Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Has anyone come across this before?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Margaret

Margaret Report 17 Oct 2006 15:05

I have a photocopy of a Death Certificate. The year of death has been changed. Would the Registrar alter the original or write out another certificate? M. Steer

KeithInFujairah

KeithInFujairah Report 17 Oct 2006 15:10

Hi Margaret, If the registrar was to alter the certificate, I would expect there to be a number next to it, this would indicate the alteration number. Keith

An Olde Crone

An Olde Crone Report 17 Oct 2006 15:41

Margaret It sounds fishy to me! The Registrar would only alter the date at the time of writing out the certificate, and would put an alteration reference number of the certificate. The Registrar is not allowed to 'tamper with' a certificate once it has left his office at the first recording of the event. A later amendement to the date would result in a new certificate being produced - and indexed - with possibly a cross reference to the origianl certificate AND a note in his 'Corrections Book' to say why another cert had been issued. I don't know how to put this delicately - but would a member of the family have had reason to alter the date? OC

Margaret

Margaret Report 17 Oct 2006 16:58

Thanks, Keith and O.C. I thought it odd! The year has been changed by only one year from 5 to 6. There is no 'initial' or 'notation'. As I said, it's only a photocopy, not a copy of the original. I can see no reason for a member of the family to 'tamper' with it. His last child was born in 1904, his widow didn't re-marry until December 1907, her next child was born in 1909. Is there something 'fishy' going on or just some lazy local official not doing his job correctly? I wonder. M. Steer

InspectorGreenPen

InspectorGreenPen Report 17 Oct 2006 18:44

My fathers death certificate had an error. The correction appears as a note on the re-issued certificate as follows. 'In No 209 (the register page) in Space 5 (date and place of birth) for 'December' read 'February' Corrected on the 18th December 1980 by me D Mc Williams Superintendent Registrar on the authority of a certificate from the Coroner' It is not permitted to change the original entry in any way, so if the date has been altered then this is not an official correction.

Margaret

Margaret Report 18 Oct 2006 14:37

Thankyou Ann and Peter. Yes, I've checked the BMD and he died in 1906 not 1905. So the amendment is correct. As I said, I only have a photocopy of a copy (issued in 1993). This has set me wondering - how much of a copy is a copy? That doesn't make sense I know. When we send off for copies of certificates, are they written out again completely? The certificate I have, definitely has two different 'hands'. The writing at the top (Reg.District, Sub-district etc.) is totally different to the writing in columns 1 - 9. If the original Registrar got it wrong, I can understand (sort of) it was Christmas Day - perhaps he's had too much...you know what and wasn't sure what year it was. M. Steer

Margaret

Margaret Report 18 Oct 2006 16:49

Ann, thanks. Basically, you've confirmed what I was thinking. Without wishing to sound heartless, it doesn't matter to me if he died in '05 or '06. However, I've been trying to find his grave/burial place for a few years - without success. If, I have the wrong year then that maybe the reason. Thanks again, M. Steer