question on Lairs/burial

[speleobat2]

Hi Kathy,

My 2x great grandmother Janet Milne Longmuir died of typhoid fever in 1855. Last year when I was searching for my families places of burial I found out that her lair had been sold to someone out of the family in 1882. Her husband had remarried in 1876 and all of her children had grown up and moved out of the area.

On the other side of the family, the Munros have a lair in Nellfield Cemetery with four of them buried in it--two adults and two children. The children were ages 10 and 15. Two of the remaining children including my grandmother are here in the US. One is around London somewhere and the others apparently found their own final resting places in Aberdeen.

You're lucky to have found any sort of records. Without a gravestone, it can be very difficult to relatives sometimes!

Carol

[Kathy]

Anne,

61 pounds seems a heavy fee, Greenock Cemetery quoted me 12.60 (pounds), but perhaps it was cheaper as I had the Lair details.

Russell, I have no idea which church. I must be doing something wrong when I access the National Archives website, I just seem to go around in circles and have to date never found anything, regardless of what search I do.

The information I have on the Lair was obtained from a very kind lady at The Watt Library in Greenock, not the first time she has been excellent at locating details I would otherwise not have found, especially as I am in Oz.

Kathy

[Archiver]

The following is from part of an e-mail I received the other day from Glasgow Cemeteries:

"Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the above. Regrettably given the high volume of genealogical searches being applied for outwith the requirement to effect a funeral, it has become necessary to instigate a standard administration charge, presently set at £61.00.

Whilst we acknowledge genealogical search work is of huge interest and great value to the immediate families involved, it is not as yet an intrinsic part of our day to day provision of a burial and cremation service. This function is not part of our statutory requirements, consequently, the charge has been levied to offset the often lengthy manual trawl of archive records and the tying up of staffing resources. It is anticipated that the ongoing transfer from manual records to an electronic system will make accessibility much easier, quicker and more cost effective."

Anne

£61!!!!! What a joke! They should transfer these records to their local archive service (which they won't, cause they'll say they're still using them and can therefore justify not allowing people to come in and search them themselves for free...)

What does £61 pay for anyway? That's not even an estimate of staff time, surely? Most archives who charge will tell you how it's broken down and how long they expect it to take so that if the total charge is too much you can still get a partial search for less. There is no way an administration charge can be £61. That is preposterous!

[apanderson]

Yup! Couldn't agree more.

I think they've cottoned on to the amount of folk wanting family history info and are looking to make 'a killing' - pardon the pun, but in the circumstances, quite appropriate!!

You would think someone, somewhere along the line would realise that much of the information they hold is a very valuable resource and they could make a fair few bob if they'd only get their act together.

I wonder how much time is spent 'rubber-earing' non-important enquires?

Maybe 61 squid is an estimate of time wasted on sending standard 'get losts'

Can you tell I get a tad hacked off about this subject

Anne

[Archiver]

I still can't believe that they'd quote someone £61 as an admin charge! I'd love to know how they worked that one out. Fair enough, they may be busy but there are ways and means of providing a service and putting people off with ludicrous charges is not one of them, especially if the records aren't available for public viewing.

I'm all for archives and the like getting a little bit of income as they are notoriously underfunded, but it has to be balanced against providing the public with a service. When departments who are not archives/registrars and the like suddenly realise that the historical documents they've been keeping are useful to people I think they can get a bit carried away with the thought of all the money the genealogy business can mean. But I think they just miss the point.

I'd be tempted to write and ask for a table of fees, as if they are charging for something the amounts should be publicly available. It should say how they are worked out as well.

I do understand that charges put people off, and it does seem like genealogy has grown from a hobby into a business (I saw an advert somewhere for someone charging to look up the Commonwealth War Graves...) but calling it an 'administration fee' just takes the biscuit.