Heneb (formerly GGAT) — Email Correspondence Catalogue

From: Sion Buckler
To: mdr@nationalarchives.gov.uk (cc Land Registry fraud team, College of Arms, Llandough Community Council clerk, Vale of Glamorgan Council, BP; bcc incl. her@heneb.org.uk, RCAHMW, Cadw, Welsh Government ministers, Law Commission, Welsh Language Commissioner)
Date: 10 February 2026, 22:15 UTC
Subject: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough / BP vs Buckler 1987
Attachments: 631213232_122229131366112242_4949030799352919380_n.jpg; 185634_1662023750546_1585848_n_1662023750546.jpg; Forensic_Evaluation_and_Restitutionary_Brief_Ty_Mawr_v0.6_clean.pdf

*FORMAL NOTICE OF RECORD CHALLENGE, ASSERTION OF RIGHT, AND DEMAND FOR ENGAGEMENT*

Dear Sir/Madam,

This Notice is issued for placement on official record and for reliance. It is not informal correspondence. I urge you not to resort to silence, deflection, or delay, as doing so following receipt of this notice constitutes knowing reliance upon, and maintenance of, records alleged to be materially defective through fraud, concealment, denial of due process, and systemic erasure. Please report any suspicious activity and discrepancies identified.

This Notice is issued in pursuit of narrative justice at this stage; formal judicial remedies are expressly reserved. It serves to document our family's side of the story before it is completely erased and history rewritten, ensuring awareness among custodians of land, heritage, heraldry, archaeology, and public records.

My elder brother, Rhys Buckler, and I are the sons of the late William Buckler (d. 1991), defendant in the landmark legal case *BP Properties Ltd v Buckler* (1987), and the grandchildren of the late Mary Williams, whose dispossession, marginalisation, and exclusion from judicial determination remain unresolved matters of record. Mary Williams was repeatedly and materially falsely addressed/mislabeled in legal and administrative records as “Mrs Buckler,” a misidentification that was never judicially tested and which directly affected the handling, scope, and outcome of proceedings. The Williams/Buckler family held claim to the land title, having acquired and occupied Great House Farm continuously since 1667, based on family records, historical evidence, and centuries of resistance to adverse claims.

I place on record that I am the first member of my family able to speak publicly and formally on these matters. Other close family members remain too traumatised and intimidated by the historical conduct of these proceedings—including violent eviction, demolition, and loss of livelihood—to engage, despite the continuing consequences of dispossession. That silence must not be misread as consent, acquiescence, or abandonment of right. There is a material distinction between free silence and silence produced by fear, trauma, and coercive experience.

The story, as we have pieced it together, reveals a multi-generational pattern of lawfare and siege: from Norman/English conquests in 1100 granting lordships over ancient Welsh Christian landscapes, through monastic (1215–1539) and Crown seizures (1539 onward), to industrial encroachments (e.g., 1876 Limeworks severance without consent) and modern corporate possession actions. This culminated in the 1988 demolition of an 800-year-old farmhouse amid police standoffs, leaving the family homeless and the site scarred, now buried under Church View Close. Archaeological vindication came too late—1994 excavations revealed over 1,000 Roman and medieval burials, confirming family warnings (e.g., the 1870 Roman soldier discovery under the living room floor, suppressed by authorities)—yet heritage records celebrate the site while omitting our dispossession.

The following assertions of right are now formally placed on record. They have never been lawfully adjudicated or extinguished:

1. Rhys Buckler may be the rightful Manorial Lord of the Manor of Llandough, by right of primogeniture and continuous hereditary connection arising from our family’s occupation of Great House Farm from 1667 until our narrative, legal, and physical dispossession.
2. I assert a claim to act as Squire of the Manor of Llandough, as executive representative and guardian of the Buckler–Williams estate and matriarchal lineage, with a mandate to pursue correction of record, restitution, and restorative remedies.

These are assertions of right, not settled declarations, placed on record pending proper adjudication—which has been historically obstructed through procedural narrowing, missing documents, and avoidance of full hearings.

In 1974, Mary Williams was twice prevented from presenting her case and obtaining a judicial determination of superior ownership, despite claims grounded in long occupation, intent, and possession. The court confined inquiry to *animus possidendi* (intention to possess) and excluded *animus domini* (intention to own), reclassifying her from putative owner to mere occupier and foreclosing title adjudication. BP sought possession only, not ownership rulings—a choice unexplained and significant. Proceedings were adjourned or quashed without resolution.

This occurred despite evidence of ownership intent, including:

- Centuries-long occupation and resistance (e.g., failed 1938 auction due to local support; post-1945 rent disputes).
- Roman-era remains and historical significance (e.g., Guglielmo Marconi's 1897 residence during radio experiments, with family aid erased from records).
- Unformalized deals like the 1895–1905 Daniel Thomas quarrying permission for promised title, undermined by vanished deeds.

Judicial ownership examination would have engaged archaeological/heritage protections, incompatible with redevelopment—consequences avoided, raising credibility concerns.

