DEVON-L Archives

From: khs <>
Subject: being married without one's knowledge
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 08:47:35 -0800

I was recently sent the following after it appeared on Yorksgen, and
thought that you would find it just as interesting.
Karen in Abbotsford BC


Subject: Being Married without one?s Knowledge

I hope you find the following interesting.

Andreas Sarker
Leicester UK

?Married or Not Married? in The Guardian, Monday 1 September 1986

A woman called Gloria was born in Colombia, married a man called Dai
Llewelyn
and bore his child. Throughout their time together, he beat her up. The
Home
Office demanded evidence of her marriage and her husband?s birth
certificate as
proof of her right to British nationality. Her husband refused to hand
over his
birth certificate and she was faced with deportation. She tried to
trace his
birth certificate but at St Catherine?s House she discovered that there
was no
such person as Dai Llewelyn and that he had given a false name at the
time of
the marriage.

She could not prove that she was married to a British citizen unless she
could
discover his true identity. The day she came home from the PRO and
challenged
him about his real identity he beat her up again and refused to tell her
who he
was. She escaped with her child to a woman?s refuge and he then
disappeared.
Her deportation was threatened for late August unless she could find out
who he
really was.

His photograph was published in the paper and he telephoned, but refused to
give
his name or whereabouts. However, he did go to the police and the Home
Office
is now satisfied that Gloria is legally married to a British subject.

He had done nothing illegal. You do not have to produce a birth
certificate to
obtain a marriage licence, and you can marry under any name you choose
provided
there is no fraudulent intent. The marriage between the two people who
attended
the ceremony remains valid whatever they call themselves so long as
neither
partner is married already. This oddity in the law can lead to serious abuse.

Helen Ventress, a pottery teacher, was served with divorce papers by a
firm of
solicitors acting for a Chinese waiter called Robert Cheung. As far
as she
knew, she had never been married, but his solicitors refused to believe
her.
They said ?we know you married Mr Cheung in 1975 and you were paid £250.
It was
a marriage of convenience so just sign the divorce papers.? Her parents
did not
believe her either when she said she had not been married. They thought
that
she had done this for the money when she was a hard-up first-year student.

Eventually they did believe her and then she was sent a copy of the
marriage
certificate between herself, Helen Rebecca Ventress, and Robert
Cheung,
solemnised at Paddington Register Office on 3 November 1975. It
gave her
parents? names and address and her date of birth. She is the only
Helen
Ventress registered within 20 years either side of the her date. The
evidence
against her seemed pretty conclusive.

Finally, Mr Cheung?s solicitors sent a private detective to see her to
try to
get her to sign the divorce papers and admit she had indeed been married.
But,
luckily, Mr Cheung had taken photographs after the wedding. The
moment the
detective saw her he realised that she was not the woman in the
wedding
photographs. Someone else had stolen her identity and married using her
name,
address and details. She did not recognise the girl in the photographs
and was
completely mystified. Then, studying one of the photographs
closely, she
recognised a young man in the background. His name was Glen Dixon and
she had
been at Ripon Grammar School with him, although he had been in a class
below.
She had no idea why he had chosen her identity but he knew her parents?
address
as both their fathers had been publicans in Ripon when they were both at
school.

Glen Dixon was found and the woman who married Mr Cheung in Helen?s
name was
identified as Susan Begbie, Glen Dixon?s girlfriend at the time. They
had met
Mr Cheung in a London pub when he was looking for a British woman to
marry to
gain British citizenry. They wanted the money, they said, to go on
holiday to
Greece.

Helen?s case was taken up by her MP. She hoped to get the marriage
struck out
and her name removed from the register. However, there is no legal
power to
remove a marriage certificate from the books ? even when the marriage is
invalid
(bigamous for instance). This marriage is voidable but one of the
parties,
Susan Begbie or Robert Cheung, has to go to court to void it. Even
then, the
marriage would remain on the register.

Helen?s MP wrote to the Registrar General. He replied that in law Helen
was not
married and there is nothing to stop her marrying in the future if
she so
wishes. He went on to say that he would be instructing the
Superintendent
Registrar at Westminster who now has custody of the register to report the
case
to the police for such action as it saw fit to take. Helen never heard any
more
but she assumed prosecutions would follow. However, the Director of
Public
Prosecutions says the police did investigate but decided to take no
further
action. The DPP never gives any reason but it does not mean that no
crime (eg
fraud or perjury) was committed ? just that for some reason the police
did not
follow this case up.

Helen now wants to marry her boyfriend, Brian. There is nothing to
prevent her
?but I would like a declaration in court establishing in law that the
marriage
to Mr Cheung never took place?. She has no money and is applying for legal
aid.
However, even when she has the court?s public acknowledge-ment that she
is not
married, she bitterly resents that fact that there is nothing whatever
she can
do to get the record of the marriage removed or altered, nor can she get a
note
attached to the record to explain that the person married is Susan
Begbie. ?I
know it?s only a remote possibility, but supposing in the future when we
are all
dead and gone that my grandchildren are due to inherit. It could be
shown in
the book that I was never legally married to Brian, as I had previously
married
Mr Cheung.?

Divorce decree records are public documents available in the Principal
Registry
of the Family Division Court. Checking there, officials report that
there has
been no divorce, or declaration that the marriage is void, between Robert
Cheung
and Susan Begbie, either in her own name or in Helen Ventress?s name.
That
marriage remains valid. Wherever Susan Begbie may be now, she may not
realise
that her marriage to Robert Cheung is still valid, whatever name she used
at the
time. If she has married again, or if she married again in the future
without
first obtaining a divorce, her marriage would be bigamous. As yet
Helen has
received no word or apology or explanation from her.

The Lord Chancellor?s department says there has been an increasing
number of
marriages of this kind. A short time ago, one woman was caught clocking
up her
12th marr-iage of convenience in a month, using false names at
different
register offices. It is all too easily done, without having to
produce any
birth certificates or any proof of marital status. Until there is a
change in
the law, it is well nigh impossible for an ordinary person to discover
if the
person they are about to marry has been married before; it is possible to
find
proof of marriage, but not of non-marriage. There is no note attached
to a
birth certifi-cate entry that would lead to a subsequent marriage or
death
cer-tificate. It is difficult to look up information unless you already
have
most of the information you are looking for.

Helen Ventress was alarmed to hear in her home town, Ripon, that Glen
Dixon who
supplied Susan Begbie with her identity had been boasting that there were
many
more girls who attended the Grammar School at that time whose identity
he has
used in marriages. Helen says ?of course they would never know, and there
is no
way they could look it up or find out until the day they are served with
divorce
papers.?

This thread:

• Re: being married without one's knowledge by "Danny Stapleton" <>

  • being married without one's knowledge by khs <>