34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death. Sub section 2

Ms. S made this Freedom of Information request to General Register Office

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, General Register Office should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear General Register Office,
Thank you for your response, however you have not answered my question,instead you state that any surname is acceptable to enter in the register even if it's not one of the parents, I think you'll find that's perjury and forgery. In 2009 Parliament Welfare reform bill, Schedule 6 - Registration of births, Number 344- Subsection (7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of acknowledgement of paternity by the father.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

As you have not answered my question, could you clarify what does Part 1, section 34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death
2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death

It's clearly stating that a birth certificate does not exist in the eyes of law. If it is not completed in compliance with B&D Act 1953 (2) An entry …of birth……shall not be evidence of birth…… unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person, which implies that the registrar would need proof of such person. Which is supported by Parliament and the Passport office, this is probably done to prevent kidnapping and all kinds of other crimes.

Yours faithfully,

Ms. S

Dear General Register Office,

You have not responded to my request, by law, the authority should have responded by the 22 June 2015. Please see a copy of request:

Thank you for your response, however you have not answered my
question,instead you state that any surname is acceptable to enter
in the register even if it's not one of the parents, I think you'll
find that's perjury and forgery. In 2009 Parliament Welfare reform
bill, Schedule 6 - Registration of births, Number 344- Subsection
(7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to
the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the
mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of
acknowledgement of paternity by the father.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

As you have not answered my question, could you clarify what does
Part 1, section 34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death
2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in
a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be
evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be
signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such
a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date
of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that
birth or death

It's clearly stating that a birth certificate does not exist in the
eyes of law. If it is not completed in compliance with B&D Act 1953
(2) An entry …of birth……shall not be evidence of birth…… unless the
entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the
informant and to be such a person, which implies that the registrar
would need proof of such person. Which is supported by Parliament
and the Passport office, this is probably done to prevent
kidnapping and all kinds of other crimes.

Yours faithfully,

Ms. S

Walsh Rosemary GRO,

Dear Ms S

Thank you for your email of 24 June 2015. 

A reply was emailed to you by my colleague Selwyn Hughes on 22 May. Please
see the details below.

Should you need any further information, please let me know.

Reply sent to you by Selwyn Hughes on Friday 22/05/2015 at 17:11
Ms S

Thank you for your email.

My earlier response was correct: a child can be given a surname different
to that of the mother or father. It's not perjury or fraud if it is the
surname that it is intended that the child be brought up in.

The child's surname is not "information given by the mother but relating
to the father". The father's details would be recorded in a separate box
in the birth entry to that of the child.

Your second point, about section 34 of the Births and Deaths Registration
Act 1953: this is not "clearly stating that a birth certificate does not
exist in the eyes of the law". What it's saying is that unless the
certificate shows that the entry was signed by someone professing to be
the "informant" (who was qualified to give such information to the
registrar), then in those circumstances the certificate will not be
evidence of the birth.

The point with that is that birth entries are signed by the informant (the
mother, father or both), and this is reproduced on the certificate.

I hope this helps to clarify.

Best wishes

Selwyn Hughes
GRO/LRS Engagement manager
Civil Registration

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office Room 205, Smedley
Hydro, Trafalgar Road,  Southport  PR8 2HH
E: [email address]
[1]www.gov.uk

Rosemary Walsh (GRO)
CEDAR Engagement Hub

Her Majesty’s Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 205 | Smedley Hydro | Trafalgar Road | Birkdale | Southport | PR8 2HH

T: 0044 (0) 151 471 4681 | Text Relay Prefix 18001
E:[email address]
[2]www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. file://www.gov.uk
2. http://www.gov.uk/

Dear Walsh Rosemary GRO,

please stop giving me some generic answer. Perjury act 1911 states section 4-False statements, &c. as to births or deaths.
(1)If any person—
(b)wilfully makes any false certificate or declaration under or for the purposes of any Act relating to the registration of births or deaths, or, knowing any such certificate or declaration to be false, uses the same as true or gives or sends the same as true to any person; or

and forgery

Under the Forgery Act 1931, Part 1. Part 1. Section1 (1), Section 2(c), section 3(b)

1Definition of forgery
(1)For the purposes of this Act, forgery is the making of a false document in order that it may be used as genuine, and in the case of the seals and dies mentioned in this Act the counterfeiting of a seal or die, and forgery with intent to defraud or deceive, as the case may be, is punishable as in this Act provided.

(2)A document is false within the meaning of this Act if the whole or any material part thereof purports to be made by or on behalf or on account of a person who did not make it nor authorise its making ; or if, though made by or on behalf or on account of the person by whom or by whose authority it purports to have been made, the time or place of making, where either is material, or, in the case of a document identified by number or mark, the number or any distinguishing mark identifying the document, is falsely stated therein ; and in particular a document is false:—
(c)if, though made in the name of an existing person, it is made by him or by his authority with the intention that it should pass as having been made by some person, real or fictitious, other than the person who made or authorised it.
(3)For the purposes of this Act—
(b)Forgery of a document may be complete even if the document when forged is incomplete, or is not or does not purport to be such a document as would be binding or sufficient in law;

I also believe the following has been committed under the Forgery and Counterfeit Act 1981 Part 1, Section 1, section 2 and section 5(1), (5) sub section (i) and (m).
1The offence of forgery.
A person is guilty of forgery if he makes a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
2The offence of copying a false instrument.
It is an offence for a person to make a copy of an instrument which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as a copy of a genuine instrument, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
5 Offences relating to money orders, share certificates, passports, etc.
(1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his control an instrument to which this section applies which is, and which he knows or believes to be, false, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
And,
(5)The instruments to which this section applies are—
(l)certified copies relating to an entry in a register of births, adoptions, marriages or deaths and issued by the Registrar General, the Registrar General for Northern Ireland, a registration officer or a person lawfully authorised to register marriages; and
(m)certificates relating to entries in such registers.

