Genealogy Chat

SSR, The extra is 'wasted' on paying the Staff, Premises, IT, Heating, Pensions etc.

Yes, these costs can be reduced by making the process more efficient i.e. automation, but this costs money - lots of it. Or you can crack the whip and get people to work faster and harder for the same or less money, make the management redundant, turn the heating down in winter, etc etc.

Lets just take a look at some of the other costs for services made by the Identity and Passport Service (IPS), of which the GRO are now part.

Give notice of marriage £33.50 per person
Register a marriage £40
Cost of Cert on the day £3.50

Cost of Identity Card £30 - this year, due to rise considerably
Cost of Passport £77.50

Registering a birth or death Free - I believe - but you have to pay to get a full birth certificate £9.00 presumably.

No, like it or not, wearing my costing hat, £9.25 isn't unreasonable. Yes, I would like to get my certs for £2.00 each but if we are realistic about it, that aint going to happen, unless the fees for other services go up to compensate or it is subsidised by the taxpayer.

I have read through all the comments about how much they should charge, but feel that the question I would like to know is ' how much would we be prepared to pay either to view online or to receive a copy via email that we can print ourselves' . I would be willing to pay £5 for an email and I think £1.50 would be fair to view WITHOUT the option to print. Maybe they could have an option to then purchase the said emailed version at a reduced price - taking the £1.50 viewing fee off, making an extra fee of £3.50.
I don't think people would mind this bearing in mind the fee will soon be close to double that.

Sorry Richard, paying staff and making sure that they are properly warm in winter is not wasting money. Making sure they are provided for in their old age is not wasting money.

Obviously you want to go back to some of the times your ancestors lived in. Who is to say that staff aren't working efficiently already?

Cheryl,

I fully agree but this won't happen until the digitisation project is completed, and no sign of that in the foreseeable future. It has also been suggested that a small change in the law will also be required, and again I can't see this getting any priority.

A nice idea, Cheryl, but until the disbanded digitisation project is restarted, if ever, that is unlikely.

Anyone else would be interested in visiting the General Register Office? (as I mentioned above).

"Sorry Richard, paying staff and making sure that they are properly warm in winter is not wasting money. Making sure they are provided for in their old age is not wasting money.

Obviously you want to go back to some of the times your ancestors lived in. Who is to say that staff aren't working efficiently already?"

Squirrel, I'm afraid your mistaking yourself here. I certainly do not believe any of that. I would suggest you go back and re read my posts you are finding your own meaning in them and havn't understood them properly.

As for efficiency besides my own repeated experience of orders wrong and missing (mirrored many times in forums I read)....just how efficient can a department be that has, as it stands, a 350% mark up on its goods, but still makes losses in the several million each year? Why would hiking the price help?...

Cheryl

The mad thing about this is, where I would have bought two certificates before, I will now buy one, some will buy none at all. So the revenue they get is going to drop drastically. Will the overheads? Probably slightly. Less orders they may lay off staff. But the costs of keeping and preserving the records, building, electricity remains same. It seems fairly obvious to me, they are going to compound the losses they are already making (and poor taxpayer will cover this gap).

So in my opinion as a result of this pay rise, the GRO will lose staff, the staff they have will face pay drops, the poor consumer will be hit for more, the poorer family historians priced out altogether. With less money coming in and less staff the service will likely get even worse, the taxpayer will be hit harder to cover these losses (precisely what they claim the rise is meant to prevent). Who is actually winning here eh?

The digitisation project (which we have all already paid for out of taxes as I understand it) was over half way completed when it stalled. Again to my understanding all 'historical' Births and Deaths have been done, just the marriages remain. The completion of the marriages, and the law change needed to get these online should be a priority.

From my own experience I buy perhaps 12 certificates a year, as it stands around 84 pounds. (Next year it wont even be half that because of the rise). In the same year I have spent around 250 pounds at Scotlands People. This is despite 25% of my ancestry being in Scotland, 75% in England. This is a pattern repeated, sometimes even more extreme in favour of the Scottish system, amongst my own contacts with Scot and English/Welsh ancestry.

The point is obvious, once a similar digitised system is in place, the GRO overheads will drop dramatically and revenue will go through the roof. They wont be losing any money any more, making profit in droves, the staff will get better pay, the taxpayer wont be covering losses as is current, and family historians get their information for a fraction of the price in a fraction of the time. Everyones winning.

It would be interesting to know what the percentage of wrong orders actually is. The problem with these sort of forums is that people will post if they get a wrong one, but not the other way around, so you tend to only hear the bad news, not the good.

In 8 years I have never had a wrong order from either the GRO or a local Register Office.

Interestingly many companies in non-life threatening businesses aspire to an accuracy rate of 95% across all transactions. To better this often becomes counter productive because the increased costs involved start to outweigh the benefits, and it is far cheaper to compensate and re-do the transaction for free. Alternatively the price per transaction has to rise by a disproportionate amount.

Clearly there will be differences of opinion on this topic, Richard thinks there is a huge margin, some of us reluctantly accept the price is more akin to the real cost. You pay's your money.... as the saying goes.

There is probably far worse to come in this afternoon's budget. Rumour is that direct taxes will rise in real terms as allowances are to be frozen.

"Richard thinks there is a huge margin, some of us reluctantly accept the price is more akin to the real cost."

Again (and really trying not to be argumentative or a smart alec), but it's not what I 'think', it is a simple fact, based on their own information that the margin IS huge and getting bigger. Where is any evidence that the price is more akin to the cost? I have seen zero offered, just conjencture. The fact they are then losing money already is both baffling and deeply ominous for the future.

I'd love to be proved wrong on all of this, and see next year they've made profit, after all it is the taxpayer that is hit if they do not, this is not about 'cheaper certificates' for our hobby, thought the fact many genealogists are now to be priced out in a counter productive move I'lI admit does sadden me a fair bit!

The reason I say that the price is more akin to the real cost is for no other than I have been involved with costings on a professional basis for over 25 years and therefore have some practical experience with this sort of thing.

For an operational process such issuing certs manually, a Marginal Cost of £2.00, with Full Cost Recovery of about 4 to 5 times that amount, is the sort of figure I would expect to see.

By way of another example, as I said in an earlier post, it costs around 10p a mile to travel by car, if you only count the petrol. Full cost recovery is around 40p a mile. Incidentally these are not my figures, they are based on the allowable mileage allowances published by HMRC, and in conjunction with the RAC. Not surprisingly A very similar mark up ratio.

Perhaps we should request some into via a Freedom of Information request from the IPS.

I had a look at the website and there is very little relating to BMDs - I did find one of interest, albeit a few years old.

http://www.ips.gov.uk/cps/rde/xchg/ips_live/hs.xsl/31.htm

Released information disclosure log

page 21-30 top item 'Administration costs incurred by the General Register Office'

MB

Again with my costing hat on, the procedure described is exactly the sort of thing I would consider in calculating the 'Marginal Cost' in a costing exercise, i.e. working out the £2.00 part.

The problem with using this figure when deciding on pricing, is that it ignores fixed overheads, wastage, slack time, holidays, NI, Pension contributions premises, rent, heating, computer hardware and software, IT support, research, training, management, canteen & coffee (maybe) etc etc etc hence the full recovery cost being significantly more once these are apportioned.

Well, didn't that question start a debate! Thanks to all who replied. I have never received a wrong certificate so my payment has never been wasted.
I only really want the information contained in the certificate. If it was a photo copy of said information just for research purposes I'd be happy.

Richard, many apologies. I've had a horrible week and wasn't able to reply immediately. Yes you're right in that you hadn't said it. I misread a post and thought you had written it.