Thanks to all of you who sent us your experiences of researching your family tree. We’ve received lots of fascinating stories - read on for Michael Lonsdale from Tarleton, Lancashire’s story:

‘My great grandparents, Thomas Barlow Lonsdale and his wife Helen Elizabeth nee Wilson, have always been something of a mystery.

I tracked Thomas and his family from 1900 to the late 1500s in Burnley, Lancashire and found they had connections to the Pendle Witches.

Thomas married Helen Elizabeth Wilson on 19 February 1899 in Kilburn and I knew that a son (my grandfather) Thomas Alfred Lonsdale had been born 29 May 1900 at 6 Claremont Road, Willesden, Middlesex, but search as I may they were nowhere to be found in the 1901 census.

I found the records on findmypast within seconds. The original enumerators sheet showed Thomas Lonsdale with wife Helen and son Thomas living in Linden Avenue, Kensal Rise, Middlesex. The name was quite clearly Lonsdale - how it had been transcribed as Southall I will never know.

From the information from the findmypast 1901 census I was now able to start to look for my great grandmother’s birth. This hasn’t proved easy and even now I know nothing about her before the day she married my great grandfather. The 1901 census says she was born in Yarmouth, Suffolk in 1872. Her marriage certificate tells me she is the daughter of a fisherman named John who was deceased and that her aged tied in with a birth in 1872. I have been unable to locate her in either the 1881 or 1891 census and can find no registration of her birth.

I hoped that the 1911 census would shed a little more light but it was the complete opposite. In 1911 my great grandmother was living in 3 rooms in Clifford Gardens, Willesden, Middlesex but there was no sign of my great grandfather or his 2 children.

They had had a daughter, Edith, who was born in 1902 and I eventually found her living with an aunt in South London. I’d expected to find my great grandfather close by but eventually found him in a convalescent home in Bognor Regis, but there was still no sign of Thomas Alfred now aged 11.

Over the years of research I had found many spelling variations for my surname and I had tried all these. I had even searched for variations on both his first and last name, but nothing. I put that research down and started on another part of the family.

Some months later I went back to look for my grandfather but with wild cards and variations in use - still nothing.

I don’t know what made me do it but instead of putting in Lonsdale/Lansdale/Landesdaile/Sonsdale and all the rest of the variations, I put in Lousdale and up came my grandfather and a few other Lonsdales.

My grandfather was living with the Cripps family in Maidenhead in Berkshire. My first thought was to wonder who the Cripps were. When I checked the 1901 census I found they were living at the same address as my family. I wondered why, when the father had 2 sisters, a brother 2 half-sisters and a half-brother, his son was living with strangers.

After some months of research I have found many coincidences between the 2 families and I am hoping that I will find a link between them and my great grandmother Helen.’

If you have an experience you’d like to share with us and our readers, email casestudies@findmypast.co.uk with ‘My experience’ in the subject line. We look forward to reading your stories!

Our expert Stephen Rigden, pictured right, answers your questions.

From Dick Myhre in Blaine, Washington, USA:

‘My wife has hired at least 3 different researchers to try to find information on her family in England and Scotland - all without success. The facts:

Her great-grandfather was George Slater, born 23 February 1826 in White Lea (Whitley?), Northumberland Co., England, ‘on the border between England and Scotland’, per family lore. His parents’ names are unknown by us. The family story is that the father died, and his wife invested the family money with ‘friends’ and that the money was ‘lost’. George was the youngest (?) of the sons in the family; the other sons were college-educated - for the ministry, we’ve heard - but the father died before George could complete his college education. We believe that there was at least one sister, whose married name was ‘Mrs Potts’.

George Slater married Elizabeth (Margaret Elizabeth?) Metcalf in 1851 at an unknown location. From a death record, we know that Elizabeth’s father’s name was William, and that he was born in England. Elizabeth herself was born 8 August 1831 in Durham Co., England. The family lore there is that Elizabeth’s parents died and Elizabeth and a younger brother were raised by a ‘wealthy aunt and uncle’, the aunt being known as ‘Lady Metcalf’. Elizabeth is said to have attended Bishop Auckland School.

