Jump to content


Photo

The Electoral Register, How The.....


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 April 2011 - 08:24 AM

I have just emailed cheryl gillan the following (copied, pasted and edited here)....


Hi,

Today (12/04/11), i received two identical letters, that start with the
paragraph...

"i notice that your name appears on the new electoral register
for the first time, whether you are..........."


for a Mrs K blakeney and Mr M blakeney, of * *** ***, chesham, bucks,
*** ***.

I would like to point out that there has been an error, which, unless
the age in which a person can vote has been drastically lowered, will
need rectifying asap.

"Mr M blakeney" is my son, and is a 12 year old schoolboy. DOB
**/**/99.
"Mrs K blakeney" is my daughter, and is 4 years old, and to the
best of my knowledge has never been married. DOB **/**/07

Maybe the process of how information is entered onto the electoral
register needs to be looked into, as this is quite a major error. I
would put one wrong entry down to human error, but two from the same
household??

Entering a 4 year old child as a married woman of voting age onto the
register, for me raises concerns. I don't think my wife and i would make
such errors when giving the information in the first place.

My eldest son, who is 17 years old, has not received this letter.

I hope you can help resolve this problem.


Many thanks,
Mr Jeremy Blakeney



Comical really but how could they make such bad errors? The letters stated that if i needed any assistance, to email her, so i did!

#2 Matthew (Admin/MPJ)

Matthew (Admin/MPJ)

    Advanced Member

  • Root Admin
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amersham

Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:06 AM

Wonder if they will say "computer error" ignoring the fact computers only process what the are given or what soeone inputs!
Matthew P Jones
Web Master of www.amersham.org.uk and www.metroland.org.uk

Follow Amershan News & Views on src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/twitter-a.png" alt="Follow Amersham News & Views on Twitter"/>

Amersham News, Views & Information Facebook Page

#3 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:12 AM

I have had a reply stating

Thank you for your email to Mrs Cheryl Gillan MP and I do understand your concerns in relation to this matter. I will raise your queries with Mrs Gillanís Agent, Philip Dumville and will come back to you when I have his comments.

#4 Jinni

Jinni

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts

Posted 12 April 2011 - 09:40 AM

So far as I know the only way of getting on the Register is from the form which Chiltern Distict Council send out to each household for completion the previous late summer/autumn.

However the error happened, I would get in touch with CDC Electoral Services and get the youngsters removed pdq before all the other parties standing send letters too!

#5 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 April 2011 - 03:33 PM

They have responded stating what you have, get onto the council.

#6 David P

David P

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts

Posted 13 April 2011 - 12:11 PM

Maybe the process of how information is entered onto the electoral
register needs to be looked into, as this is quite a major error. I
would put one wrong entry down to human error, but two from the same
household??


Since the only source of information used for the electoral register, as far as I know, is the Voter Registration Form filled in by the householder, I, too, would put it down to human error. The only question is, which human?
David P

#7 Fran

Fran

    Advanced Member

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Amersham
  • Interests:Reading, writing about reading, theatre, film, restaurants, walking through woodland, Scrabble.

Posted 13 April 2011 - 12:47 PM

"Mrs K blakeney" is my daughter, and is 4 years old, and to the best of my knowledge has never been married.

Children these days grow up so fast, I suppose it's hard to be certain. ;)

#8 Fran

Fran

    Advanced Member

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Amersham
  • Interests:Reading, writing about reading, theatre, film, restaurants, walking through woodland, Scrabble.

Posted 13 April 2011 - 08:34 PM

Speedy, your advanced children have nothing on this one: Unborn baby threatened with ASBO. :blink:

#9 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 April 2011 - 11:08 AM

Since the only source of information used for the electoral register, as far as I know, is the Voter Registration Form filled in by the householder, I, too, would put it down to human error. The only question is, which human?


Certainly not me, i'm 100% certain my kids aren't 18 years old and one of them hasn't snook off and got married.

Nothing would surprise me fran.

#10 roob_the_doob

roob_the_doob

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 596 posts

Posted 17 April 2011 - 12:26 AM

The key question is, have they received a polling card? If not, it's just a mistake by some idiot who is sending out these letters. But if they have, and if the error were to be repeated many times, that is a serious matter. The new electoral roll is the one being used to decide on the distribution of constituencies across the UK (and constituency boundaries).

#11 hyposmurf

hyposmurf

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,488 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 17 April 2011 - 08:55 AM

Speedy, your advanced children have nothing on this one: Unborn baby threatened with ASBO. :blink:

I would love to know how a 36-week-old foetus has managed to go to the park and cause trouble without me noticing.


:D
At the same time its quite amusing, its also qite worrying that they can get it so wrong!

I had to have my name corrected on the electoral register from Denial to Daniel.That mistake was'nt doing me any favours when applying for credit :)

#12 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2011 - 02:24 PM

The key question is, have they received a polling card? If not, it's just a mistake by some idiot who is sending out these letters. But if they have, and if the error were to be repeated many times, that is a serious matter. The new electoral roll is the one being used to decide on the distribution of constituencies across the UK (and constituency boundaries).