As i stated before that under the birth and death act 1953 section 34 Entry in register as evidence of The Birth and Death Act 1953
1) The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this Act.
(2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78 required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death

The UK government does not think like you and you do not over rule the UK government or it's law as published

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...
Schedule 6 - Registration of births
335. New section 2A relates to the registration of births in cases where the parents are not married. It places a duty on the mother - and on certain other qualified informants - to provide the registrar within 42 days with information concerning the birth of a child, and to sign the register. This is similar to the existing duty of married parents.
344. Subsection (7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of acknowledgement of paternity by the father.

so please don't tell me about any surname will do as it's fraud, please answer my question and how does a birth certificate get corrected?
Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Hughes Selwyn,

 Dear Ms S,

Thank you for your email. I'm sorry you feel that my earlier response was
a generic reply. I was trying to specifically address the questions which
you had raised in your earlier mail, and I believe that I did so. It is
possible for any  surname to be chosen for a child's birth entry, provided
that it is the name in which it is intended (by the informant) that the
child be brought up in. Similarly, in terms of the father's details, these
are only shown in specific boxes of the entry, and can only be filled in
where either the parents are married, or the father signs the entry to
acknowledge those details (either in person or via a written declaration).
The name and surname of the child is not part of the details relating to
the father.

The link you have given in your email to the Welfare Reform Bill is to
legislation which did not fully come into force (it was a Bill and not all
provisions were made law in the Welfare Reform Act.). The provisions
relating to current legislation are those outlined in the Births and
Deaths Registration Act 1953.

You have mentioned once again that you believe that perjury and forgery
have taken place. If you believe this to be so, you are free to report
this as an offence to the police, but please be aware that the use of any
surname in the entry is not perjury if it is indeed the surname the child
is being brought up in, and any certificate which accurately reflects the
register entry is not forgery.

You have lastly asked about how a birth entry is corrected. I am attaching
this link from the Gov.uk website which explains the procedure:

[1]https://www.gov.uk/correct-birth-registr...

I hope this is helpful.

With best wishes,

Selwyn Hughes
Policy advisor
Civil Registration

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 03, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road,  Southport  PR8 2HH
E: [email address]
[2]www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Dear Hughes Selwyn,

You stated that '....surname of the child is not part of the details relating to the father' What does the word detail mean?
Oxford dictionary defines detail as 'Individual fact or item'
Fact! Is true, any surname = false certificate= forgery which includes birth certificates as stated by the forgery and counterfeiting act 1981

A birth certificate is not only to record the facts about the birth but is a declaration of parentage, in which the child surname should relate to either parent. For you to state that 'it possible for any surname to be chosen for a child's birth entry' it is ludicrous, some may say that a registrar with such an attitude is legally making children abandon.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articles-226856... -gang-4m-benefits-fraud.html
Paragraph 11 from the above link sets outs the legal framework as well as the legislation of the birth and death act 1953, states that 'As a registrar, he had a duty to request confirmation of a birth, with an NHS number from the hospital where the child had supposedly been born. Instead, he simply filled out birth certificates after being given names by the gang'. That's exactly what you are implying when you state that any surname can be recorded if its not related to the parents.

You stated that the welfare reform bill is not fully in force, however parliament was not changing the current legalisation outlined in the birth and death act 195, they were reinforcing, that no information/details relating to the father should be entered in the register on the basis of what the mother said. So if a registrar is not permitted to enter details of the father that's including a surname, how is it permitted by government that a registrar can enter any surname in the child birth entry?

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo1/1-2/6/...

4 False statements, &c. as to births or deaths.
(1)If any person—
(b)wilfully makes any false certificate or declaration under or for the purposes of any Act relating to the registration of births or deaths, or, knowing any such certificate or declaration to be false, uses the same as true or gives or sends the same as true to any person; or

You also forgot to clarify what the HM passport policy meant by ' If the child's surname is not related to a parent on the birth certificate, you should get a new one' along those lines, if its so acceptable to register any surname.

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Hughes Selwyn,

 Dear Ms S,

In terms of the name of the child, the point I was trying to make is that
what is recorded in the birth register for the child is the name and
surname. The Registration of  Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 (which
are the regulations covering the provisions of the Births and Deaths
Registration Act) say that the surname to be recorded is "the surname by
which at the time of registration of the birth it is intended that the
child shall be known."

This is not the same as saying that the surname has to be that of the
father, or mother: it is simply the surname by which the child is to be
known.

Recording a surname for the child, therefore, is not the same thing as
recording the details of the father. That is provided for later on in the
birth entry.

The information is taken from the "informant", ie the person who gives the
information to the registrar. This is usually the mother, but can be the
father or jointly from both parents.

This is completely different from a scenario as in your email link where
someone has been making up fictitious births.

Lastly, our Passport guidance does not say that " if the child's surname
is not related to a parent on the birth certificate, you should get a new
one". For one thing, the full (long) birth certificate shows how the child
is related to the mother - and to the father if his details are shown -
since that's what the certificate is there to do: to demonstrate
parentage. It doesn' t necessarily require that the surnames are
identical. The guidance simply says that if a birth certificate needs to
be supplied it must be a full certificate (ie showing parental details). 

I hope this helps.

Selwyn Hughes
Policy advisor
Civil Registration

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 03, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road,  Southport  PR8 2HH
E: [email address]
[1]www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Dear Hughes Selwyn,

It is ironic how you refer to this scenario being completely different from the scenario in the email link where someone has been making up fictitious births!
Fictitious: not real or true; imaginary or fabricated. Synonyms: false, fictional, counterfeit, sham
Fictitious!!!! That word completely describes this scenario.
As I stated in my last correspondence to you, referring to paragraph 11 of the article, where it states ‘As a registrar, he had a duty to request confirmation of a birth, with an NHS number from the hospital where the child had supposedly been born. Instead, he simply filled out birth certificates after being given names by the gang.’ Also paragraph 6 states ‘prosecutor Paul Raudnitz told the jury: ‘This case revolves around the making of false identities for children and Azu Akpom as a registrar was at the centre of helping make those identities.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

Your referral to Section 9 (3)(b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 states that 'the surname to be entered {in the registration entry} shall be the surname by which at the date of the registration of the birth it is intended that the child shall be known'
Black’s law dictionary defines Surname: The family name; the name over and above the Christian name. The part of a name which is not given in baptism; the name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents; The last name; the name common to all members of a family.
Section 9 (3)(b) does not state ‘that any surname can be entered’ as you keep reiterating. In fact Section 9(3) (b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 supports and is construed on the basis of the Birth and Death Registration Act of 1875 instruction read "The putative father of an illegitimate child cannot be required as father to give information respecting the birth………except at the joint request of the mother and father; in which case both the mother and father must sign the entry as informants". This indicates that the protocol for registering a birth of illegitimate child; is that the child could take either surname if it was a joint entry. This ascertains that where there is no joint entry then the surname shall be of the mother, and evidently is supported by the Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1 Section 10 sub section1 and Section 34 sub section 2 where it clearly states that if
As Section 34 states
Entry in register as evidence of The Birth and Death Act 1953
1) The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this Act.
(2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death
Which basically states legally that the birth certificate does not exist ‘unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person,
For example
Mother goes and registers a birth by herself and her name is Miss Apple
yet she register’s her child’s surname as orange
only to find out that ‘the father’ is Mr Nut who is not on the birth certificate.
By law even thou Miss Apple signed the register as the informant the birth certificate does not exist legally because the entry of birth is not signed by an informant who is such a person ‘Miss orange’ as required by law at the date of the entry ……

Lastly, In relation to your last paragraph, where you stated 'Lastly, our Passport guidance does not say that " if the child's surname is not related to a parent on the birth certificate, you should get a new one"
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/sy...

