about 2014 for people with calculated ages less than 100 and the records are visible.  Another family member died in 2015 and was born in 1926, their record is still hidden. It looks as if the process of matching date of birth and name from the deaths register is rolling forward about 5 years retrospectively. I think Ancestry update on an annual basis FMP perhaps more frequently.

 

Peter

Edited 9 September , 2019 by petwes

[ss002d6252]

My aunt died 6 1/2 years ago but is still blacked out on the Ancestry 1939 register.

Craig