Personal data processed via the RON (registration aka RSS) system in relation to the legislation

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,

The Ron system operates on two types of information, information received from the hospital notification, ‘these reports are generated automatically from the date of birth as the trigger’ 2.2.19, were the use of the mother’s surname is used as a default, as stated by the HSIC and the information provided by the mother and/or the father.

According to 2.2.13, the health service birth notification must be received and entered onto the system electronically forming an outline birth record (birth certificate), the information provided by the parent(s) registering the birth would be cross referenced against the outline record.

The GRO’s stance to recording any surname is based on:
R. 9 (3) With respect to space 2 (name and surname)–
(b) The surname to be entered shall be the surname by which at the date of the registration of the birth it is intended that the child shall be known.
Without any acknowledgment of the legal instruction that is clearly defined for the protocol for registering a surname as expressed in R. 65 (2) (a) (ii).

R. 65 (2) In the case of a certificate in form 21–
(a) Opposite the words “Name and Surname” there shall be entered–
(ii) Where the person’s name but not his surname is recorded in the entry, that name (being in a case where this is recorded in both columns 2 and 10 of the entry, the name recorded in column 10) followed immediately, if the entry contains a surname which appears from the entry to have been used by his father or his mother at or after the date of birth, by that surname;

The only time the RON system will accept ‘any surname’ is when the birth notification has not been received, these details are held until the corresponding notification is received 2.2.20. The fact that the information has been given before the health notification is received does not legally allow the live birth register to be legally be altered, as the information is only held on the system until the information is synchronised; or unless there had been an fulfilment of 2.2.9 that relates to S. 10 of the BADA 1953, that is pivotal to the consent required to process someone personal data and would provide any alternative method of matching for the RON system.

The GRO’s belief that R.9 (3) (b) allows for the registrar to enter ‘any surname’ is theoretically based on the paper based procedure of registering a birth, with the RON system a lot of the statutory duties that was required by register/superintendent registrar was removed, as the RON provide ease for registrars, whilst collecting and processing personal data accurately to ascertain a legal identity.

However the RON system operates on the basis of the legislation, does not recognize that ‘any surname’ can be entered in the register of births and will not issue a birth certificate, according to 2.2.13, the system would accept a registration only if it matched with a birth notification. . . . A registration will not be complete until that information is matched with the birth notification.

In situations were there has been a solo informant and the information provided by them has been accepted by the registrar but rejected by the RON system as the information, I would like to know how the Ron system has over-ridden the legal capacity that it operates on

1) Has the RON system been tampered with by registrars/ superintendent registrars to accept and issue a birth certificate, when the information received from the hospital notification and given by the qualified informant does not match as stated in 2.2.13?

2) How has the RON system accepted and issued a birth certificate when the information received from the hospital notification and given by the qualified informant does not match as stated in 2.2.13?

3) In relation to 2.2.13, how is the registration been legally completed when there is a difference in personal data?

4) In relation to 2.2.9 that relates to S. 10 of the BADA 1953, were has the registrar’s obtained consent to process someone else’s personal details, whose information was not provided to registrars and is not on the birth certificate?

5) Due to the Data Protection ACT 2018, how has birth certificates been processed fairly in relation Article 5 (1) (a), when the RON system has not performed its legal task according to 2.2.13?

Information in regards to the RON system and the HSCIC has been obtained from:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.u...

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2...

Yours faithfully,

Ms. S

FOI, General Register Office

If your enquiry falls within the remit of a Freedom of Information request
Her Majesty’s Passport Office will send you an acknowledgement within the
next 2 working days.

 

If your enquiry does not fall within the Freedom of Information remit this
will not be forwarded or responded to. Therefore please contact the
appropriate department listed below:

 

• For a passport enquiry or complaint, please complete an online enquiry
form

 

• If your enquiry or complaint relates to a certificate which you have
ordered from the General Registrar’s Office, please complete the
certificate service order enquiries form.