Page 3 and 4 under the heading - ‘certificate of birth’ it states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.’

Which contradicts what you stated in your last paragraph! The above statement does deflect from the notion where you state that ‘For one thing, the full (long) birth certificate shows how the child
is related to the mother - and to the father if his details are shown -since that's what the certificate is there to do: to demonstrate parentage. It doesn't necessarily require that the surnames are identical.’

The one thing that I can’t understand is how registrar’s are so lackadaisical in recording of factual information pertaining to a birth then want to justify their actions or statements using the legislation that evidently registrars don’t understand. Your job is vital to ascertain a true identity for every child born in the UK yet as the scenario in the article state's 'this case revolves around the making of false identities for children', I guess this scenario is not that different after all!

Can you explain how a registrar of birth can enter any surname as an entry in the register yet the Her Majesty’s passport policy does not condone this notion of ‘any surname’ being acceptable on a birth certificate when applying for a passport?

And you have not yet clarified what you clarify what does Part 1, section 34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death mean?

And how does one obtain a new birth certificate?

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Hughes Selwyn,

 Dear Ms S,

You maintain that a child's surname has to be recorded in the birth
register as that of the mother, if the father's details are not in the
entry. That is not so, and it's not what the legislation says. As I've
mentioned before, the surname to be recorded is that in which it is
intended that the child be brought up in - and that does not have to be
that of the mother.

I do feel that the points you're raising have already been covered in our
earlier correspondence.

Section 34 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act: I explained in my
earlier email (22 May, copied to you by my colleague Rosemary Walsh) what
this means. I commented then that it means:

this is not "clearly stating that a birth certificate does not  exist in
the eyes of the law". What it's saying is that unless the  certificate
shows that the entry was signed by someone professing to be  the
"informant" (who was qualified to give such information to the 
registrar), then in those circumstances the certificate will not be 
evidence of the birth.

In the example you have given below, "Miss Apple" is the qualified
informant - and the certificate is legal - despite the child being given
the surname "Orange".

Passport guidance, referring to a "certificate of registry". I've covered
this in my earlier emails too. I explained in my email of 18 May:

a "certificate of registry of birth". I believe that these were documents
issued up until about 20 years ago which simply confirmed that someone had
attended to register a birth, but did not necessarily give any other
details from the registration. This document confirmed that the person
attending had fulfilled their legal obligation to register, but I believe
the document was discontinued since everyone is issued with a free birth
certificate at the time of registration anyway. However, some of these
documents may still be in the possession of those applying for a passport,
so the guidance is still valid.

It's also not the case that "HM passport policy does not condone this
notion of any surname being acceptable on a birth certificate…", as I
mentioned in my last email:

our Passport guidance does not say that " if the child's surname  is not
related to a parent on the birth certificate, you should get a new  one".
For one thing, the full (long) birth certificate shows how the child  is
related to the mother - and to the father if his details are shown - 
since that's what the certificate is there to do: to demonstrate 
parentage. It doesn' t necessarily require that the surnames are 
identical. The guidance simply says that if a birth certificate needs to 
be supplied it must be a full certificate (ie showing parental details). 

I suggest we just agree to differ on this question, because I don't feel
there is anything I can add to the points I've made, which I recognise
have not convinced you. Equally, you will know from my responses that I
don't believe the legislation you have quoted has the meaning which you
believe it has - and I've tried to explain why.

You also ask about how one obtains a new birth certificate. Birth
certificates are copies of the original entry, in which is recorded the
details which the informant gave at the time of registration. It is not
amended to show subsequent name changes later in life, but there are other
ways of recording these such as taking out a deed poll.

If there was some error in the original entry,  it may be possible to have
the entry amended. My email of 6 July enclosed a link to the Gov.uk
website which outlines the procedure for that.

I do hope the above helps to clarify the points in our earlier
correspondence. I should add that I have been taking this correspondence
as "official correspondence" rather than under the provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act, but this has made no difference to the content
of the replies you have received. Whilst I am happy to try to reply to any
further points you have, if you are not satisfied with my responses the
General Register Office does have a complaints procedure, which is
detailed in the attached link:

[1]https://www.gov.uk/government/organisati...

With best wishes

Selwyn Hughes
Policy advisor
Civil Registration

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 03, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road,  Southport  PR8 2HH
E: [email address]
[2]www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Dear Hughes Selwyn,

You have not covered any points with anything factual instead you keep telling me what you believe, your definition to your understanding of the legislation is; and yes I do maintain that when a registrar of births registers a child’s birth it should be factual information entered in the register. I don’t know what definition you have for ‘surname’ but the English dictionary and Black’s Law Dictionary has the same definition ‘the name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents; The last name; the name common to all members of a family’.
You stated ‘As I've mentioned before, the surname to be recorded’
‘The’ can roughly be defined as it is attached to, refers to a specific, individual, object.
‘The surname’ is attached, refers to a specific individual which is conjunction with the definition in Black’s Law Dictionary.
What’s funny is that you keep saying it doesn’t matter but it was actually a registrar of births that informed me that it’s not acceptable. That there is a protocol to recording or entering particulars in the register.
The Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1, Section 10, Sub-section 1 states,’.. and the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father of the child unless…’. If the ‘father’ at the time of registration was not there psychically to identify himself as the father nor did he make any declaration that he is the father of a child in the prescribed forms of section 10 sub section A to C, of the Birth and Death Act 1953. Neither did he sign the register or any declaration signifying his consent for his personal information to be used.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Name: The designation of an individual person, or of a firm or corporation. A person's "name" consists of one or more Christian or given names and one surname or family name.
You stated ‘What its saying is that unless the certificate shows that the entry was signed by someone professing to be the "informant" (who was qualified to give such information to the
registrar), then in those circumstances the certificate will not be evidence of the birth.’
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz...
34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death.
(1)The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this Act.
(2)An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death:
Between what you stated and what sub section2 of section 34 states is two different meanings, not to mention that you selected part of what sub section 2 has stated, You missed the part of ‘and to be such a person’
Shall not be evidence of the birth…..unless the entry purports to be signed by someone professing to be the informant and to be such a person.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Purports as
Substanial,of real worth and importance; of considerable value; valuable. Belonging to substance; actually existing; real; not seeming or imaginary; not illusive; solid; true; veritable.
You see the word ‘and’ it is defined as - used to connect words of the same part of speech, clauses, or sentences, that are to be taken jointly, in conjuction.
( Required or permitted by law)
The birth and death Act 1953 states Part 1, sub section 2 states
(2) The following persons shall be qualified to give information concerning a birth, that is to say—
(a) The father and mother of the child;
(b) The occupier of the house in which the child was to the knowledge of that occupier born;
(c) Any person present at the birth;
(d) Any person having charge of the child.