From a family Bible we have record that George and Elizabeth’s first child, daughter Ann or Annie, was born in Kilmarnock, Scotland, on 31 December 1851. This baby died at sea on 10 October 1853 on the trip from the British Isles - departure point unknown - to North America. Where the family intended to land is a matter of speculation, but they ended up in Chile, where 2 more children were born to them. One family history states that George and Elizabeth were headed for Eastern Canada, where George had brothers in the ministry. The story continues that the ship’s captain was steering a northerly course and began running into icebergs. After trying to convince the captain to turn south, which he refused to do, the crew mutinied, thus their arrival in Chile.

Two family histories exist, written by granddaughters of George and Elizabeth Slater. One states that the family was Church of England; the other states that they were non-conformist. If they were non-conformist, might that explain why no records of them have been found to date? We have enough information that it seems really strange not to have been able to find anything on this family - Slaters or Metcalfs - in Great Britain! We would very much appreciate your help in solving any of these mysteries.’

Steve says:

‘Thank you for submitting your very interesting question.

It is quite common to hear family legends and lore which have been passed down through the generations like heirlooms. However, the difference between a normal heirloom, such as a valued piece of jewellery or furniture, and a family legend is that the latter tends to be changed over time: to become more colourful, more elusive, less plausible. In many, if not most, family legends there will be a kernel of truth and it is the job of the family historian to work through the accumulated layers of elaboration and embroidery to uncover that truth.

This is of course easier said than done, especially when, as in this case, the family appears to have been transcontinental, travelling from the British Isles to South America to North America. This makes it all the more important, however, to follow the cardinal rule of genealogy, which is to work back as systematically as you can from proven and known facts towards the unproven and unknown. I cannot tell from your email whether you have exhausted all enquiries in North America and been working back methodically but, if not, and not least given the negative outcome of the investigations made upon your behalf by hired researchers, I would advise you to take stock and review all available information to ascertain what might be missing and what your next steps might be. You really need to ensure that you have accurate and reliable information before continuing.

As to the components of the family legend in your email, some of these are likely to have foundation in reality and some less so. The full combination of lost fortunes, a wealthy aunt, icebergs and mutiny aboard ship is unlikely to be wholly factual. Regarding the individual details in the story, I have taken a quick look at some of these but, not unexpectedly given the outcome of previous research, did not find obvious candidates for the Slater or Metcalf families in the 1841 or 1851 censuses, nor a birth or baptism for Annie in Kilmarnock in 1851/52.

There will probably be multiple places named ‘White Lea’: certainly, there is one in Northumberland near Alston (which is on the Cumberland side of the county boundary) and another near Billy Row, just north of Crook in Co Durham, and quite possibly others. Education of young women other than at home was not standard in 1840s and I would be surprised if there was a ‘Bishop Auckland School’ admitting girls that Elizabeth Metcalf attended, although of course there may be local researchers among findmypast customers who can correct me on this point.

As for Chile, there were many purposeful British settlers in South America, all around the Chilean coast from Pisagua and Iquique down to Punta Arenas (Sandy Point) and Tierra del Fuego, and a mutiny on a Canada-bound ship in the North Atlantic would be unlikely to lead to a subsequent rogue docking so very far away. If you search the 1890-1960 passenger lists on findmypast.co.uk, or search the same records on www.ancestorsonboard.com, using the combination of surname Slater and destination Chile, you will find a surprising number of records. Of course this is not the right period for your family history but it does show that Chile was not an unusual emigrant destination.

Perhaps some findmypast customers might want to comment on Dick’s question?’

If you’d like to send your question to Steve, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account.

Our expert Stephen Rigden, pictured right, answers your questions.

From Debbie Dixon (nee Munday) in Australia:

‘Perhaps you may have some suggestions for finding my Munday family.

My grandfather was Charles William Munday born in 1904 in St Pancras to Charles Thomas Munday and Margaret Elizabeth Fitzgibbon. The family eventually emigrated to Australia.

I have found Charles Thomas Munday born c1875 in St Pancras to James Munday and Jemima Howard whose first married name was Spankhurst. On James and Jemima’s marriage certificate James’ father is listed as Richard Munday (labourer) and James is listed as a bachelor. Both James and Jemima’s ages are recorded as ‘of age’. This gives me no idea where or when James Munday was born. I have found both a Richard and James Munday but have no way of proving if these are my ancestors.

James and Jemima had a son in 1871 but did not marry until 1872. On the 1871 census Jemima is living with her father William Howard. By 1881 James Munday was dead so I have no way to find out any information about him. Can you help?’

