Having spent the past few weeks wrestling with the General Office of the ONS, (oddly, even though they now come under the perview of the Home Office, they still use the same ONS disclaimers and contact addresses!) I thought that it was about time I passed on a copy of the conversations that have gone on.
Somewhat predictably we have been faced with open discussion followed by a seemingly incredulous lack of understanding followed by closed ranks followed by a full refusal to discuss the matter further!
What will happen next is anyones guess, but for now I am not expecting a great deal.
I am also doing this for the purposes of having as many full copies of this entire debacle in as many places as possible. Anyone wishing to repost without changes is welcome to do so but please let us know where it has been posted so that we may keep a record of its various existences and also learn anything from information offered by others not on these boards.
All correspondence follows:
I wonder if you can help me. I have a couple of questions and I have searched gro.gov.uk and have not found the answers!
Can you provide me with any information that might be available regarding de-registration. I have not been able to find any so far!
I am conducting a philosophical study of our 'free society' and wondered if de-registration were an option and how one might go about doing this?
I see that you are able to make corrections and change any number of details about the registration itself but I would like to know if you are also able to de-register the birth and reclaim the certificate of live birth that was presented as proof of the birth in the first instance, if you should so choose?
I guess what I am asking is...are you free to leave this 'free society'?!
Can you please explain to me how de-registration might be achieved and if it cannot be done, why not.
My second question is regarding Registrar General and the legal requirement for them to report directly to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953). This seems strange to me and I would like to understand why the CFO of the Government has anything to do with overseeing the registration of births, marriages, adoptions and deaths. What do these have to do with finance?
If you are unable to answer these questions knowledgeably, please feel free to tell me to whom I should be addressing these questions. Also, if you could cc me should you need to pass this email on to someone else, that would be very helpful as I would like to keep a record of who I have been in contact with.
There is no provision for a birth to be 'de-registered'. There is a legal
requirement under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 for every
birth in England or Wales to be registered and the birth registration is an
historical record of the fact that the birth has taken place.
It may be helpful if I explain that as the General Register Office(GRO) has
statutory powers it requires a Minister to represent them in government.
Until 1 April 2008 GRO was part of the Office for National Statistics(ONS),
whose Minister was from the Treasury. Since ONS became independent from
government GRO has become part of the Identity and Passport Service under
the Home Office.
I hope this helps with your study.
Pam J Blunt
Births Deaths &Adoptions Branch
General Register Office
Thank you for your previous reply. If, in your view, it is neccessary to forward my question to any additional agencies in order to obtain an authoritative reply, please feel free to do so. My questions is:
Is any natural person subject to the Act of 1953?
The 1953 Act requires that the birth of every child born in England and
Wales shall be registered in the district in which the birth took place. It
is the duty of the mother, or father where the parents are married, to give
information for the registration, where they are available.
Births Deaths & Adoptions Branch
I am sorry to be so persitent but you did not answer my question fully. If you are unable to do so, please feel free to pass this on to someone who can, or point me the direction of who that person might be!
Is any natural person subject to the Act of 1953?
I am sorry but I am unclear as to what you mean by the term 'natural
person' - perhaps you can clarify this?
I can only reiterate that when a woman gives birth in England or Wales
there is a legal requirement under the Births and Deaths Act 1953 for the
birth to be registered.
Pam J Blunt
Births Deaths & Adoptions Branch
I apologise for the huge delay in my response. Thank you for your patience.
I assure you that this issue is not in any way frivolous as this issue may directly affect me and my family, and I am simply seeking to authoritatively clarify the universal applicability of the Act, more directly as it pertains to a 'natural person'.
As you are employed by the General Register Office, on behalf of this government agency, I believe that as a matter of law you are the one who is charged with the authority of employing and potentially enforcing certain Acts and statutes upon the general public, some of whom may in fact be 'natural persons' and perhaps therefore not be subject to the 1953 Act, or potentially other Acts as well.