Serious unresolved anomalies persist, indicating something is still not right with the record:

- Licence correspondence dated 31 October 1974 surfacing only on 4 November, potentially interrupting proceedings to prevent hearings.
- Claims of 1974 benevolent withdrawal under press scrutiny unsupported by verifiable coverage.
- Land registration before Mary Williams’s 1983 death without title determination; disputes possibly lodged/suppressed by Land Registry.
- Inconsistent treatment of BP entities across proceedings to family detriment.
- Procedural barriers preventing effective defense (e.g., interrupted essential services post-licence; 1960–1987 court rulings dismissing ancestral title as "notion" without evidence).
- Knowing bypass of archaeological constraints (e.g., 1978 trenches ignored; no contemporaneous 1970s/1990s press on discoveries amid development).
- Missing key documents (e.g., 1667 conveyance, 1811–1835 Lambert Williams agreements proving status, 1982–84 library deeds vanishing).
- Risks of further erasure: Heritage databases celebrate "Llandough Roman villa cemetery" while omitting our saga; modern residents unaware of the "battleground" site.

These anomalies suggest systemic theft, from colonial English subjugation (e.g., 1543–1770 orbit shifts) to corporate siege, during Wales' cultural/economic transitions. Authority derived through such means is illegitimate under natural justice, customary Welsh principles, and moral-legal frameworks. The record's distortion secures advantage, but passage of time does not validate it.

Preliminary assessment indicates cumulative benefits from redevelopment (absent title extinguishment) exceed £100 million, forming a basis for reparations—covering lost land, artifacts, livelihood, and trauma.

I require relevant public servants, custodians, and office-holders (including Land Registry, heraldry bodies, museums, archaeologists, MPs, historians, and councillors) to cease delay, engage substantively, review/correct/annotate records where defective, and prevent further rewriting of history. Justice delayed is denied, especially with verifiable evidence available.

This Notice:

- Challenges the record's accuracy, completeness, and legitimacy.
- Place assertions of title/standing on record pending adjudication.
- Reserves all rights without prejudice.
- Puts officials/beneficiaries on notice that silence/reliance may aggravate responsibility.

For the avoidance of doubt, His Majesty the King was notified yesterday.

This serves as an invitation to engage constructively before reliance becomes untenable.

Regards, Sion Buckler On behalf of the Buckler–Williams family Robin Hill, Dinas Powys, Vale of Glamorgan, Wales. https://bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz

*Postscript — Disability and Succession (Material Notice):* The heir-apparent to the asserted Manorial Lordship is Rhys Buckler’s son, a young man with Down syndrome. Any obstruction, marginalisation, or differential treatment affecting his inheritance would engage the Equality Act 2010 and UK international obligations on disability rights. Disability cannot bar succession or recognition. This is recorded to prevent claims of ignorance.

Note: Multi-recipient notice; Heneb's HER address received it by blind copy. No Heneb reply is in the mailbox.

From: Sion Buckler
To: unclehowell@protonmail.com (bcc: her@heneb.org.uk, heritage@heneb.org.uk, nmr.wales@rcahmw.gov.uk, FOIUnit@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk)
Date: 20 May 2026, 21:10 UTC
Subject: Great House Farm, Williams/ Buckler Family, Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan

Sir / Madam,

To all those whom it concerns, BCC'd into this email.

I write to request disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and, where applicable, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

This request concerns Great House Farm / Ty Mawr (Great House), Llandough, associated estate lands, historic occupation and related heritage records. My family is Buckler and before that Williams, and we occupied Great House Farm from 1667 until our forceful dispossession of it in 1988. Without our ownership ever having been estiguished and without BP ever having a ruling of ownership, only possession.

It's alledged our fee simple absolute and manorial title was stolen. And when BP registered our lands in their names in 1982, with our stolen title, my nan who challenged this all her life, during the 2 week land registry window to challenge BP's registration, which they achieved via purgergy and document/ identity fraud, she conveniently died. As my father did after his appeal of the 1987 mistake ruling was mistakely dismissed and his ECHR request blocked and home abruptly demolished, which he was prevented from stopping having been hospitalised and arrested without charges by armed force officers and possible SAS.

https://youtu.be/0eXOoj7eUCo?si=hcgSA2pFgEE943HG

I understand records may exist within the National Monuments Record of Wales, Historic Environment Record archives, archaeological consultations and planning files, including references already identified as:

• Great House Farm HER site entry – GGAT03586s
• Land at Great House Farm HER event entry – GGATE003872
• The 1990 archaeological assessment commissioned by BP Properties Ltd.

Please provide copies of, or access to:

1. All records concerning Great House Farm / Ty Mawr / Great House Estate, Llandough including:

• surveys
• reports
• site notes
• photographs
• maps
• aerial imagery
• GIS layers
• archive material
• annotations
• title references
• occupancy references
• landscape records
• archaeological observations.

2. All internal and external correspondence involving:

• RCAHMW / NMRW
• Cadw
• GGAT / Heneb
• Vale of Glamorgan Council
• BP Properties Ltd
• developers
• planning authorities
• landowners, estate representatives or consultants.

