'Official' BDM Certificates

[Cornish Terrier]

There has been quite a bit of discussion throughout this site about Parish Registers and BDM Certificates.

You need an 'Official' Registered Certificate to apply for or prove lots of things these days ....................... but surely we need to ask WHY?

I have just found one in my possesion for a Marriage at Pendeen in 1856.

If you check the Pendeen parish Register it shows that WILLIAM Trewheelar married Mary Ann James 6th December 1856 at St John's Church, Pendeen.

It is clearly entered as WILLIAM and he was even kind enough to sign his own name as WILLIAM.

Yet on the CERTIFIED COPY of an ENTRY OF MARRIAGE Pursuant to the Marriage Act 1949 we find the following:-

JAMES Trewheelar and Mary Ann James

And:-

Certified to be a true copy of an entry in a register in my custody {signed} Rita A. Collier 23-8-93

Is there really any point in spending money on BDM Certificates??

CT

[donne]

This seems a shocking error. To give the registrar the benefit of any tiny doubt, I suppose it is just possible that the copy of the parish register entry which was sent to the GRO was in error, but since FreeBMD indexes Mr. Trewheelar as William I guess even this doubt is removed.

I note that most applications to the GRO now come back with a photo or digital copy of the entry which is probably a good thing in view of CT's experience. What annoys me is that usually we don't require a certified copy for any legal purpose. We just want to know what's in the register but for that we now have to pay an enormous fee, much more than in 1993! They say they are just covering costs for the service but I suspect that they are cashing in on the interest in family history. I would suggest that a two-tier system of fees is introduced where the higher rates only apply if you need a certified copy, where standards of checking should be a lot higher than in this example.