Again, please pass my request for clarification along to whomever can respond authoritatively in the event you need to defer to another.
I very much appreciate your continued assistance. It is a pleasure dealing with someone who responds promptly and honestly, thank you.
I look forward to hearing from you,
I have passed your question to a colleague for further deliberation and
will get back to you in due course.
Pam J Blunt
Births Deaths & Adoptions Branch
I have explained the legal requirement for the registration of births
under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 and there is nothing
further I can add in this respect.
We are unable to answer your question about whether any 'natural person' is
subject to the above Act and would suggest you consider seeking further
advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or obtaining legal advice.
Pam J Blunt
Births Deaths & Adoptions Branch
It appears that we are suffering from a conflict of available information versus required response, so, in a bid to clarify some of the issues and aid you further in your duty to provide me with the answers I require, please read the following which will hopefully provide you with a firmer footing and understanding of "Natural Person" so as to continue this discussion: http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/61D37D9C-A50D-4E29-86A8E661D7D5E344/alpha/N/
A link that shows regard to the system in the United States of America but the very essence is the same. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Natural+persons
Much more generic and much more specific all at once! http://www.legal-explanations.com/definitions/natural-person.htm
The pick of the three. Succinct and definitive.
So, as we can now accept that you have been provided with the information required to understand what or who is and can be a natural person, can you confirm that you now understand the central issue of this topic please?
Moving along, so as to quicken the process for all concerned, I require the following information and answers as soon as is reasonably possible. In respect of "reasonability" I believe that it would be fair to offer a term limit of 14 days, although, should you require further time to gather the necessary information prior to responding in full, please advise me as I would like to be given the opportunity to offer a longer term limit should I feel it is necessary.
Finally, should I not receive the responses required within the term limit or should any responses provided not be complete and lawful, I shall have no other option but to offer my understanding and responses and these shall be entered into the record as my terms and conditions of dealing with your office, these issues and my relationship with the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 henceforth.
1. Please could you advise me of the name and position of any other persons with whom you have discussed this matter or who have offered advice with regard to my questions.
I will require e-mail addresses for all parties involved as they are a part of the record of this discussion and I have a right to know who is providing this information. They should also be kept informed at all times of any progress and discussion regarding such and will be henceforth copied into each part of the discussion.
2. "The 1953 Act requires that the birth of every child born in England and Wales shall be registered in the district in which the birth took place. It is the duty of the mother, or father where the parents are married, to give information for the registration, where they are available."
This is quoted from the correspondence that I received from you on Monday, 11 May, 2009 3:35:04 GMT. I have two questions regarding this:
i. Having now been provided with the information required to develop a full understanding of the term "Natural Person" and, assuming that this is a term that you now understand, could you please tell me how the information offered at that time would relate to Natural Persons in their roles as parents of a child and,
ii. What provision does the Act make in defining the legal requirement with regards to the registration of the birth of a baby born of two Natural Persons.
3. Your advice that I seek legal advice elsewhere and not from yourself or your office is somewhat concerning for a number of reasons:
i. That is exactly what I came to your offices for and
ii. You are now informing me that the office you work for, capable, accustomed and funded as it is to ensure that, amongst other duties, the full prosecution of those that seek to circumvent, break or misuse the Acts and Statutes under which you operate is not able to offer legal advice any further and
iii. The statement itself is of dubious intent based upon my previous experience of your willingness to provide legal advice on this matter:
(from your first response to my original request for information on Thursday, 7 May, 2009 5:46:54 GMT)
"There is a legal requirement under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 for every birth in England or Wales to be registered and the birth registration is an historical record of the fact that the birth has taken place"
Clearly, offering legal advice was part and parcel of the conversation and your job as that is EXACTLY what was provided...Advice on the legal position!
With this in mind, why are you/is your office now refusing to offer further discussion on a matter which is, as evidenced in both our correspondence and the very tenets under which your offices are funded by the UK taxpayer - the enforcement of the Act - which have/has already, as evidenced in our correspondence been more than ready to offer legal advice on a swift and regular basis?