Using my example
Mother goes and registers a birth by herself and her name is Miss Apple, yet she register’s her child’s surname as orange, only to find out that ‘the father’ is Mr Nut who is not on the birth certificate.
Think about Section 34
Shall not be evidence of the birth…..unless the entry purports to be signed by someone professing to be the informant and to be such a person
Miss Apple may be qualified informant however she is not Miss Orange, so Miss Apple has no right to say any other surname and the registrar according to The Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1, Section 10, Sub-section 1 states,’.. and the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father of the child unless…’.
So if the prescribed forms of registering a birth under section 10 has not been achieved then technically the birth certificate does not exist according to section 34, as Mr Nuts did not sign nor declare to be father.
In regards to the Her Majesty’s passport policy Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, which evidently you did not read or else you wouldn’t be telling that ‘our Passport guidance does not say that’
The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012,
Page 4 titled ‘Certificate of registry of birth’ states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.’
‘If the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate’
As for stating ‘The guidance simply says that if a birth certificate needs to be supplied it must be a full certificate (ie showing parental details).’
Whenever a parent is applying for a passport, a first passport for a child, a birth certificate is always required. So for you to tell me that has no real relevance to what I am asking, just as when you stated that ‘a "certificate of registry of birth". I believe that these were document issued up until about 20 years ago which simply confirmed that someone had attended to register a birth’.
This policy was written in 2012, what has 20 years ago got to do with anything.
You state ‘If there was some error in the original entry, it may be possible to have
the entry amended’
The error is obviously not recognized by the GRO, I have attempted this. They don’t recognize section 54 Error of fact or substance of The Registration of Births and Deaths Regulation 1957.
Correction of errors of fact or substance
58.—(1) Where it appears or is represented to a superintendent registrar or a registrar that there is an error of fact or substance in a completed entry in a register of live-births, still-births or deaths in his custody, other than an entry to which Regulation 59 applies, he shall–
(a)send a report to the Registrar General giving such information as the Registrar General may require and enclosing a copy of the entry; and
(b)comply with any instructions which the Registrar General may give for the purpose of verifying the facts of the case and ascertaining whether there are available two persons qualified to make a statutory declaration required by section 29(3) of the Act(1).

Also the GRO doesn’t recognize parental rights.
In England & Wales there are two statutes relevant to changing a child's name, Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 and the Children Act 1989. Statute law is legislated by Parliament but law is also made by the higher courts.

The statute focused on here is:

1. Re PC (change of surname) [1997] 2 FLR 730 - Where only one person has parental responsibility for a child that person has the right and power lawfully to cause a change of name without any other permission or consent. Where two or more people have parental responsibility for a child then one of those people can only lawfully cause a change of name if all other people having parental responsibility consent or agree.

How do I obtain a new birth certificate?
Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Dear General Register Office,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of General Register Office's handling of my FOI request '34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death. Sub section 2'.

It has been several months since I requested Freedom of Information from the Registry Office in regards to what does 34 mean?
As Section 34 states
Entry in register as evidence of The Birth and Death Act 1953
1) The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this Act.
(2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death

It's clearly stating that a birth certificate does not exist in the
eyes of law. If it is not completed in compliance with B&D Act 1953
(2) An entry …of birth……shall not be evidence of birth…… unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person, which implies that the registrar
would need proof of such person. Which is supported by Parliament and the Passport office, this is probably done to prevent kidnapping and all kinds of other crimes.

This that is supported by In 2009, Parliament Welfare reform bill, Schedule 6 - Registration of births, Number 344.
Subsection (7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of acknowledgement of paternity by the father.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, page 4 titled ‘Certificate of registry of birth’ states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articles-226856...
-gang-4m-benefits-fraud.html
Paragraph 11 from the above link sets outs the legal framework as well as the legislation of the birth and death act 1953, states that 'As a registrar, he had a duty to request confirmation of a birth, with an NHS number from the hospital where the child had supposedly been born. Instead, he simply filled out birth
certificates after being given names by the gang'. That's exactly what you are implying when you state that any surname can be recorded if its not related to the parents.

In England & Wales there are two statutes relevant to changing a child's name, Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 and the Children Act 1989. Statute law is legislated by Parliament but law
is also made by the higher courts.

The statute focused on here is:

1. Re PC (change of surname) [1997] 2 FLR 730 - Where only one person has parental responsibility for a child that person has the right and power lawfully to cause a change of name without any
other permission or consent. Where two or more people have parental responsibility for a child then one of those people can only lawfully cause a change of name if all other people having parental
responsibility consent or agree.

How can I obtain a new birth certificate?

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/3...

Yours faithfully,

Ms. S

Hughes Selwyn,

Dear Ms S,
 
Thank you for your latest email. I do feel that I have already tried to
answer the points you are making, but I’m summarising the relevant points
below.
 
The surname of the child
 
When registering a birth, the registrar will simply ask the informant at
registration in what name and surname it is intended to bring the child
up. This is what will be recorded in space 2 in the birth entry (name and
surname of child). This is specified in the relevant legislation
(Registration of Births and Deaths Regulations, 1987 section 9(3)(b).
The regulations say that the surname to be entered is “the surname by
which at the date of the registration of birth it is intended that the
child shall be known”. It does not say that this has to be the same
surname as the father, or that of the mother. I note that one of the
definitions of surname in the dictionary you quote is simply “the last
name”.
 