 

• If your request is for information relating to your data held by Her
Majesty’s Passport Office or an individual it falls under the terms of the
Data Protection Act 1998 and may qualify as a Subject Access Request,
please email [email address]

 

• If your enquiry relates to nationality you should forward your enquiry
to the UK Visas and Immigration enquiry team who are better placed to
respond, please email    [email address

 

 

show quoted sections

Ms. S left an annotation ()

Correction to question 5
replace Data Protection Act 2018 with GDPR

5) Due to the GDPR 2018, how has birth certificates been processed fairly in relation Article 5 (1) (a), when the RON system has not performed its legal task according to 2.2.13?

Jackson Diane,

Dear Ms S,
 
Thank you for your email of 17 October.
       
Your request has been answered outside of the Freedom of Information Act
2000 but this has not affected the information we have provided.
 
The information you have quoted concerning the RON system and HSCIC is
from an archived consultation document and the proposed legislative
changes to the registration system were never enacted, therefore the paper
register held in every register office remains the legal record of all
birth registrations.
 
The doctor or other person in attendance has a legal obligation to notify
the birth to the relevant health authority and registrars are provided
with this information under statute. The birth notification is not used to
register the birth nor does it create the outline for a birth
registration, the registrar will use the notification to ensure that the
birth has taken place in their district and thereby requires them to
register the event.
 
Information for the registration comes directly from the informant in all
respects, this includes names and surnames of the parents and the name and
surname in which the child will be brought up. It is these details,
provided by the informant, which form the basis for the birth registration
and not any information contained in the NHS notification.
 
In order for processing to be lawful, personal data should be processed on
the basis of the consent of the data subject or by some other legitimate
basis laid down by law.  In the case of birth registration there is a
legal requirement for all births to be registered by virtue of The Births
and Deaths Registration Act 1953.  Therefore the lawful basis for
processing the data provided by the informant is to comply with a legal
obligation and consent is not required. 
 
Diane Jackson
Policy Manager
Civil Registration Policy Team
 
Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 3, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road, Southport, PR8 2HH
 
T: +44 (0)0151 471 4590 Text Relay Prefix 18001

E: diane.jackson[1]@gro.gsi.gov.uk
[2]www.gov.uk
 
Any personal information you provide to us will be handled in accordance
with data protection legislation.  Further information on how we process
your personal information can be found at
[3]https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...
 
 
 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://gro/sites/Communications/GRO%20En...
3. https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...

Dear Jackson Diane,

The archived consultation document referring to the use of RON system, the document is about how the RON system works, capabilities of the RON system, the processing of personal data via of RON system in accordance with the BADA 1953 and the RANDR 1987.

The paper register has been non existent since 2009 when the RON system was fully implemented, all birth certificates are legally completed via the RON system. There was no proposed changes to the legislation to be enacted, the only change that occurred was that registrars no longer need to complete the birth register by hand and few of their statutory duties were removed such as R. 3 (1), S. 26 (2) etc as the RON system collects and obtains all personal data necessary for processing in accordance with the legislation to ascertain a legal identity.

The RON system is a centralised database that operates on two types of information, information received from the hospital notification, ‘these reports are generated automatically from the date of birth as the trigger’ 2.2.19 - S. 203 (1) of the Public Health Act 1936, S. 1 (2)(c) of the BADA 1953 and the information provided by the informant S. 2 (a) BADA 1953.

According to 2.2.13 - The system for birth registration would be underpinned by the computerised central database (see paragraphs 1.2.1–1.2.9). Health Service birth notifications (see paragraph 2.2.3) would be received and entered onto the system electronically to form an outline birth record.

With reference to you response in para. 2, you stated 'The birth notification is not used to
register the birth nor does it create the outline for a birth registration' according 2.2.13 the hospital notification does create a birth record, R. 3 (1) implies that the birth notification is (was) used before commencing the registration to prepare a draft of the birth record. With the use of the RON system, R. 3 (1) is automatically created by the obtaining the hospital notification as stated in 2.2.15.