3. Any documents discussing:

• estate ownership
• occupation history
• family occupation or association
• agricultural use
• commemorative tree planting or memorial planting
• estate boundaries
• title history
• acquisition history
• disputes concerning ownership, heritage status or land use
• estate restructuring, extinguishment, compulsory acquisition or title alteration.

4. Copies of all material linked to GGAT03586s and GGATE003872, including the archaeological assessment and associated correspondence.

5. Any records identifying historic occupants, proprietors, tenants or family associations, including references to the Williams family where present within archives.

6. Metadata identifying file creators, accession history, provenance, dates and retention schedules.

7. File indexes, archive references or schedules identifying further related material not already listed.

Please provide information electronically where possible.

If any material is withheld, please identify the exemption relied upon and provide the public interest assessment.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

5 Robin Hill, Dinas Powys

Note: Sent to several bodies by blind copy; Heneb's HER and heritage addresses were among them. The RCAHMW automatic acknowledgement in the same thread is catalogued on the RCAHMW page.

From: Calli, HER (her@heneb.org.uk)
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 22 May 2026, 14:34 UTC
Subject: RE: Great House Farm, Williams/ Buckler Family, Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan

Dear Mr Buckler,

Thank you for your email. Heneb is not subject to FOI requests as we are a Limited company. However, if you fill out our Enquiry Form<https://heneb.jotform.com/form/240392792819366> then we will be happy to assist as best we can.

Kind regards,

Calli

From: Sion Buckler
To: HER (her@heneb.org.uk)
Date: 23 May 2026, 00:44 UTC
Subject: Re: Great House Farm, Williams/ Buckler Family, Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan

Thanks,

From: Sion Buckler
To: Cadw@gov.wales, foi@museumwales.ac.uk, foi@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk (cc foi@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk, enquiries@ggat.org.uk, planning@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk, clerk@llandough-cc.co.uk, askthearchives@cardiff.gov.uk)
Date: 29 May 2026, 18:43 UTC
Subject: FORMAL DISCLOSURE NOTICE & LITIGATION HOLD: Historic Significance, Planning Approvals, and Displaced Family Tenancy Records for Great House Farm, Llandough (FOIA/EIR Request)

LEGAL NOTICE TO RECIPIENTS:
*Take notice that this request is issued in anticipation of formal legal
proceedings and the filing of an official report regarding systemic
institutional fraud, land misconduct, and the unlawful concealment of
historic preservation data. You are under a strict legal duty to preserve
all physical and electronic records, metadata, correspondence, maps, and
erased files relating to this site. Any spoliation, deletion, or
withholding of data will be cited in subsequent court filings.*
Dear Freedom of Information Officer,
RE: Information Request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
I am writing to request access to historical records, internal
correspondence, planning briefs, and assessments held by your organization
regarding Great House Farm, Llandough, near Penarth/Cardiff (demolished
December 1988), and the historical occupancy of the Buckler family.
Statutory Mandate on Accessibility & Charging Fees:
I am aware that previous attempts to locate this data have resulted in
directives to visit physical archives in person or use paywalled,
commercial third-party web portals. Please be advised of the following
statutory obligations:

1. Under EIR Regulation 8, fees cannot act as an unreasonable barrier or
deterrent to access. Because my family was historically displaced from this
site and I am executing this request remotely, forcing physical attendance
or demanding payment constitutes an unlawful obstacle.
2. Public authorities are required to supply information in the format
requested. I require all documents to be delivered digitally via email
attachment or secure electronic download link, free of charge, as
specified by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) guidelines for
data already held electronically.

Please provide all recorded information matching the following points:
1. Tenant/Ownership Identification and the 1880 Report

- Any documents, archival notes, or registry indexes citing the
William/ Buckler
family line (who occupied and farmed the house across four generations).
- Clarification on whether my family members were formally cited as the
legal owners, long-term tenants, or registered reporters of the 1880
discovery under the dining room floor.
- Any explicit records indicating gaps, deleted metadata, or missing
volumes in your authority’s archive concerning the tenancy, land-dispute
maps, or agricultural heritage of Great House Farm between 1950 and 1989.

2. Statutory Protection and Cadw’s Assessments

- Given that the site's extreme archaeological value (a
1st-to-4th-century Roman precursor villa and a massive early medieval
monastic settlement) was verified by rescue operations as early as 1979,
what are the recorded reasons why Cadw failed to place a statutory
Schedule or Protection Order on the standing fabric of Great House Farm
before its demolition?
- All internal correspondence, risk assessments, or ministerial briefs
evaluating the preservation value of the sub-medieval direct-entry
farmhouse core before it was levelled.

3. Planning Approvals and Local Authority Governance

- All minutes, planning committee files, and consultation responses from
the local authority that granted planning permission and housing
development rights on this specific acreage.
- Direct information explaining how the council approved planning
permission for a private housing development in light of the documented
historical evidence surrounding the immediate parish boundary.