4. As a different course of action, you have suggested that I seek further remedy from the CAB or a legal professional. The CAB are, as we both know, not in the realms of being able to deal with this issue as they will in most cases defer to your offices and, since you now claim not to be able to help any further, I would be left with no choice but to contract the services of a legal professional. I can find NO legal basis under which the appointed enforcers of any Act, Statute or Law can require that a potential subject of said Act, Statute or Law and its ramifications and requirements of that subject therein seeks third party advice, especially when said advice will undoubtely require a financial penalty to be paid. Surely it is in the best interests of everybody involved to ensure that full understanding is reached by both parties so as to ensure that any two-party contract is offered the full force of law, In short, without a full understanding of the Act and its requirements, how can a person be placed under its jurisdiction? If you accept the responsibility of enforcement then you must, and do, accept the responsibility to provide full remedy and justification for all and any requests for information.
With this in mind, I graciously reject your offer of seeking third party advice as the requirement to respond on your part is both real and binding.
Please could you confirm that you understand your requirement to respond truthfully, fully and within the law?
(end of questions)
Actually, being completely honest, I am not the least bit confused as this is the general position taken by anybody who finds themself faced with a choice between answer honestly and truthfully and within the law or to bury their head in the sand and hope that "the problem" goes away!
Pam, I am not going away!
With my fullest appreciation of the help that you have offered thus far and, I am sure, will continue to offer,
Sixth response: (You are going to LOVE this one!)
I am replying on behalf of Pam who is now on holiday leave. We are unable
to add to the information Pam has already given you and I regret that we
must now cease to correspond with you in this matter.
Births, Deaths & Adoptions Branch
Thank you for your prompt response.
For information purposes, I understand that you are attempting to subvert the course of these discussions in a bid to avoid actually answering the questions, however, as you are funded by the UK taxpayer, you are duty-bound to offer the answers that have been requested of you or provide us with the name and contact details of a person who is willing to answer these questions and will be prepared to do so without charge.
That said, I refer you to this section of my previous correspondence:
"Moving along, so as to quicken the process for all concerned, I require the following information and answers as soon as is reasonably possible. In respect of "reasonability" I believe that it would be fair to offer a term limit of 14 days, although, should you require further time to gather the necessary information prior to responding in full, please advise me as I would like to be given the opportunity to offer a longer term limit should I feel it is necessary.
Finally, should I not receive the responses required within the term limit or should any responses provided not be complete and lawful, I shall have no other option but to offer my understanding and responses and these shall be entered into the record as my terms and conditions of dealing with your office, these issues and my relationship with the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 henceforth."
This makes clear my intention to disallow any attempts on your part/on the part of your offices to simply ignore the questions and, having considered your response, this is exactly what you have attempted to do. In light of your failure to exercise your duty to me with regards to answering my questions both fully and lawfully, I now enter the following into the public record and request that you do the same by way of public notice or any other publicly available medium claiming in full the support of the office you hold and work for, for my terms and conditions:
Please note, these terms and conditions relate directly to the following persons:
i) Natasha-Sharon:Hawkes (formerly known as the corporate legal fiction Natasha Sharon Hawkes born 4th November 1977 in Bedford Hospital, England) hereafter referred to as "Natasha", "me", "myself" or "I",
ii) Shaun-David-Mark:Hawkes (formerly known as the corporate legal fiction Shaun David Hawkes, also known as Shaun David Carr born 23rd November 1971 and registered in Edmonton, England) hereafter referred to as "Shaun" or "my husband",
iii) Domink-Matthew-James:Hawkes (formerly known as the corporate legal fiction Dominik Matthew James Hawkes born 4th August 2004 at Bedford Hospital, England) hereafter referred to as "Dominik",
iv) Hannon-Mark-Anthony:Hawkes (born 2nd March 2007 outside of the United Kingdom without registration under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953) hereafter referred to as "Hannon",
v) Lillian-Eleanor-Grace:Hawkes (born 24th December 2009 outside of the United Kingom without registration under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953) hereafter referred to as "Lillian",
Further, any reference to "my children" or "our children" shall be accepted to refer to the natural persons listed as iii, iv and v and any reference to "us", "we", "our" or "my family" shall be accepted to refer to the natural persons listed as i, ii, iii, iv and v.