Details of the father
 
Entering a surname in space 2 is not entering the father’s details. Any
details relating to the father are entered in space 4, and, as you say,
these cannot be entered if the father is not either physically present to
sign the register or unless he has signed  a statutory acknowledgment of
paternity / been named as the father in a court order.  This does not
affect what surname can be entered in space 2, since this is about the
surname of the child and not of the father (or mother).
I’ve already explained, therefore, in my email of 22 May (repeated in my
email of 27 July) why section 34 (entry in the register as evidence of
birth) is not contravened by this scenario: provided the mother has given
the surname in which it is intended to bring the child up in, and has
signed the register entry, then the certificate of the entry will be
evidence of birth.
 
Passport guidance
 
I also feel that the guidance on this is straightforward. I’ve explained
in my earlier emails that a “certificate of registry” is not the same
document as a birth certificate. They were issued purely to confirm that
the parent(s) had fulfilled their duty to register, but did not always
include the name of the child. As such, if they did not do so it would be
no help as a supporting document for a passport application for the child.
This would also apply to any other document which did not show the name of
the child.
 
In summary, all we’re saying is that when a birth certificate is being
presented as evidence in support of a passport application for a child,
that certificate has to show the name of the child and that of the
parent(s). I’m not sure what the difficulty is here: a full certificate
will do that, ie it will reproduce the information shown in the birth
register entry. At a minimum that will show the name of the child, and
that of the mother, at the time of registration. If the father’s details
are shown in space 4 then it will show these too.
 
Parental responsibility
 
You’ve raised this in your latest email, but just asserted that GRO do not
recognise parental rights. We do, and are well aware of the relevant
legislation, but that does not affect the provisions relating to birth
registration which we have corresponded about : we haven’t been talking
about change of name, but of recording the name in the birth entry.
 
Request for review under the Freedom of Information Act.
 
I understand that you have contacted our office to request an internal
review of our correspondence. I indicated in my last email that I had been
taking our correspondence as “official correspondence” rather than under
the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. We chose to do this
because you have been asking us to clarify existing legislation, which we
have been happy to do but would routinely do so as “business as usual”.
 
As such, we will not be reviewing this correspondence under the provisions
of the Freedom of Information Act. I have, however, referred our
correspondence to the General Register Office Complaints team and asked
them to review this, since you remain dissatisfied by my responses. You
will hear from them in due course.
 
I am sorry that I have not been able to clarify the position to your
satisfaction.
 
 
Selwyn Hughes
Policy advisor
Civil Registration
 
Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 03, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road, Southport  PR8 2HH
E: [1][email address]
[2]www.gov.uk
 
From: Ms. S [[3]mailto:[FOI #269501 email]]
Sent: 27 July 2015 21:45
To: Hughes Selwyn
Subject: Re: Surname of child in birth register.
 
Dear Hughes Selwyn,
 
You have not covered any points with anything factual instead you keep
telling me what you believe, your definition to your understanding of the
legislation is; and yes I do maintain that when a registrar of births
registers a child’s birth it should be factual information entered in the
register. I don’t know what definition you have for ‘surname’ but the
English dictionary and Black’s Law Dictionary has the same definition ‘the
name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents; The
last name; the name common to all members of a family’.
You stated ‘As I've mentioned before, the surname to be recorded’
‘The’ can roughly be defined as it is attached to, refers to a specific,
individual, object.
‘The surname’ is attached, refers to a specific individual which is
conjunction with the definition in Black’s Law Dictionary.
What’s funny is that you keep saying it doesn’t matter but it was actually
a registrar of births that informed me that it’s not acceptable. That
there is a protocol to recording or entering particulars in the register.
The Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1, Section 10, Sub-section  1
states,’.. and the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of
any person as father of the child unless…’. If the ‘father’ at the time of
registration was not there psychically to identify himself as the father
nor did he make any declaration that he is the father of a child in the
prescribed forms of section 10 sub section A to C, of the Birth and Death
Act 1953. Neither did he sign the register or any declaration signifying
his consent for his personal information to be used.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Name: The designation of an individual
person, or of a firm or corporation. A person's "name" consists of one or
more Christian or given names and one surname or family name.
You stated ‘What its saying is that unless the certificate shows that the
entry was signed by someone professing to be the "informant" (who was
qualified to give such information to the registrar), then in those
circumstances the certificate will not be evidence of the birth.’
[4]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz...
34 Entry in register as evidence of birth or death.
(1)The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation
to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this
Act.
(2)An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a
register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of
the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person
professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be
[F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the
registrar information concerning that birth or death:
Between what you stated and what sub section2 of section 34 states is two
different meanings, not to mention that you selected part of what sub
section 2 has stated, You missed the part of ‘and to be such a person’
Shall not be evidence of the birth…..unless the entry purports to be
signed by someone professing to be the informant and to be such a person.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Purports as Substanial,of real worth and
importance; of considerable value; valuable. Belonging to substance;
actually existing; real; not seeming or imaginary; not illusive; solid;
true; veritable.
You see the word ‘and’  it is defined as - used to connect words of the
same part of speech, clauses, or sentences, that are to be taken jointly,
in conjuction.
( Required or permitted by law)
The birth and death Act 1953 states Part 1, sub section 2 states
(2) The following persons shall be qualified to give information
concerning a birth, that is to say—
(a) The father and mother of the child;
(b) The occupier of the house in which the child was to the knowledge of
that occupier born;
(c) Any person present at the birth;
(d) Any person having charge of the child.
 