4. Institutional Concealment and Historical "Ignorance"

- Records showing exactly where and at what stage of the planning
process this archaeological evidence should have been brought up
but was not,
which ultimately allowed developers and public bodies to claim they were
unaware of the land's deep significance until after the farmhouse was
destroyed and housing development began.
- Any environmental impact assessments, historic environment register
(HER) lookups, or developer briefs filed between 1980 and 1990 regarding
the footprint of Great House Farm.

If any part of this request is refused under the guise of commercial
sensitivity or archival limitations, you are required by law to state the
exact statutory exemption applied and provide a formal internal review
pathway.
I expect your response within the statutory 20-working-day timeframe.
Kind regards,
*Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)*
*5 Robin Hill, Dinas Powys, Vale of Glamorgan*
------------------------------
Once you send this, the 20-working-day statutory clock begins. If you want,
I can help you draft a specific complaint letter template to the
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) in case they try to ignore this
notice or try to charge you anyway. Would that be useful for your legal
preparation?

Note: Multi-recipient notice; GGAT's enquiries address was copied. The same text was re-sent at 18:48 UTC to Glamorgan Archives with enquiries@ggat.org.uk among the blind-copy recipients. No bounce was recorded for the GGAT address.

From: Barbara Rees (Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk) — automatic reply
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 29 May 2026, 18:43 UTC
Subject: Automatic reply: FORMAL DISCLOSURE NOTICE & LITIGATION HOLD: Historic Significance, Planning Approvals, and Displaced Family Tenancy Records for Great House Farm, Llandough (FOIA/EIR Request)

My next working day is Wednesday, 10th June 2026.

Diolch.

Note: Out-of-office reply. Other automatic replies in the same Gmail thread (South Wales Police, Stephen Doughty MP) belong to other bodies and are not reproduced here.

From: Sion Buckler
To: FOIUnit@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk (cc FreedomofInformation@gov.wales, enquiries@ggat.org.uk)
Date: 7 June 2026, 05:36 UTC
Subject: Planning Permission Church View Close, Llandough

Dear Sir/Madam,

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and, where applicable, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, I request copies of records relating to Great House Farm (Ty Mawr), Llandough, near Cardiff.

I am specifically seeking:

1. Planning applications, permissions, refusals, conditions, appeals, and related correspondence concerning the demolition of Great House Farm and subsequent residential development.

2. Any archaeological assessments, surveys, reports, briefs, watching briefs, excavation reports, or heritage impact assessments relating to the site.

3. Any correspondence between the Council, Cadw, BP Properties, BP, developers, archaeologists, the Royal Commission, or other public bodies concerning:
- Great House Farm;
- its historic significance;
- archaeological discoveries;
- listing or scheduling considerations;
- demolition proposals.

4. Any records discussing reported Roman remains, medieval remains, monastic remains, burials, architectural fragments, or other archaeological features associated with the site.

5. Any records relating to emergency listing, spot-listing, preservation, or protection measures considered for Great House Farm during the 1980s.

6. Any committee minutes, officer reports, recommendations, or briefing papers relating to planning decisions affecting the site.

If some records are held in archives or under a different authority, please advise where they may be located.

I would prefer the information in electronic format.

Yours faithfully,

Sion Buckler

https://bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz

Note: Addressed to the Vale of Glamorgan; GGAT's enquiries address was copied. No GGAT/Heneb reply is in the mailbox.

From: Sion Buckler
To: HER (her@heneb.org.uk)
Date: 8 September 2026, 03:05 UTC
Subject: Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff

HER Officer (Heneb: Glamorgan-Gwent),

This is a request for recorded information under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and, so far as applicable, the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and under the public-access duty to the historic environment record.

I request the full HER source file for Great House Farm, Llandough (GGAT02038s and any linked event or find records), specifically:

1. The complete text of the entry or entries that refer to armour or medieval ironwork found under the rear wing / floor c.1880, including every source code and footnote.

2. A copy or transcript of the RCAHMW / Suggett 1988 material held on the HER file (GGAT’s 1990 assessment cites “RCAHMW 1988” for the museum attribution).

3. Any museum accession number, letter, or catalogue slip on the file that identifies where the ironwork went.

4. Any distinction on the file between:
(a) the c.1880 rear-wing ironwork;
(b) iron from the 1979 villa excavation south of the church;
(c) the 1994 cemetery iron girdle (Burial 631) later examined by the National Museum of Wales.

Please send electronic copies. I am an interested person researching the documented history of this site, not a commercial applicant.

Regards,

Sion Buckler
hywelapbuckler@gmail.com

From: Sion Buckler
To: Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk (cc her@heneb.org.uk)
Date: 19 September 2026, 22:55 UTC
Subject: Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff
Attachments: GHF-HENEB-2026-09-20_Schedule_of_Records_Requested.pdf

Dear Calli,

Further to my email of 8 September 2026 concerning Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough, I attach a formal schedule of the records I am seeking, so that the request is easier for Heneb to work through and to allocate internally. I have also completed your online enquiry form, so the request is in your preferred channel.