1. Whereas "we" understand that "our" rights as individuals human beings are such that "we" were born into a free world without, including but not limited to, bond or restriction of movement and have at no time requested that freedom be removed or that such movement be restricted and hereby renounce all and any perceived agreements, obligations or benefits offered or implied by the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 (hereafter "the Act") or any part thereof to include any changes to "the Act" past, present and future,
2. Whereas "we" have firm belief and conviction that "our" requests for remedy under the Act have been in the most part ignored, "our" efforts for fair, full and lawful discussion have been subverted and "our" desire to fully understand the Act or any part therein has been extinguished by the lack of any advice, support or remedy offered by the offices appointed and empowered to undertake prosecution under the Act and execution of its terms and conditions,
3. Whereas "we" have requested reponses to reasonable questions and have not been provided with any of these answers within the offered term-limit "we" confirm that "we" no longer wish to be subject to "the Act" to include any changes to "the Act" past, present and future or any of the conditions perceived or real therein,
4. Whereas "we" request, with immediate effect, that you issue copies of the death certificates for "my husband", "Domink" and "myself" so as to confirm "our" Civil Deaths,
5. Whereas "our" Civil Death now enables "us" to take no further part in the United Kingdom as a corporation, society or organisation and "we" are thus no longer subject to its Acts or Statutes,
6. Whereas "we" offer "our" assurance that "we" as Natural Persons will never seek to break any law although, for clarification, these do not include anything claimed to be given the force of law save for the laws of God himself as handed down to mankind and "we" would individually accept all and any lawful consequences for any such actions,
7. Whereas "we" waive all and any benefit(s) offered by any court of law, government office, the United Kingdom and any other persons, organisations and/or corporations acting in a legal manner or claiming to be acting in a lawful manner whilst attempting to use any Act or Statute regardless of any claim that said Act or Statues carry the force of law,
8. Whereas "we" do not accept any financial charges applied by yourselves or any other party whose participation is required to achieve these terms and conditions in lieu of your decision to offer no reasonable remedy and as such "we" expect you to ensure that all and any claims of remuneration, financial or otherwise, are settled within any stated terms and conditions of the party serving said financial notice,
9. Whereas "we" truthfully and with full understanding accept your statement "we must now cease to correspond with you in this matter" received by "us" Thursday, 11 June, 2009 4:51:55 GMT as a full and final end to any responsibility perceived or real that may be inferred upon "us" by the Act. You have clearly stated that there can be no further correspondence in this matter and as such "we" agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment; there shall be no further correspondence between "us" and yourselves regarding the Act or any part therein past, present or future,
"We" look forward to receiving notification that the confirmation of our Civil Deaths for "myself", "my husband" and "Dominik" will be awaiting collection at Bedford Registry Office within a period of 7 days, however, as you have clearly stated that there will be no further correspondence on this matter, "we" assume said notification will not be forthcoming and, in lieu of this likelihood, "we" will simply send our appointed representative, Beryl Janice Rinaldi, to Bedford Registry Office to collect said confirmations. Please note that, should the confirmations not be ready to collect by the close of business of the 19th June 2009, our representative will have no choice but to charge a financial penalty of £100 for the visit and £250 for each subsequent daily visit until such confirmations are completed and presented.
Finally I thank you wholeheartedly for your ludicrously predictable lack of cooperation. You could not possibly have made our job any easier.
Without maliceaforethought, ill-will or malintent,
Natasha-Sharon:Hawkes, Freeman On The Land
So, fun as it was, what do you think the chances are of us getting our confirmations??!
Don't worry, that was rhetorical!!!
Keep you posted.