Using my example
Mother goes and registers a birth by herself and her name is Miss Apple,
yet she register’s her child’s surname as orange, only to find out that
‘the father’ is Mr Nut who is not on the birth certificate.
Think about Section 34
Shall not be evidence of the birth…..unless the entry purports to be
signed by someone professing to be the informant and to be such a person
Miss Apple may be qualified informant however she is not Miss Orange, so
Miss Apple has no right to say any other surname and the registrar
according to The Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1, Section 10,
Sub-section  1 states,’.. and the registrar shall not enter in the
register the name of any person as father of the child unless…’.
So if the prescribed forms of registering a birth under section 10 has not
been achieved then technically the birth certificate does not exist
according to section 34, as Mr Nuts did not sign nor declare to be father.
In regards to the Her Majesty’s passport policy Birth certificates and
full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, which evidently
you did not read or else you wouldn’t be telling that  ‘our Passport
guidance does not say that’
The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: 
passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy
published 7th February 2012, Page 4  titled ‘Certificate of registry of
birth’ states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for
passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not
recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new
birth certificate.’
‘If the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases
the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate’
As for stating ‘The guidance simply says that if a birth certificate needs
to be supplied it must be a full certificate (ie showing parental
details).’
Whenever a parent is applying for a passport, a first passport for a
child, a birth certificate is always required. So for you to tell me that
has no real relevance to what I am asking, just as when you stated that ‘a
"certificate of registry of birth". I believe that these were document
issued up until about 20 years ago which simply confirmed that someone had
attended to register a birth’.
This policy was written in 2012, what has 20 years ago got to do with
anything.
You state ‘If there was some error in the original entry, it may be
possible to have the entry amended’ 
The error is obviously not recognized by the GRO, I have attempted this.
They don’t recognize section 54 Error of fact or substance of The
Registration of Births and Deaths Regulation 1957.
Correction of errors of fact or substance
58.—(1) Where it appears or is represented to a superintendent registrar
or a registrar that there is an error of fact or substance in a completed
entry in a register of live-births, still-births or deaths in his custody,
other than an entry to which Regulation 59 applies, he shall– (a)send a
report to the Registrar General giving such information as the Registrar
General may require and enclosing a copy of the entry; and (b)comply with
any instructions which the Registrar General may give for the purpose of
verifying the facts of the case and ascertaining whether there are
available two persons qualified to make a statutory declaration required
by section 29(3) of the Act(1).
 
Also the GRO doesn’t recognize parental rights.
In England & Wales there are two statutes relevant to changing a child's
name, Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 and the Children Act 1989.
Statute law is legislated by Parliament but law is also made by the higher
courts.
 
The statute focused on here is: 
 
1.      Re PC (change of surname) [1997] 2 FLR 730 - Where only one person
has parental responsibility for a child that person has the right and
power lawfully to cause a change of name without any other permission or
consent. Where two or more people have parental responsibility for a child
then one of those people can only lawfully cause a change of name if all
other people having parental responsibility consent or agree.
 
How do I obtain a new birth certificate?
Yours sincerely,
 
Ms. S
 

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. file:///tmp/www.gov.uk
3. mailto:[FOI #269501 email]
4. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz...

Dear Hughes Selwyn,

The Surname of the child

I’m well versed in what Section 9(3)(b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 states, and you are right when you state “it doesn’t say that this has to be the same surname as the father, or that of the mother.” I like how you’ve nick picked at the definition of a surname, and tried to quote me “simply last name” however what I said was that Black’s Law Dictionary, defines Surname: The family name; the name over and above the Christian name. The part of a name which is not given in baptism; the name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents; The last name; the name common to all members of a family.

That definition is a sentence and the commas in between indicate a pause between parts of a sentence. So it wasn’t simply quoted ‘the last name’.

The legalisation has stated ‘the surname ……….of the registration of birth it is intended that the child shall be known”

‘The surname’ as defined by the legal dictionary- Black’s Law Dictionary which is used in UK Law has stated that the surname is the name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents; The last name; the name common to all members of a family.

In fact Section 9(3) (b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 supports and is construed on the basis of the Birth and Death Registration Act of 1875 instruction read "The putative father of an illegitimate child cannot be required as father to give information respecting the birth………except at the joint request of the mother and father; in which case both the mother and father must sign the entry as informants". This indicates that the protocol for registering a birth of illegitimate child; is that the child could take either surname if it was a joint entry. This ascertains that where there is no joint entry then the surname shall be of the mother, and evidently is supported by the Birth and Death Act 1953, Section 10. Sub section 1. ‘the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father’ and is also supported by the Family Law reform Act 1969.

I’ve noted that you are still informing me that it is acceptable to register your child in any surname, even if it doesn’t not belong to the mother, but as I said before this perjury and forgery but what’s ironic is that on page 6 of The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, under the heading ‘Re-registration of births’ and states that ‘the legal team for GRO have stated that the child’s surname may on be changed to:
 The father’s surname
 The mother’s surname
 A combination of the two
 The mother’s maiden surname or
A relevant surname where parents follow a different cultural customs’.
Not even the GRO’s legal team is telling the GRO that anyone’s surname can be entered in the register/ birth certificate. It’s an is invalid, contradicting the Birth and Death Act 1953 whilst seeking to overrule Section 9(3)(b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987.

Perjury
4 False statements, &c. as to births or deaths.
b)wilfully makes any false certificate or declaration under or for the purposes of any Act relating to the registration of births or deaths, or, knowing any such certificate or declaration to be false, uses the same as true or gives or sends the same as true to any person; or
Under the Forgery Act 1931, Part 1. Part 1. Section1 (1), Section 2(c), section 3(b)

1Definition of forgery
(1)For the purposes of this Act, forgery is the making of a false document in order that it may be used as genuine, and in the case of the seals and dies mentioned in this Act the counterfeiting of a seal or die, and forgery with intent to defraud or deceive, as the case may be, is punishable as in this Act provided.
(3)For the purposes of this Act—
(b)Forgery of a document may be complete even if the document when forged is incomplete, or is not or does not purport to be such a document as would be binding or sufficient in law;
the Forgery and Counterfeit Act 1981 Part 1, Section 1, section 2 and section 5(1), (5) sub section (i) and (m).
1The offence of forgery.
A person is guilty of forgery if he makes a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
2The offence of copying a false instrument.
It is an offence for a person to make a copy of an instrument which is, and which he knows or believes to be, a false instrument, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as a copy of a genuine instrument, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
5 Offences relating to money orders, share certificates, passports, etc.
(1)It is an offence for a person to have in his custody or under his control an instrument to which this section applies which is, and which he knows or believes to be, false, with the intention that he or another shall use it to induce somebody to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person’s prejudice.
And,
(5)The instruments to which this section applies are—
(l)certified copies relating to an entry in a register of births, adoptions, marriages or deaths and issued by the Registrar General, the Registrar General for Northern Ireland, a registration officer or a person lawfully authorised to register marriages; and
(m)certificates relating to entries in such registers.