I appreciate a response would not fall due until 6 October, so this is not a chaser. It is to put the detail in one place and to clarify the basis of the request.

On your note of 22 May. You are right that Heneb, as a limited company, is not a public authority under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and I do not pursue that. Two separate points remain, and I would welcome Heneb's position on each.

First, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 apply on a different test — regulation 2(2) reaches bodies carrying out functions of public administration relating to the environment, or under the control of a public authority. If Heneb considers it falls outside that, please say so expressly with brief reasons, so that I can direct the request elsewhere.

Second, and independently, the Historic Environment Record is a statutory record: sections 194 and 195 of the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 require the Welsh Ministers to maintain an HER for every local authority area and to make it available for public inspection, and Heneb keeps the south-east Wales record on their behalf. I therefore ask in the alternative that this be treated as a request for access under that regime and under Heneb's own policy.

Two things that will make this easier. If any item is too broad, please tell me which and I will narrow it rather than have the whole request refused. And if Heneb can supply, as a first step, simply a schedule or index of the records it holds for this site — without copying them — that would let me target the rest precisely and save your staff considerable time. I am content to inspect material by appointment at Baglan or at the HER, and any reasonable copying or staff-time charge can be notified to me in advance for approval.

Two small administrative points. Please confirm which legal entity now holds the records and functions formerly of Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd, and who within Heneb handles access requests of this kind.

Finally, since my correspondence in May was framed more formally: my purpose is documentary. I am reconstructing the record of a farm my family occupied for generations, and I would far rather do that with Heneb's help than around it.

I should say plainly that I have read GGAT's December 1993 notification to the Vale of Glamorgan that Condition 18 had not been complied with, and the recommendation that a Breach of Condition Notice be issued. Whatever else is in dispute about this site, that was the Trust doing its job properly, and I am grateful for it.

Thank you in advance for your time in this matter,

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber/Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

Enc: Schedule of Records Requested, ref GHF/HENEB/2026-09-20

Note: Sent as a new Gmail thread but continues the 8 September request; Heneb's reply of 6 October refers to it.

From: Barbara Rees (Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk) — automatic reply
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 19 September 2026, 22:56 UTC
Subject: Automatic reply: Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff

My next working day is Wednesday, 23rd September.

Diolch.

From: Historic Environment Record Team, Heneb (her@heneb.org.uk)
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 6 October 2026, 08:03 UTC
Subject: RE: Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff

Dear Sir,

I write in response to your email, “Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff”, dated 8 September 2026.

I note that you have framed your request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. The question of whether Heneb falls within the scope of those Regulations is a matter of legal determination, and nothing in this response should be taken as expressing a view on that matter. Irrespective of that question, access to the information concerned is not restricted and the information is available on request directly from the HER team. Following its digitisation, it is now freely available online via the Archwilio website via record 02038s.

The additional information referred to in your email dated 19 September 2026 will require further time to review, insofar as it is held within the HER. We will respond separately in relation to that information.

Yours faithfully,

Tîm Cofnod yr Amgylchedd Hanesyddol | Historic Environment Record Team
Gwefan / Web
www.heneb.org.uk
THE TRUST FOR WELSH ARCHAEOLOGY
YMDDIRIEDOLAETH ARCHAEOLEGOL CYMRU

Cadeirydd / Chair: Dr Carol Bell PSG / CEO: Richard Nicholls

Heneb is a Registered Organisation with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists
Mae Heneb yn Sefydliad Cofrestredig gyda’r Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

The Trust is both a Limited Company (1198990) and a Registered Charity (504616)
Any of the statements or comments made above should be regarded as personal and not necessarily those of
Heneb. This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed.

Privacy Policy - Heneb

Registered Office: Corner House, 6 Carmarthen Street, Llandeilo, Carmarthenshire, SA19 6AE
Swyddfa Gofrestredig : Ty Cornel, 6 Stryd Caerfyrddin, Llandeilo, Sir Gaerfyrddin, SA19 6AE

Cwmni Cyfyngedig (1198990) ynghyd ag Elusen Gofrestredig (504616) yw’r Ymddiriedolaeth
Dylai'r datganiadau neu'r sylwadau uchod gael eu trin fel rhai personol ac nid o reidrwydd fel datganiadau neu
sylwadau gan Heneb. Mae'r e-bost hwn ac unrhyw ffeiliau a drosglwyddir gydag ef yn gyfrinachol ac at ddefnydd
yr unigolyn neu'r corff y cyfeiriwyd hwy atynt yn unig.

From: Sion Buckler
To: HER (her@heneb.org.uk)
Date: 10 October 2026, 19:14 UTC
Subject: RE: Great House Farm, Llandough, Cardiff

HER Officer,

Great House Farm, Llandough — your letter of 6 October 2026, request of 8 September 2026 (GGAT02038s)

Thank you. I note that you point to Archwilio record 02038s and that you will reply separately on the 19 September 2026 email.