Steve says:

‘Thanks for your email, Debbie, which I have selected to answer as it highlights a question that I believe many researchers come up against.

You have a James Munday who married in 1872, had some children, and then died at some date before 1881. Furthermore, on his marriage certificate he is described as being of full age, which should indicate that he was born at some date in or before 1851 (i.e., at least 21 years earlier).

What this combination of circumstances means is that currently you have him on neither the 1871 nor the 1881 census returns. Furthermore, you feel that you cannot positively identify him on earlier census returns as you do not know when he was born and you will be faced will several candidate entries.

However, all is not lost.

Firstly, his wife Jemima was alive at the time of the 1881 census, upon which her recorded age is 39 years. She is on the 1871 census (as a young widow, not yet married to James Munday) as 29. This seems to reliably place her birth circa 1841/42. This is not necessarily a guide to the age of James but it provides a starting point.

Secondly, you have the approximate parameters within which the death of James occurred, i.e., from the date of birth of his last known child to the date of the census in April 1881. The death indexes for this period give the age of death, so you can calculate the approximate year of birth. Eliminating all the deaths for men of the same name born after 1851, you will be left with a list of candidate entries of death. I took a look and there would appear to be about 10 entries which meet the available criteria.

One is in Pancras but he was aged 63 years at his death in June quarter 1876, which would mean that he was born in 1812/13, making this person considerably older than the husband of Jemima (who was born circa 1841/42). I don’t believe this eliminates this individual: a widow with young children might marry an older man and, certainly, although ‘of full age’ is a very common formula, it was definitely used on occasion to disguise a disparity in age.

There are at least two possible next steps.

One is simply to apply for the candidate death certificates, one at a time, starting with those you consider most probable. Of course, this will cost money, as the General Register Office has to charge you the statutory fee. However, hopefully, on one of the first certificates the informant at the death will be Jemima Munday. You would then know James’ age at death, be able to calculate his approximate year of birth, and be able to start looking for him more confidently in the 1871 and earlier censuses.

An alternative is to use family reconstruction techniques to begin to identify the other candidates from the list of deaths with individuals enumerated on the 1871 (and earlier) census, trying to match them with census returns with a father Richard. You may find that you can confidently eliminate some candidates, and you may find a favoured candidate for ‘your’ James. Assuming you have a subscription rather than PayAsYouGo access, this will not cost you money, just time.

A variation on this second family reconstruction approach would be simply to search each of the four census years from 1841 to 1871 for a Richard Munday with a son James Munday born before 1851. However, note that this approach runs the risk of the father and son already living in separate households (or the father Richard being dead) by 1841.

In summary, you are unlikely to find a quick and easy answer but I believe that you should be able to resolve this particular problem through careful lateral thinking and a systematic approach to the available resources.’

If you’d like to send your question to Steve, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account.

England play Slovenia this afternoon which means it’s time for another World Cup widows competition question!

Can you tell us what disability Chelsea Pensioner Bartholomew Murphy, born in Wexford in 1841, who served in the 36th Reg Of Foot, is reported to have? Search our Chelsea Pensioners records for the answer - Murphy’s medical report holds the key.

The prize: a digital camera, vouchers for a year’s Full subscription plus more family history prizes.

We hope that England make it through to the next stage of the tournament so we can extend our competition, but if they’re kicked out today this will be the last question we pose and the competition will close.

If this happens (fingers crossed it doesn’t!) we’ll let you know how to enter the competition. Remember that you need to answer all the competition questions correctly to be in with a chance of winning. You have until 12 July to send us your answers and there can only be one winner. We’ll pick the winner at random from the entries that contain all of the correct answers - the judge’s decision is final.

We’ll publish the winner on our blog on 13 July along with the answers to all the questions. Good luck!

Make sure you’ve registered on findmypast by midnight Tuesday 22 June (UK time) for our next World Cup offer (if you’ve already registered there’s no need to do so again).

Remember that as soon as you sign in to the site between 9am Wednesday (UK time) and 9am Thursday your 90 free minutes will start - so be ready to begin your research then! All you need to know is here: http://www.findmypast.co.uk/world-cup.jsp

Look out for our third competition question coming your way on Wednesday morning (UK time)!

Thanks to all of you who visited the site on Friday/Saturday. We’re so glad that most of you managed to get lots out of your free 90 minutes. After the huge amount of visitors to the site during the first England match we made further provisions for the second match so that the site would run faster and give you a better service. We handled significantly more traffic this time around and we’re pleased that even more of you had a positive experience.