Interpretation of Part I
8Meaning of “instrument”.
(1)Subject to subsection (2) below, in this Part of this Act “instrument” means—
(a)any document, whether of a formal or informal character;

Details of the Father
Detail is defined as an individual fact or item.
The Birth and Death Act 1953, Section 10. Sub section 1. ‘the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father’ and is also supported by the Family Law reform Act 1969.
When the legislation refers to ‘register’ it is the whole register it is referring to, that the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father’. Black’s Law dictionary defines Name: The designation of an individual person, or of a firm or corporation. A person's "name" consists of one or more Christian or given names and one surname or family name.
The name, whether the given name or surname shall not enter in the register unless in the prescribed forms stated in the B&D 1953, So this does have an effect on what surname can be entered in space 2. You say that you’ve explained section 34 of the Birth and Death Act 1953 but you haven’t instead what you have done is state is Section 9(3)(b) of The Births and Deaths Regulations 1987 to support your argument in terms of defining what Section 34 of the B&D act 1953.

A surname is regarded as someone’s details as it relates to them, yet the GRO are not bothered that they have entered a surname in the registrar that has no relevance at the time of registration, therefore there is a breach of Section 10. Sub section 1. of the Births and Death Act 1953 – ‘the registrar shall not enter in the register the name of any person as father’.
When you state ‘entering a surname in space 2 is not entering the father’s details.’ Partly you are correct however on the legislation Section 10 of the B&D 1953, the registrar has entered in the register the name of any person as father’ which should not have been permitted, as I state before that Section 9 (3)(b) does not state ‘that any surname can be entered’ but clearly states that ‘the surname to be entered’, a surname is the name common to all members of a family; derived from the mother or the father.

Passport guidance
Let’s get this correct the heading is “Certificate of Registry of Birth” where it clearly refers to the registry of birth, the documentation it has to be referring to is the birth certificate.
The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, page 4 titled ‘Certificate of registry of birth’ states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.’

As you stated ‘that the “certificate of registry” …….. they were issued purely to confirm that the parent(s) had fulfilled their duty to register, but did not always include the name of the child’.
This is the same for the birth certificate that parents had fulfilled their duty to register.
For you to tell me that documents are different is nonsense! The title of the policy is “Birth certificates and full birth certificate” So when the passport office policy states the heading “certificate of registry”, there not referring to land registry, they are referring to the title of the policy/document “Birth certificates and full birth certificate”
In summary what I am saying is that if a birth certificate is being presented as evidence in support of a passport application for a child, that birth certificate according to Her Majesty's Passport Office Policy clearly states that ‘A certificate of registry of birth (a birth certificate) is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.’ I’m not sure what the difficulty is here: As my child’s full birth certificate will not permit her legally to obtain passport, as the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded.

Birth and Death Act 1953, Part 1, Section 12

12 Certificate of registration of birth.
At the time of registering the birth of any child, the registrar shall, if so required by the informant of the birth . . . F34 give to the informant a certificate under his hand in the prescribed form that he has registered the birth.

So a certificate of registry of birth is a birth Certificate.

Hence the reason why I keep asking how do I obtain a new birth certificate!!!!!!!!!

Parental Responsibility

You state that the GRO recognizes parental responsibility, but how can you? If there were two parents on the birth certificate and they were in agreement about changing their child’s name on the birth certificate, the GRO would change it, however when one has solo parental responsibility and are lawfully allowed to change their child’s name; the GRO makes it difficulty.

1. Re PC (change of surname) [1997] 2 FLR 730 - Where only one person has parental responsibility for a child that person has the right and power lawfully to cause a change of name without any other permission or consent. Where two or more people have parental responsibility for a child then one of those people can only lawfully cause a change of name if all other people having parental responsibility consent or agree.

We not only being talking about a change of name but how to obtain a new birth certificate?

I don’t know why you have decided to take this on as an ‘official correspondence’ as I wrote publicly under the freedom of Information Act, which you have not provided. I have complained to the GRO’s complaints team before let’s just say boo who! I have asked for an internal review yet it has been rejected, why?
The whole purpose of the birth registration process is to ascertain a true identity for every child registered within the UK as stated by UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)5 1989, Article 7 para. 1" The name and nationality of a child are the most basic content of his or her identity, and birth registration constitutes the legal recognition of a child's identity.
Black’s law dictionary defines Identity: In the law of evidence. Sameness; the fact that a subject, person, or thing before a court is the same as it is represented, claimed, or charged to be.

What we have been talking about is what section 34 of the B&D act 1953 means and how to obtain a new birth certificate because obviously Her Majesty's Passport Office doesn’t except any surname being used on a birth certificate, if it doesn’t relate to anyone on the birth certificate?

How to obtain a new birth certificate? That has been my main point, How to obtain a new birth certificate?

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Mawdsley Karen,

Dear Ms S
 
I have been asked to review your enquiry as a 2^nd stage complaint. Would
it be possible for you to let me have a  personal email address  or a
postal address as this would be a more appropriate channel to respond.
 
Many thanks
 
Karen Mawdsley
Head of First Point of Contact, Operations
 
Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room E201 | Smedley Hydro | Trafalgar Road | Southport | PR8 2HH
E:[email address]
www.gov.uk
 
 
 
 

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Dear Mawdsley Karen,

Why has my request for information under the FOI, been taken as an official correspondence and reached stage 2?

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Mawdsley Karen,

Dear Ms S

Selwyn Hughes wrote to you on 07th August 2015 to explain that he will not be reviewing this correspondence under the provisions of the FOI Act. He has passed this through to myself to take an independent review as you are not happy with his response. It has reached Stage 2 as you have already had a response from Selwyn and therefore it was felt Stage 1 was inappropriate.

Many thanks

Karen Mawdsley

Head of First Point of Contact, Operations

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room E201 | Smedley Hydro | Trafalgar Road | Southport | PR8 2HH
E:[email address]
www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Dear Mawdsley Karen,

Since Mr Huges Selwyn wasn't bothered when he took it upon himself to take my request under the freedom of information Act and make it an 'official correspondence' and responded, you can make your stage 2 statement right here on the Whatdotheyknow site.

I do not wish to give my personal information via a website or you could leave your email

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Mawdsley Karen,

Dear Ms S

As explained earlier, I will now answer your query as a 2nd stage complaint.

Firstly, you asked for clarification in regards to Section 34, part 2 of the Birth and Death Certificate Act 1953. In general terms this means the entry of a birth or death must be signed by the informant registering the event. If this is completed then the certificate can be used as valid evidence.