The 8 September request asked for the HER source file, not only the online summary. Archwilio 02038s does not supply:
1. the complete entry text on armour or medieval ironwork found under the rear wing or floor about 1880, with every source code;
2. a copy or transcript of the RCAHMW / Suggett 1988 material on the file;
3. any museum accession, letter, or catalogue slip naming where the ironwork went;
4. any recorded distinction between the c.1880 rear-wing ironwork, the 1979 villa iron south of the church, and the 1994 cemetery iron girdle (Burial 631).

Please give the record location before any viewing is discussed: series, accession, box, shelf, and catalogue id for the source file behind 02038s, and whether staff physically checked that the item is there (who, date, store). I am not requesting a screen-room viewing.

If any of the four items is not held, please name the systems searched and whether the physical source file was retrieved (EIR reg.5 and reg.9; reg.14 if you refuse).

Please also give a date for the separate reply on the 19 September email. The 8 September request was answered on day 20. An extension of the 19 September points should be notified if you need beyond 20 working days from 6 October.

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber/Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

From: Sion Buckler
To: enquiries@ggat.org.uk, her@heneb.org.uk (cc cadw@tfw.wales, nmr.wales@rcahmw.gov.uk)
Date: 24 September 2026, 15:05 UTC
Subject: FOI "Llandough Roman villa & medieval house finds were destroyed in a 1983 fire"
Attachments: 3290.jpg; 3293.jpg

Dear Heneb: The Trust for Welsh Archaeology,

I am writing to request access to recorded information concerning the March 1983 fire at the former Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust (GGAT) warehouse in Swansea, particularly the reported destruction of archaeological finds, excavation records and photographic material from Llandough, together with records concerning the subsequent custody, preservation, transfer and integrity of archaeological records relating to Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough.

I recognise that Heneb is an independent private company limited by guarantee and registered charity rather than a body ordinarily subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

However, Heneb now maintains the statutory Historic Environment Records for Wales on behalf of the Welsh Ministers. Sections 194 and 195 of the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 require the Welsh Ministers to maintain publicly accessible Historic Environment Records, including information concerning archaeological investigations and their findings.

I therefore ask that this request be considered under any applicable statutory information-access regime, including the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 insofar as Heneb considers that it falls within their scope.

If Heneb considers that the EIR do not apply to any or all of the information requested, please state that expressly and identify the legal basis for that position. I would nevertheless be grateful if Heneb would consider the request voluntarily as an information-access request, particularly where the information forms part of, or supports, the statutory Historic Environment Record or associated archaeological archive maintained on behalf of the Welsh Ministers.

I have copied Cadw and the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales because the request concerns the statutory HER system and records said to have been transferred or accessioned into the National Monuments Record of Wales.

The request is for existing recorded information only. I am not asking Heneb to create a new report or undertake fresh archaeological interpretation.

Purpose and evidential context

This request arises from a wider forensic examination of the surviving documentary record concerning Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough.

Two companion forensic critiques, dated 21 September 2026, have been prepared concerning respectively Cadw and GGAT/Heneb. They are not presented as proof of dishonesty, bad faith, corruption or deliberate destruction. Rather, they identify a series of documentary gaps, inconsistent records and questions which cannot properly be resolved without access to the underlying primary records.

In particular, the GGAT critique identifies questions concerning the Trust's historical roles as archaeological adviser, contractor, investigator, curator and record-holder, and concerning the provenance and subsequent custody of the 1990 Great House Farm assessment and associated material.

The purpose of this request is therefore to establish, from the records themselves, what material existed, what was lost, what survived, where it was held, when it was transferred, and whether the present HER and archive accurately represent the historical record.

The two distinct archaeological areas at Llandough

For the avoidance of doubt, I ask that the following be treated as separate investigations.

1. Llandough Farm / Roman villa area south of St Dochdwy's church

GGAT undertook excavation in this area in 1978–79, with the HER identifying event GGATE001109 as "Llandough Farm". The associated site record concerns an Iron Age/Roman villa complex with later early-medieval burial activity.

2. Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr) area north of St Dochdwy's church

GGAT undertook an archaeological assessment/evaluation of Great House Farm in 1990, followed by the substantially larger Cotswold Archaeological Trust excavation in 1994.

These should not be conflated in the records or in any response to this request.

Part A — March 1983 warehouse fire

I have identified contemporaneous newspaper reports concerning the March 1983 fire at the GGAT Swansea warehouse.

Those reports state that substantial quantities of archaeological material were destroyed and specifically identify finds from Llandough among the losses. They also report the destruction of a photographic studio/darkroom and a substantial quantity of photographic material.

I therefore request:

1. Any surviving inventory, catalogue, accession register, storage list, box list, find list, archive schedule or other contemporaneous record identifying archaeological material held at the Swansea warehouse immediately before the fire.

2. Any surviving inventory, assessment or other record identifying material from the 1978–79 Llandough Farm excavation which was destroyed, lost, damaged or rendered unrecoverable in the fire.

