Comments on: Is 192.com Britain’s most invasive website?

By: Markyboy

Markyboy — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:00:39 +0000

I work abroad and meet lots of people. What if you have a problem with ex-girl friend? It’s nice to go back to UK and return to your privacy. I don’t like the fact that person can look you up and also your family. Gross invasion of privacy.

By: badzir

badzir — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 16:04:28 +0000

For God sake! For all you people who don’t mind to share all your details with the world- share as much as you wish. I don’t want my personal informations to be available for everyone just by few clicks. I should have a choice to opt out. I do mind, and I want my privacy to be respected. How to sue them for shering my details without my consent?

By: Roy Stockdill,

Roy Stockdill, — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 11:18:55 +0000

I might add, further to the above message, that it has always been possible to discover details of someone’s birth simply by going to a record office and looking at the GRO indexes in books or on microfiche. This was the principal use of the former Family Records Centre at Islington, now sadly closed. All that’s changed is that the indexes are now on the Internet, which of course makes them more easily accessible to far more people. However, in my opinion and experience, fraudsters don’t bother using the GRO records because they are far more likely simply to forge a fictitious birth certificate! Someone will probably tell me about the trick recorded in “Day of the Jackal” by Frederick Forsyth (where the villain obtained the birth certificate of a dead child), but this is a very rare occurrence. The only person I’ve ever heard of who used it was the late John Stonehouse, a former government minister, who left his clothes on a beach in America, letting everyone assume he’d drowned, and then turned up in Australia.

By: Roy Stockdill,

Roy Stockdill, — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 11:10:18 +0000

There is far too much paranoia around about privacy! I am a professional genealogist and know pretty well all there is to know about tracing people and their ancestry. All 192.com have done, as other more enlightened people have pointed out,is incorporate data that is freely available and already in the public domain from a number of sources.

For example, the births, marriages and deaths indexes of the General Register Office for England & Wales are online in several places and accessible by anyone with a subscription to one of the genealogical websites that carries them. The registration of BMD events has been a completely open system ever since civil registration was introduced into England and Wales in 1837 (Scotland from 1855 and Ireland from 1864). The reason it is an open system has always been for the very reason some folks seem to be worried about. i.e. to prevent fraudulent and fictitious births, marriages and deaths being recorded.

Give me the name of anyone born in England or Wales since the second half of 1911, plus the place (registration district) and a year, and I can usually supply the maiden name of the mother within minutes. However, this is NOT an intrusion into privacy because the birth details of any individual are a matter of FACT and public knowledge and not that person’s exclusive possession. That banks and financial institutions and other bodies still use the absurdly outdated system of asking for the mother’s maiden name as a codeword is nonsense and only goes to show how stupid they are! It is not the fault of the registration system, which is there to guard against fraud, as I have explained. My advice to all when asked to supply your mother’s maiden name is to change it, make something up and not use the real name. All they want, after all, is a codeword that only you and they know. Give them any name you like, it doesn’t have to be the real one!

By: Blahblah

Blahblah — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 05:49:54 +0000

This is really scary all my info is up on that site. I just turned 18 and it says it there. I have a very unusual name and surname so anyone who googles me would see my number, address ect. My parents are there too. Is there anyway I can get them to remove it?

By: lisa clare

lisa clare — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 01:32:31 +0000

That should say search

By: lisa clare

lisa clare — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 01:31:48 +0000

This is bang out of order. for one you dont care how hurt we can be when you can stilll sratch someone deceased but my now husband who divorced ten years ago is still listed with his ex wife. this is offensive and wrong. just delete the lot or update please

By: Anonym123

Anonym123 — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:55:13 +0000

Ignorance you are wrong! These people are IGNORING my request to delete the data! In your opinion this is MY FAULT???

By: Anonym123

Anonym123 — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:52:52 +0000

I have sent them the detail cancellation form TWICE and waited 3 months and still my details are there! What should I do to have these “people” respect my privacy??? PLEASE HELP!!!!

By: Alexander Smith

Alexander Smith — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:52:10 +0000

192.com is only publishing consented public information in a directory – like the telephone book and Edited Register, which you can opt out of, that is obviously not a breach of privacy, however specially publishing photos of someone’s home, as some sort of revenge, incl. details of who else lives there, in a magazine, eh…is a breach of privacy, duh!