Your second query relates to Passport policy. This refers to a “Certificate of registry of birth”. I understand how this may cause some confusion however this document is different to a Birth Certificate. A certificate of registry of birth was completed to evidence that the birth was duly registered but may not have held all the details of the child.
The policy states this document cannot be used as evidence to obtain a passport for those reasons.

A child must be registered with a surname the parent/s intend it to be known/bought up as. This means it does not necessarily need to be the surname of the Mother and/or Father.

I hope this clarifies any concerns you may have and I can only apologise for any confusion caused.

If you are not satisfied with my response you may ask your Member of Parliament to raise the matter with the Registrar General or the Home Office Minister responsible for GRO, James Brokenshire.

Many thanks

Karen Mawdsley
Head of First Point of Contact, Operations

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room E201 | Smedley Hydro | Trafalgar Road | Southport | PR8 2HH
| E:[email address]
www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Dear Mawdsley Karen,
As I explained to you, this not a complaint made to the GRO, It is a request of information under the FOI act.
The information I requested
1) As Section 34 states
Entry in register as evidence of The Birth and Death Act 1953
1) The following provisions of this section shall have effect in relation to entries in registers under this Act or any enactment repealed by this Act.
(2) An entry or a certified copy of an entry of a birth or death in a register, or in a certified copy of a register, shall not be evidence of the birth or death unless the entry purports to be signed by some person professing to be the informant and to be such a person as might be [F78required or permitted by law] at the date of the entry to give to the registrar information concerning that birth or death
2) In 2009, Parliament Welfare reform bill, Schedule 6 - Registration of births, Number 344.
Subsection (7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of acknowledgement of paternity by the father.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...
3) The GRO is part of Her Majesty's Passport Office, in HM Passport office: passport policy – Birth certificates and full birth certificate policy published 7th February 2012, page 4 titled ‘Certificate of registry of birth’ states ‘A certificate of registry of birth is unsuitable for passport purposes if the name of the child to whom it refers is not recorded. In such cases the applicant should be advised to obtain a new birth certificate.’
4) How to obtain a new birth certificate

Can you support your statements with factual status of law and not in your opinion, i.e. ‘In general terms’.
In response to your correspondence, you still have not provided me with any evidence of factual information, Status of law to support your correspondence, just your opinion.

First paragraph, I know the register must be signed, however it’s not evidence of birth unless the entry purports to be signed by the informant and to be such a person, to be such a person means that the information the informant has provided should relate to such a person.
For example. A midwife (as she is present at the birth) can provide information to the registers about the birth, she registers the child’s birth with a surname different from the child’s parents and signs the birth certificate. That birth certificate does not exist legally. 1) There’s no declaration of parentage which technically means that child could be deemed as legally abandoned. 2) A false identity has been made
Under the Forgery Act 1931, Part 1. Part 1. Section1 (1), Section 2(c), section 3(b)

1Definition of forgery
(1)For the purposes of this Act, forgery is the making of a false document in order that it may be used as genuine, and in the case of the seals and dies mentioned in this Act the counterfeiting of a seal or die, and forgery with intent to defraud or deceive, as the case may be, is punishable as in this Act provided.

(2)A document is false within the meaning of this Act if the whole or any material part thereof purports to be made by or on behalf or on account of a person who did not make it nor authorise its making ; or if, though made by or on behalf or on account of the person by whom or by whose authority it purports to have been made, the time or place of making, where either is material, or, in the case of a document identified by number or mark, the number or any distinguishing mark identifying the document, is falsely stated therein ; and in particular a document is false:—
(c)if, though made in the name of an existing person, it is made by him or by his authority with the intention that it should pass as having been made by some person, real or fictitious, other than the person who made or authorised it.
(3)For the purposes of this Act—
(b)Forgery of a document may be complete even if the document when forged is incomplete, or is not or does not purport to be such a document as would be binding or sufficient in law;
2nd paragraph, you stated ‘A certificate of registry of birth was completed to evidence that the birth was duly registered but may not have held all the details of the child.’ Who completed the certificate of registry of birth, since it’s not a birth certificate? I never gave anyone permission to complete a certificate of registry of birth. Who other than the parents has the legal right to complete a certificate of birth without the parents’ permission?

It doesn't make sense that Her Majesty’s passport policy would state this if it’s not referring to the birth certificate, what does a certificate of registry look like, can you provide a template?

What is the legal meaning of surname? The GRO keep stating that the surname doesn’t have to relate to the parents, however this is falsifying a birth certificate, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

The information requested in regards to -In 2009, Parliament Welfare reform bill, Schedule 6 - Registration of births, Number 344.
Subsection (7) provides that information given by the mother but relating to the father cannot be entered on the register merely because the mother has provided it, ensuring that there has to be some form of acknowledgement of paternity by the father.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

Quiet interesting if the Government is stating that as mother cannot just go a provide information in regards to the father and the register shall not enter it in the register, the same will apply for the use of any surname in the register, as a surname belongs to anyone, could be anybody, somebody.

Why are you recommending that I should ask a member of parliament to raise this matter with the GRO? This a request for information under the FOI Act that you have not provided, the matters been raised you’re just not responding with any factual/ status law.

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Mawdsley Karen,

Dear Ms S

I'm aware that you originally made a request for information under the FOI Act. However as previously advised, Mr Hughes did inform you that he wouldn’t be reviewing this correspondence under FOI.

Both myself and Mr Hughes have explained the Birth and Death Act 1953, section 34 to which you have referred to. However, you do not agree with either responses.

Unfortunately I don’t have a copy of a Certificate of Registration of Birth. Section 12 of the Act does give some information, it states “ At the time of registering the birth of any child, the registrar shall, if so required by the informant of the birth . . . F34 give to the informant a certificate under his hand in the prescribed form that he has registered the birth”.

In regards to your query about the definition of forgery and the Forgery Act 1931, again Mr Hughes has responded to you previously and I do not have anything else to add to his reply

I explained in my previous email that if you are not happy with my response you can ask your MP to raise the matter further. Unfortunately there is no further action I can now take

Many Thanks

Karen Mawdsley
Head of First Point of Contact, Operations

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room E201 | Smedley Hydro | Trafalgar Road | Southport | PR8 2HH
T: +44 (0)151 471 4620 | E:[email address]
www.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Doug Paulley left an annotation ()

I have removed an annotation or annotation(s) from this thread at the request of the user concerned.
--
Doug - volunteer, WhatDoTheyKnow.com