You also stated what the registrar will use the hospital notification for 'confirmation' however according to 2.2.13 'the hospital notification does create a birth record and should be entered via RON as stated in 2.2.15.

2.2.13 also states 'the information required to be given by the person registering the birth would be cross-referenced against the outline record' This correlates with S. 26 (2) of the BADA 1953, again with the use of the RON sysytem this duty has been removed from registrars as the RON has the capabilities to carry out internal checks in order to cross reference information given and received.

It is understood that for completion of the birth record, information must be provided by an informant. However the RON system operates on two types of information, information received by the hospital notification and information given by the informant.

According to 2.2.13 'The system would accept a registration only if it matched with a birth notification. In circumstances where a person seeks to register a birth and there is no birth notification, the system will allow the person to give the information. A registration will not be complete until that information is matched with the birth notification. In such circumstances the informant will be required to provide contact details should any problem arise when the birth notification is received from the Health Service. Confirmation of the registration would be sent to the informant when the registration is completed.'

The only time the RON system will accept ‘any surname’ is when the birth notification has not been received, these details are held until the corresponding notification is received 2.2.20. The fact that the information has been given before the health notification is received does not legally allow the live birth register to be legally be altered, as the information is only held on the system until the information is synchronised; or unless there had been an fulfilment of 2.2.9 that relates to S. 10 of the BADA 1953, that is pivotal to the consent required to process someone personal data and would provide any alternative method of matching for the RON system.

As all birth are registered via RON and the RON will only accept information that is matched and as stated in 2.2.13 '...a registration will not be complete until that information is matched with the birth notification.' As the RON does not accept information that does not match and a registration will not be complete until that information is matched with the birth notification.

It is obvious that the computer - the RON system has been misused as there has been an alternation without permission that is automatically implemented into the RON system 'as the RON does not accept information that does not match and a registration will not be complete until that information is matched with the birth notification' breaching the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

In the last paragraph you stated that 'the virtue of The Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 is the lawful basis for processing the data, provided by the informant is to comply with a legal
obligation and consent is not required.' for processing to be lawful. However there is no informant that gave consent to the processing of their personal data nor did the informant comply with their 'legal' obligations for consent not to be required. The informant that did comply with their legal obligation does not legally have rights (as married couple do) to give nor should it have been allowed nor should it be accepted by the registrar when the data given refers to someone else unless there fulfillment of S. 10 that is pivotal to the consent required to process someone personal data according to S. 10.

You have failed to answer my previous questions can you clarify:

In situations were there has been a solo informant and the information provided by them has been accepted by the registrar but rejected by the RON system as the information, I would like to know how the Ron system has over-ridden the legal capacity that it operates on

1) Has the RON system been tampered with by registrars/ superintendent registrars to accept and issue a birth certificate, when the information received from the hospital notification and given by the qualified informant does not match as stated in 2.2.13?

2) How has the RON system accepted and issued a birth certificate when the information received from the hospital notification and given by the qualified informant does not match as stated in 2.2.13?

3) In relation to 2.2.13, how is the registration been legally completed when there is a difference in personal data?

4) In relation to 2.2.9 that relates to S. 10 of the BADA 1953, were has the registrar’s obtained consent to process someone else’s personal details, whose information was not provided to registrars and is not on the birth certificate?

5) Due to the GDPR 2018, how has birth certificates been processed fairly in relation Article 5 (1) (a), when the RON system has not performed its legal task according to 2.2.13?

In light of your response can you clarify:

8) Are all birth certificate completed via the RON system?

9) Are hospital notifications received and entered in the RON system as stated in 2.2.13?

10) What Section of the BADA 1953 allows a registrar to accept and enter via the RON data referring to someone else without their consent?

11)Can you clarify what is meant by paper register when the paper register has been non existent since 2009?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2...

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S

Dear Jackson Diane,

It has been several months since the request was sent to the GRO and you haven't responded to my reply.

Yours sincerely,

Ms. S