Talk:Deed poll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Isn't a deed poll stictly UK only? If it is, that should go into the article. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 13:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No---Deed poll is used to obtain a legal name change in Australia . Felix the Cassowary 09:56, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Then perhaps it is a common to the Commonwealth? gK ¿? 19:43, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

England and Wales[edit]

I am slightly confused, because the CAB say that in England and Wales you can change your name by merely adopting a new one, provided there is no intent of fraud or deception. They add that there is no legal way to change your name; in certain circumstances, however, third parties may require evidence of the name change, and a deed poll is one of a number of ways to prove this change. If no-one objects, I'll update the page to reflect that.

See eg http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/n6m/index/family_parent/family/change_of_name.htm

Tom Yates 15:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are right in part, you do not need a deed poll or statutary delcaration in Enland and Wales, however it is not true to "say there is no legal way to change your name", rather the only legal way to change your name is by using the new one. DP and SD are just to help you convince the eg DVLA and passport authority that you have. It is all explained in Name change#United Kingdom. Billlion 17:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have changed United Kingdom to England, Wales and Northern Ireland as deed poll does not exist in Scots law. I should know I have changed my name by this process. Davidkinnen 11:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deed polls are valid in Scotland too. The difference in Scotland is that you can also change your name by recording it on the birth certificate. [User:Gixz|Gixz]] (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article is still wrong. It states "In some other jurisdictions, a person may simply start using a new name without any formal legal process". As noted above, this is also true in England and Wales, not just "other jursidictions". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reilly (talkcontribs) 07:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

other uses[edit]

Deed Poll is speaking not only used as a mean to change one's name. I have included its use in conveyancing context here. Any other forms of use of Deed Poll? My research shows that there is actually no limitation as to the use of Deed poll - so long it expresses an intention thats ok. --Sunnyhsli 03:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Not a contract"?[edit]

"It is strictly speaking not a contract because it only binds one party and expresses an intention instead of a promise."

How is it not a contract? For example, in a deed of change of name, wouldn't it be a contract between the person and the government that both will use the new name in, say, tax correspondence? --Damian Yerrick 16:12, 4 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it's a promise by one individual or group thereof to use a different name from their current one. The government may choose to honour it, but that's up to them. Strib 11:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links[edit]

An IP editor has three times added an external link to www.deedpolls-online.co.uk. I identified this as a spam link, and reverted it.

An IP editor then added an external link to www.nationwidedeedpollassociation.org.uk, identifying it as "Nationwide Deed Poll Association, the trade association for the Deed Poll industry". I reverted this with the edit summary " remove link to self-styled trade association that only lists two members, effectively a spam link". The same IP editor has restored this link.

I also added a paragraph on unofficial websites, with a source. The same IP editor deleted this paragraph, but it was restored by User:Eteethan.

I judged the "Nationwide Deed Poll Association" link to be spam because:

  • It only lists two members, one of which is the website that had earlier been linked to
  • No phone number is listed on the website. This is unusual for a trade association that would be expected to court media coverage
  • The association has only ever issued one press release, dated 2013

The association may have been set up to try to limit to most egregious behaviour of some deed poll websites, rather than to give an air of respectability to its members. However in my view it is clear that this is is not a well-established trade association, and is not a useful link for this article.

I totally agree about the “Nationwide Deed Poll Association” ... looks spammy. Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:32, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My view on this link is reinforced by it being introduced from the same IP address that was used to restore the earlier link. Both of the IP addresses were only used to edit this article. While I endeavour to assume good faith there is a possibility that these links were added with the intention of promoting a website, any my paragraph may have been removed because it could reduce traffic to that website.

Deed poll processing websites are examples of unofficial websites that charge for access to government services. Many of these websites are designed to deceive, in that they do not make it clear that they charge an additional fee, and some are designed to appear to be the 'official' websites. This is supported by the following sources:

Only the second of these articles says anything about deed poll websites / services. The other articles do not “support” what you say because they are about EHICs, passports, etc. (not deed polls) Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While I admit to having a distaste for this type of website, I am not a campaigner against them and this is my first involvement with this issue.

I will remove the Nationwide Deed Poll Association link. Please discuss the issue here before restoring it, or adding similar links. Verbcatcher (talk) 14:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The only one of the links you posted which considers deed poll services to be "copycats" is the Guardian link (article by Donna Ferguson). Deed polls are *not* issued by the government, the service offered by the Royal Courts of Justice is a service for enrolling a deed poll which has already been executed. That is, you should have your deed poll prepared before enrolling it, and the Royal Courts of Justice will merely keep a copy of it. If the deed poll is not prepared correctly they will simply reject it, they will not help you prepare the document in any way. The courts, generally speaking, do not provide the same service of solicitors and legal firms. Incidentally, Donna Ferguson is not a lawyer, or else she might have realised this herself. Brianjones1981 (talk) 11:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree about the trade association though. Brianjones1981 (talk) 11:12, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Donna Ferguson's article does not say that the government issues deed polls, and as far as I can see her article does not conflict with your description. She writes:
  • The official site, which advises on deed poll changes and which allows users to download forms from the Ministry of Justice for free, is gov.uk/change-name-deed-poll.
Yes — but as the comments at the bottom of the article say — there is a considerable fee to pay to actually do anything with the form! So, yes the form is free, but ... well aren't all forms “free”?! Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will restore the paragraph, changing a phrase to advise individuals on changing name using a deed pool. The official site describes the process and specifies a valid form of words for a deed poll. I will not restore the quote from the Guardian which is unnecessary and may be contentious.
I have removed the section that you added about Donna Ferguson because 1stly, the government does not provide a web service — if anything they provide downloadable forms, which have to be posted (so not really a “web service”), and 2ndly, there is no such thing as an official or unofficial “deed poll website”. Deed polls are legal documents which can, and are, prepared by many legal firms and solicitors. The government, though, does not prepare deed polls. The gov.uk webpage is an informational page about deed polls, and is not a statement of the law, and does not give legal effect to anything written there. It may, in fact, be wrong about the law (I'm not saying it is, but it may be, because the information is written by civil servants, who might get things wrong.) Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What you are implying in the paragraph you added, which is also implied by Donna Ferguson — but which is highly contentious — is that professional deed poll services (and, solicitors too? or are they ... just more “respectable”?) are “pretending” to be the “official” website. Whereas it can be argued that they are simply doing what legal firms do. They aren't breaking any laws by simply offering a legal service. So this sort of thing doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia, — leave that to the hacks. Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My reading of the government website is that it is not necessary to enrol a deed poll at the Royal Courts of Justice for it to take effect, but that some organisations require this.[1] Should we mention enrolment of deed polls, or is this to much detail for this article? Verbcatcher (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The gov.uk webpage does not say that some organisations require enrolment. It simply recommends to ask organisations if they require one. Subtly different. Jeremy jones 1234 (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]