It is inevitable that there’s a limit to the amount of people who can access the site at one time and the evening is definitely the busiest time for the site. We would recommend that you take your 90 minutes at other times of day where possible - this should allow you to whizz around the site at full speed!

On free access days you’ll need to make sure that no-one else has already logged in on your computer - we have restricted the free 90 minutes to one session per computer. Your 90 minutes will start as soon as you log in so be ready to start your research straight away!

The amount of people who made useful and unexpected discoveries during their free access is inspiring - get ready for Wednesday’s offer to make sure you don’t miss out.

It’s that time of year again!

Are you stuck for gift ideas for Father’s Day this Sunday? Problem solved with findmypast.co.uk’s completely free Father’s Day family tree template!

Start a new hobby for your dad  by downloading the free family tree template today.

As you may have already heard, we’ve tweaked our World Cup offer slightly to ensure that all of you receive the best possible service: whenever England play a match you will be able to access findmypast.co.uk for free for 90 minutes.

All you have to do is make sure you’ve registered on the site (unless you’re already registered in which case there’s no need to do so again) and choose your 90 minutes between 9am Friday 18th June and 9am Saturday 19th June (UK time).

England will play Algeria this evening at 7.30pm - it’s up to you whether you choose to take your 90 minutes of free browsing when England play!

Here’s the competition question we’d like you to answer for the second part of the competition. Search our birth records to find the answer:

How many first names was Ann Pepper, born in West Derby in the Jan/Feb/Mar quarter of 1883, given?

The prize: a digital camera, vouchers for a year’s Full subscription plus more family history prizes.

Keep your eye on the blog for a competition question to answer each time England play. For a chance to win the prize, send us your answers to all the competition questions when England get knocked out of the competition - we’ll give you details of how to enter then. Remember to make a note of your answer to each part of the competition - you’ll need to send us your answers in one bundle after England get knocked out.

You have until 12 July to send us your answers and there can only be one winner. We’ll pick the winner at random from the entries that contain all of the correct answers - the judge’s decision is final. We’ll publish the winner on our blog on 13 July along with the answers to the questions.

Good luck!

*All records available using our Full subscription (including the 1911 Census) will be free: Living Relatives searches and Memorial scrolls are not included.

With the next England match just around the corner, we’re warming up to provide further entertainment for any non-football fans in the form of our second World Cup widows offer:

90 minutes free access to findmypast.co.uk at a time of your choice on the day that England play – when England play, you still don’t pay!*

How to get free access

• Make sure you are registered on the website before midnight (UK time) on the day before the match. If you have already registered, you do not need to do this again.
• Return to findmypast.co.uk at a time of your choosing between 9am (UK time) on the day of the match and 9am (UK time) the day afterwards.
• Once you have signed in, you will have 90 minutes to search and view the records for free.

The free 90 minutes are available as a continuous period and will begin the moment you sign into findmypast.co.uk between the times stated above. If you’re not in the UK, you can convert the UK times above into local time here. A listing of the scheduled England matches is available here.

Our World Cup Widows offer for the second England match is now much more flexible, particularly for those of you based outside of the UK. You are now able to use the records at findmypast.co.uk at a time that suits you. We’ve been working hard to improve the speed of the site after the overwhelming popularity of our first offer so that even more customers will be able to benefit from it.

Visit our World Cup page for more information. If you need a helping hand with your research, take a look at our video tutorials or our Getting Started page which provide advice and tips about using our records.

We’d love to hear about any discoveries you make while our records are free to view - post anything you’d like to share with us and our readers on our Facebook page.

*All records available using our Full subscription (including the 1911 Census) will be free: Living Relatives searches and Memorial scrolls are not included.

First of all, apologies to all of of you who experienced a slow site during Saturday’s first England match: we were slightly overwhelmed by the response. But like the England team, we are now in hard training to make the second part a much more satisfying experience!

Although it’s great to hear that many of you found some nuggets during the free period, we’re working on a plan to make sure that everybody (especially our subscribers) get the normal, fast findmypast experience for the second match this Friday evening. And we’re also plotting ways to make sure that those based overseas don’t have to set their alarm clocks for strange hours to take part.

Keep an eye on this blog for more news, but if you haven’t registered yet, please do so now!