3. Any records identifying Llandough photographic material lost in the fire, including, where recorded:

- original negatives;
- contact sheets;
- prints;
- transparencies/slides;
- photographic registers or catalogues;
- site photography logs; and
- duplicate or working copies.

4. Any post-fire salvage, recovery, reconciliation or damage-assessment records concerning archaeological material or photographic material recovered from the warehouse.

5. Any insurance claim, loss schedule, valuation, stock reconciliation, internal audit, board/minute record, memorandum or other contemporaneous document assessing the scale or nature of the archaeological and photographic losses.

6. Any correspondence concerning the fire or its archaeological losses with Cadw/Welsh Historic Monuments, the Welsh Office/Welsh Government, Amgueddfa Cymru/National Museum Wales, RCAHMW, local authorities, funding bodies, insurers, fire authorities or other archaeological organisations.

7. Any GGAT annual report, internal report, memorandum or other record discussing the fire, the losses, salvage, replacement of records, reconstruction of catalogues or subsequent archive-management arrangements.

Part B — What survived from the 1978–79 Llandough excavation

8. Any surviving GGAT records showing what material from the Llandough Farm excavation survived the 1983 fire, including finds, site records, plans, drawings, photographs, notebooks, context records, catalogues, reports and publication material.

9. Any surviving records showing where surviving Llandough material was subsequently stored, transferred, deposited or otherwise held.

10. Any transfer, accession or deposit records identifying material from the Llandough excavation now held by Heneb, Amgueddfa Cymru/National Museum Wales, RCAHMW, the Archaeology Data Service or another repository.

11. If Heneb no longer holds material formerly held by GGAT from this excavation, please provide any recorded information showing when and how that material ceased to be held by GGAT or its successor organisations.

Part C — Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr): the 1990 GGAT assessment

12. Any records showing the complete archival history and custody of the GGAT 1990 archaeological assessment of Great House Farm, including the report associated with HER record GGAT02038s.

13. Please provide any surviving records showing:

- the date on which the assessment was completed;
- the date on which it was received or entered into GGAT records;
- its original file or archive reference;
- where the original and working copies were held;
- any subsequent movement between GGAT offices, stores or repositories;
- any transfer or deposit to RCAHMW/the National Monuments Record of Wales;
- the date and reference of any such accession; and
- the identity and present location of associated archive material.

I understand that the 1990 assessment was accessioned into the National Monuments Record of Wales on 20 March 2019.

Please confirm whether that date is correct and provide the underlying accession, transfer, deposit or cataloguing record.

14. If the assessment was not accessioned into the National Monuments Record until 2019, please provide any recorded information showing where the assessment and associated archive material were held between completion of the assessment and that accession.

15. Please provide any surviving pre-1990 or 1990 GGAT material relating to Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr, including correspondence, field notes, photographs, plans, drawings, draft reports, site notebooks, assessment notes and archaeological planning correspondence.

16. Please specifically provide any surviving material corresponding to, or identified as, Appendix B and Appendix E of the 1990 GGAT assessment, together with any records showing whether either appendix has been lost, separated from the principal report, transferred elsewhere, superseded, or otherwise disposed of.

17. Any records concerning the preparation, internal review, approval, issue and circulation of the 1990 assessment and its appendices.

18. Any records concerning the commissioning, procurement, quotation, specification, fee, contract, invoice or other administrative arrangements under which GGAT undertook the 1990 Great House Farm assessment.

19. Any records showing what information supplied by GGAT about Great House Farm was entered into, amended within, cross-referenced within, or omitted from the then South Glamorgan/West Glamorgan Sites and Monuments Record.

20. Any audit trail, change history, correction record or equivalent metadata showing subsequent amendments to the relevant HER records and references for Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr.

Part D — Relationship between the 1990 assessment and the 1994 excavation

21. Any records showing what information or archive material from the 1990 GGAT assessment was supplied to, transferred to, or made available to Cotswold Archaeological Trust in connection with the 1994 excavation.

22. Any correspondence between GGAT and Cotswold Archaeological Trust concerning the archaeological potential, results, interpretation, extent or recording of the Great House Farm site.

23. Any records showing whether the 1990 GGAT trench plan, archaeological potential map, appendices or conclusions were used to determine the location, extent or methodology of the 1994 excavation.

24. Any records identifying any material change between GGAT's 1990 assessment and the findings of the 1994 excavation, including any contemporary acknowledgment within GGAT's records that the 1994 findings differed materially from the conclusions or zoning of the 1990 assessment.

Part E — The 1994 Cotswold Archaeological Trust excavation archive

25. Any records held by Heneb concerning the surviving archive of the 1994 Great House Farm excavation, including information on where the archive was deposited or transferred.

26. Any records showing the date, destination and scope of any transfer or deposit of the 1994 excavation archive, including:

- finds;
- human-remains records;
- context sheets;
- plans and drawings;
- photographs;
- catalogues;
- databases; and
- specialist reports.

27. The published excavation record states that 1,026 inhumation burials were examined, whereas the current Heneb HER record states 858 inhumations.