Yes they did.

#13 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2011 - 12:58 PM

Have the council taken an arrogance pill or something? Two emails i have sent them have been replied to so damn rudely i replied back telling them to EDIT :angry:

Edited by Matthew (Admin/MPJ), 19 April 2011 - 01:23 PM.
Removed implied swear word - do not swear or even imply, this is a family forum


#14 PeterC

PeterC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 458 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:14 PM

Two emails i have sent them have been replied to so damn rudely

No excuse for rudeness but I can imagine that the clerk dealing with would have regarded the correspondence as follows:

1. The source of the information was the registration form completed by the householder
2. The householder is now writing to his MP blaming the council for the incorrect information that he had supplied
PeterC aka Chilternbirder

#15 Speedy

Speedy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 April 2011 - 11:25 AM

Apologies for the swearing. I was venting frustration.

In all honesty i have lost all trust in the way this council is run. I was told in the reply to my email that i hadn't put down both dates of birth on the form, if i didn't do that then i admit error on my part. They continue by saying that when this happens they automatically assume those persons to be of voting age. I take it that they are incapable of querying an error? but they will happily chase you up when they want their council tax! Also appears to me they'll happily use assumptions to run their system! This only makes me think that their system and their attitude is wrong and needs to be changed. As for the 'Mrs' error, they tell me this does not matter and poll cards and any letters can be sent out as ms or mrs, you must be joking! :huh:

Anyway. I've said my piece and it's all sorted now, so i shall let this topic rest in peace.

#16 David P

David P

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 12:21 PM

They continue by saying that when this happens they automatically assume those persons to be of voting age.


Seems perfectly reasonable considering that the form states quite clearly that only persons over 16 years of age should be entered on the form.
David P

#17 Fran

Fran

    Advanced Member

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Amersham
  • Interests:Reading, writing about reading, theatre, film, restaurants, walking through woodland, Scrabble.

Posted 20 April 2011 - 04:07 PM

They continue by saying that when this happens they automatically assume those persons to be of voting age.

Seems perfectly reasonable considering that the form states quite clearly that only persons over 16 years of age should be entered on the form.

David, my first thought was to agree with you, but actually, given that 16-18 year-olds are meant to be included on electoral roll, it's crucial that dates of birth are submitted so that when there is an election, the returning officer knows who among those originally under 18 is now old enough to vote.

Consequently, I don't think they should enter anyone on the roll unless they have their DOB. That way, even if someone well under 16 is accidentally put on the form, they should not be put on the register, let alone receive a polling card.

#18 David P

David P

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 10:28 PM

David, my first thought was to agree with you, but actually, given that 16-18 year-olds are meant to be included on electoral roll, it's crucial that dates of birth are submitted so that when there is an election, the returning officer knows who among those originally under 18 is now old enough to vote.

Consequently, I don't think they should enter anyone on the roll unless they have their DOB. That way, even if someone well under 16 is accidentally put on the form, they should not be put on the register, let alone receive a polling card.


The form only requires DOB for those between 16 and 18. Under 16s should not be entered at all. Therefore, if no DOB is given it is reasonable to assume that the person is between 18 & 70. (Over 70s have to tick a box to confirm that they are too old and doddery to be fit for jury service).

If someone is entered who is under 16 and the DOB is given, then the returning officer should reject the entry. If this was the case and he has not done so, then he has made a mistake. I think he is still justified in feeling somewhat miffed if someone complains to their MP that he didn't correct a mistake which they had originally made.
David P

#19 Fran

Fran

    Advanced Member

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Amersham
  • Interests:Reading, writing about reading, theatre, film, restaurants, walking through woodland, Scrabble.

Posted 20 April 2011 - 10:51 PM

David, my point was that it would be far more sensible if everyone had to include their DOB.

Re over 70s, I'm not sure that it should be compulsory for them to tick the box to exclude them from jury service. After all, plenty of 70-somethings still work, and even sit in court and the House of Lords.

#20 David P

David P

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,708 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 07:06 PM

Re over 70s, I'm not sure that it should be compulsory for them to tick the box to exclude them from jury service. After all, plenty of 70-somethings still work, and even sit in court and the House of Lords.


Absolutely. I have never been called to perform jury duty but would be very interested to do it. Yet I am soon to be excluded, in spite of the fact that I have the time, the willingness and, dare I say it, the brain to do the job, which probably does not apply to the majority who are called.
David P

#21 Fran

Fran

    Advanced Member

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,145 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Amersham
  • Interests:Reading, writing about reading, theatre, film, restaurants, walking through woodland, Scrabble.

Posted 22 April 2011 - 08:30 AM

It's funny that this issue hasn't been mentioned in debates about employees no longer being forced to retire at 65, pension crisis etc. It is a ludicrous and outdated rule that ought to be changed. Perhaps you could start a campaign, David...