Problems with the probate website

That all sounds only too familiar, Stuart!

Speaking as a recently ex software developer, I have three main gripes about the whole implementation -

• one is that they took the system out for such a long time, which may be an indication that they wrote the new one in situ rather than having a separate testing environment and then making it "live" which is a much more normal development practice and means the live system is only out of action for a short while
• given the number and type of errors we are encountering/have encountered, I do wonder whether there was actually any testing at all by anyone other than the people doing the coding
• putting aside the whole situation of releasing a system with very significant errors, I wonder who is actually fielding the emails being sent to them since, being as succinct and clear as I can possibly be, they obviously haven't read the content of my emails.

It is interesting that, unusually for a contractor to a government body, there appears to be no quality certification equivalent to ISO 90001, but it has been suggested to me that I inform their certification body about the standard of the released product. I am not someone who likes to make waves, so I probably won't, but it raises questions about why on earth a UK government body chose this particular contractor....

 

Makes sense, Peter..... unfortunately.....

It might have been even cheaper to leave things alone?

 

Good idea!

 

Iron Mountain already had significant contracts with other Civil Service departments

 

I've found out a bit of the background to this. The ministry (now MoJ, but it's changed several times) let a PFI contract to Hays IMS in 1999 to create the National Probate Records Centre in Birmingham. IMS was bought by Iron Mountain in 2003; both were in the same business of storing and imaging paper documents and maintaining a digital archive with access to the host business. Their usual customers are banks and other big companies, and their records are confidential. The wills in the probate archive are public documents, and the paper storage has to meet the higher standards of a historical archive (BS 5454).

They must have started off by physically transferring all the paper to the NPRC, and then in 2013 HMCTS (MoJ) launched their first on-line service, for soldiers' wills. At this stage the public service was done by HMCTS, with Iron Mountain doing the back-office work of finding and, for items not yet in digital form, imaging the papers. At the time it was said there was the intention to transfer the public service to NPRC as well, and the new supposedly quicker service at £1.50 started in 2018. Only last year did it get over the backlog it built up initially due to being so cheap!

The original PFI contract is listed officially with a value of £11M - whatever "value" means. It sounds too low for the full cost over 25 years, certainly if it is to include imaging all the documents. But I can only make sense of the current £1.50 charge if that only covers digital retrieval, with imaging paid for already. Of course we don't know how much of the paper holding has been imaged so far.

 

That was 2019, of course.

 

I have successfully updated my PRO account and can see my previous orders displayed, some marked "Download" and some marked "Documents pending". However, HIDDEN next to this table is an extension reached by the bar along the bottom of the table, which has a "Contact Us" link. I ordered 3 Wills and each one was returned with a "Not found" notice, although I was very careful with the date entry. I have used the contact link next to each one to file a query and give the correct information.
I found at first that the dates I entered were not received as I entered them. For example, I entered 12 and the order showed 11. I suggested to them that they return to the calendar, which was a great visual tool.
I agree that the communication by the PRO has been poor at best.
Remember to look for the extension for a contact link.

 

This is the link I have used many times to ask about the non-delivery of a will ordered in January. It still hasn't arrived and I think I have abandoned hope! The question now is - do I order it again and hope it arrives this time, or do I carry on throwing emails into the abyss

I hope you have received all yours now, Margaret!

 

AngelaC I would not order any more just yet. The 4th Will that came was for the wrong person, (completely wrong, wrong year etc, even though it had a probate number), so for a 4th time I used the contact us button. I have not had a reply to any of my enquiries and still have 4 Wills outstanding.

 

I placed my order for ten items on 9th Feb, though the confirmation only arrived on 15th. The payment came off my card on 14th, bizarrely labelled C@HMCTS.GSI.G, and I never got an e-mail from Worldpay (or whoever did it).

My complaint about their mix-up with probate numbers used twice went in on 18th, and that got a reply on 3rd Mar with 9 items (18 files) attached. The final one came with an e-mail on 9th Mar, so I do now have all that order; that was less than three weeks.

So they are processing these things, but I suspect there is a big queue. I also suspect my one got higher priority, since it looks like a serious bug in their software. As no-one else has reported the same I guess they fixed the bug itself, and resolving the problems it caused may have got higher priority or been done by different staff. I'm afraid if your problem is the "customary" kind, which we've been seeing for the last three years, it will have to wait its turn.

 

It's definitely a problem with their new system rather than something that's long standing, as I received an email while the system was down and inaccesible for weeks, that this particular will was available for download. However, when the system came back and I was able to get on, that particular will was pending and had been ever since. I think it's probably a lost cause but I am reluctant to order any more as it doesn't exactly give me a lot of confidence!

I'm glad all your wills have now arrived though - definitely a plus!

 

@AngelaC I was going to say I'm still in the same boat with one for which I got the available for downloading email while the system was down but hey presto I've just checked and it has finally appeared. Taken two months but I'm now up to date!!

On another point I've noticed the rider at ordering about wills being for personal use without consent of relatives, which I'm sure wasn't there before. I wonder if they've considered how close a relative that should be. Most of the wills I check are to clarify recent relationships at 4th cousin or higher so yes I am related but very very distantly.

 

That's very reassuring @KevinStortford - thank you! On the basis of that, I just checked but no, still not there. However, there is hope!

 

I thought that warning was about copyright. Proved wills are public documents, which must mean they are regarded as published, but like a letter or anything else copyright in it belongs initially to the author. In this case you know who could have inherited it, and I guess it's usually going to be the residuary legatees. There can't be many wills that include the will itself as a bequest!

Time limits will apply, so older wills should be safe, and the same would apply to any restrictions on using personal information (as opposed to just obtaining or publishing it). For more recent wills, or any other private ownership rights in a document that is physically deposited with the probate court, I think you'd need to ask an expert.

 

Just reporting in, following @KevinStortford 's encouragement! I FINALLY got a reply to one of my emails (the latest one - not a peep from the others) enclosing a copy of my missing will and probate (after more than 2 months!) Such a relief. I now feel a bit happier about placing more orders, even though the site is still a lot flakier than the old one.

 

Thanks - that video is really useful to get going on using the site.

We know that it is not easy to get to the right image of a probate calendar page as they appear in random orders, many are missing from a search for the full surname and sometimes there are large numbers of hits from a search to wade through.

I have discovered another work around that can save time if you have found all of the details you need for an order from the calendar on FindMyPast, Ancestry or elsewhere. You can just look at any page and click on the link to open the image and order form. Then enter all of the details of name, dates and registry that you have seen elsewhere.

I can get orders into my basket that way but yesterday and this morning attempting payment gives a red box with

There is a problem

• HTTP/1.1 500 returned - please contact your administrator.

Below the box is

Redirecting to payment...

Nothing further is happening. Anyone else getting the same or is it a browser or cooky issue or something similar?