|
|
|
Notifications
|
|
|
|
My suggestion of a formal letter.
Dear Sir Madam
(Change of Name) Regulations 1994, Statutory Instrument 1994 No. 604.
I find your intolerance and attitude discriminatory and contrary to the relevant acts of parliament, the requirement for your co-operation in making the changes requested.
Unless your immediate attention is given to this matter you will leave me no option but to make service upon you by instructing solicitors to act on my behalf, with any ensuing costs and a claim for distress.
''The Adult Deed Poll will enable those persons aged 16 or over to change their legal name by Deed Poll.
**people who have had or who are having gender reassignment may choose to change their gender title from Ms to Mr or vice versa. [in accordance with the UK gender Recognition Act 2004/05 as revised 2008}**''
I must also remind you of the confidentiality clause in the said act, (Data Protection Act. Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act was created with an "expectation of privacy" in mind.)
Previous Names
It is rare for an article about a transgender person not to reveal their previous name. This conveys the false impression that transgender people are happy to have their previous names made public. A transgender person takes a new name to reflect their public change of gender. They discard the old name in the process and the deed poll on change of name is quite emphatic about this. Under no circumstance is the old name retained.
Why should you avoid revealing a transgender person's former name?
Gender Recognition Act. 2004 legislation which gives a transsexual person full legal rights as a member of the gender in which they are living post transition, including the right to have their birth certificate revised, and to marry. The GRA established the Gender Recognition Panel which issues Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs). Acquisition of a GRC allows the holder to apply for a new birth certificate. It is an offence in law for an individual working for a public body to reveal that an individual has a GRC, or to reveal their personal gender history. It is also unlawful for an employer to demand to see it as ‘proof’ of gender (just as it is not required of non trans people to ‘prove’ their gender).
Yours etc.
I was going to add ''Read up on it you muppet''
What STOPPED you? 
It was a member of GS, battling agains a brick wall, trying to get her name and gender changed for council tax and accomodation. Not least being refered to as Sir.
Many thanks Crissie! I cant thank you enough. I think for the sake of all of us in Southwark I should aim as high as possible. Its patently obvious that Southwark council have no awareness of trans issues whatsoever. Maybe they should get with the programme!
In the months that this has dragged on I haven't spoken to one person at the council who has any idea what the law says about this.
Its bizarre, their man was actually standing in my living room doing a tennancy check to see if I was sub-letting or involved in some kind of fraud. Clearly I wasn't. The reason given for not accepting my deed poll? Because I might be sub-letting or involved in some kind of fraud!
It gets worse. I asked him what happens when a non trans person changes their name by marriage or even like me by deed poll. No problem at all he says, its the change of title that causes the problem. I said the title has been changed from Mr to Ms by the deed poll too. It's legally binding. Would it be a problem for someone changing from Miss to Mrs? No it wouldn't says he. So why me? Explain it to me. Show me the southwark policy that says this is a problem. Better still tell me what I can do about it.
I wont trouble you with any of the drivel he started spouting, lets just say he dug a pretty impressive hole for himself and flung himself right on in there headfirst.
There is no policy of course. Or if there is not a soul at Southwark knows about it.
Clearly that has to change.
Thanks again Crissie!
Far to much of this going on! I have just had an Ipswich Borough Council employee sent on a training course for this behaviour . I think the course is called "The bleeding obvious" and don't mess with Julia Ford or anyone who knows her . Any trans person I know who gets treated this way then the person who does it regrets it big time.
Oh its so much fun being me.
Julia x.
I'm happy to say this issue is now over for me. It did take a few dramatic turns mind you.
In the end I made contact with an area manager who cut through all the BS in about 15 minutes flat.
She came to my house to apologise on Southwarks behalf and made the neccessary changes to my tenency with no fuss whatsoever. A very nice lady indeed. It turns out the man who caused all the hassle has 3 other investigations about his conduct going on! I don't think he's the right man for the job!
I thought that was it all over and done with. Wrong.
Last week I started getting letters in my old name announcing I was in council tax and rent arrears. Hundreds of pounds. I tried to get through by phone for hours on end and I went down there, 3 days in a row, but the queue was right out the door every time. I was furious.
Eventually I got through to someone who told me my benefits had been stopped and that there was no record of any deed poll or name change. I just burst out laughing.
The last thing I did with the man who started all this was shove a copy of my deed poll into his hands, right there in my own living room . A 3rd copy I should say. Thats 5 in total to Southwark and there is no record of any of them. Not one.
I got back on to the area manager lady who helped me in the beginning. She said that the man in question took leave that very day he saw me and isn't back yet, so it's probably still laying on his desk. A very large pinch of salt required for that one I think, but she assured me that this time finally, once and for all, its all been updated adjusted and processed and that once again Southwark are very very sorry. I hope so. What a pointless waste of time.
As for the boy wonder himself? I don't know if this is just extreme stupidity or being criminally bad at his job or if theres anything phobic in his conduct. I think a bit of all three probably, but with emphasis on the first two.
Amazing how the threat of litigation moves things along, especially when it reflects directly on the ability of organisations to grasp facts in relation to human rights aspects and breaches of laws, that make them look discriminatory or just plain ignorant of basic human rights.
Many thanks to you again Cristine. This all started last year and it wasn't until I sent them the letter you suggested at the top of the thread that anything was done about it at all. No exaggeration.
It says "I know what laws you are breaking and I've got you bang to rights" loud and clear.
Although I would probably be tempted to add "me old beauty" for effect. lol!
I think they were definitely motivated more by the threat of being sued than any notion of doing the right thing.
Maybe we're just a little bit too diverse for them!
Glad to hear that I was of some help Maggie, no need to go into deapth, just point out a few facts, leave them to look them up, ''OMG now we are in the proverbal crap quick, sort it out'' Please keep us updated.
Well done Crissie. There is no excuse for this kind of behaviour from any public bodies. If anyone else is having trouble like this then please let us know.
Hugs, Katie x