Please provide any records held by Heneb which explain the difference between these figures, including whether they represent different stages of excavation, different archaeological categories, different counting methodologies, or subsequent correction or revision of the HER.

28. Any records showing whether material from the 1994 excavation remains with Heneb/GGAT, Cotswold Archaeology, Amgueddfa Cymru/National Museum Wales, RCAHMW, the Archaeology Data Service or another repository.

29. I understand that archive material relating to the 1994 excavation was deposited in or around 2014. Please confirm whether this is correct and, if so, provide the relevant accession/deposit information and identify the repository concerned.

Part F — Archive management following the 1983 fire

30. Any records concerning the archive-management arrangements implemented by GGAT following the 1983 fire for the preservation, cataloguing, duplication, storage and eventual deposition of excavation archives, photographs and associated records.

31. Any records showing whether records affected by the fire were reconstructed, recreated, copied, replaced or otherwise restored, and which archaeological projects were affected by any such work.

32. Any records concerning subsequent reviews of the completeness of excavation archives affected by the fire.

33. Any retention schedules, disposal schedules, archive policies, accession procedures or records-management guidance used by GGAT during the relevant period which governed the retention or disposal of archaeological project records and photographs.

Part G — Present completeness and custody of the archaeological record

34. Any surviving GGAT/Heneb records identifying missing, lost, destroyed, separated or otherwise unaccounted-for archive components relating to either the Llandough Farm excavation or Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr.

35. Any records showing whether the 1978–79 Llandough excavation archive, the 1990 Great House Farm assessment and the 1994 Great House Farm excavation archive were ever cross-referenced, reconciled or treated as related archaeological records.

36. Any records identifying discrepancies between the historical GGAT records, the present Heneb HER, the National Monuments Record of Wales and the published archaeological reports concerning these sites.

Part H — Heneb's statutory HER role and custody of information

37. Please identify the legal and administrative basis on which Heneb maintains the relevant Historic Environment Record on behalf of the Welsh Ministers, including any agreement, contract, service specification, grant agreement, memorandum of understanding or other instrument governing that arrangement.

38. Does Heneb consider that information forming part of the statutory Historic Environment Record is held:

a. by Heneb in its own capacity;

b. by Heneb on behalf of the Welsh Ministers; or

c. on some other legal or administrative basis?

Please explain.

39. Where historical GGAT material now held by Heneb forms evidence supporting a statutory HER record, please identify whether the underlying source archive is regarded as part of the HER itself, associated reference material, or a separate archaeological archive.

40. If any of the information requested above is held by Heneb solely on behalf of the Welsh Ministers, please identify the relevant Welsh Government/Cadw body responsible for access to that information and the applicable access regime.

Searches and records no longer held

I appreciate that some historical records may no longer survive.

Where information requested above is no longer held, please state that clearly and, where recorded information exists concerning its destruction, disposal, transfer, loss or separation, please provide that information.

For each material category where the original record is no longer held, please provide any surviving record showing:

- when it ceased to be held;
- why it ceased to be held;
- whether it was destroyed, lost, transferred or otherwise disposed of;
- whether any replacement, copy or reconstruction was made; and
- the repository or organisation to which it was transferred, where applicable.

If Heneb's searches establish that a record formerly known to exist cannot now be located, please identify the relevant search terms, archive locations or record systems searched and the outcome of those searches, insofar as such information is itself recorded.

Where records have been transferred to another body, please identify that body together with any accession, archive or reference number known to Heneb.

Scope and cost

If Heneb considers that this request is too broad or that responding to it would exceed any applicable statutory cost limit, please identify the specific questions or categories causing the difficulty and advise how I can narrow the request while retaining the central questions concerning:

1. the scale and nature of the archaeological and photographic losses in the March 1983 warehouse fire;
2. what material from the 1978–79 Llandough excavation survived;
3. the complete custody history of the 1990 Great House Farm assessment and its appendices;
4. the relationship between that assessment and the 1994 excavation;
5. the whereabouts and completeness of the 1994 excavation archive; and
6. the present accuracy and provenance of the relevant HER records.

If some information is already publicly available or is held by another body, please identify the relevant repository and, where possible, provide the relevant archive, accession or catalogue reference rather than simply directing me to the organisation generally.

This request is made in the public interest and is intended to establish the documentary record. It should not be read as an allegation that any individual or institution acted dishonestly, in bad faith, corruptly, or deliberately destroyed or concealed evidence.

I would be grateful for confirmation of receipt and for the request to be dealt with under the appropriate applicable information-access regime.

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)

Royal Signals Cyber/ Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

Note: No Heneb reply to this request is in the mailbox as of 13 October 2026.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk (cc Coventry.Office@landregistry.gov.uk; bcc incl. Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk and other bodies)
Date: 27 September 2026, 04:12 UTC
Subject: Great House Farm, Llandough

Sirs/ Ma'ams,

I need to correct a date I have used in earlier correspondence about Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough, titles WA231076 and WA240304.

I had treated 1983 as the year the two titles were merged. That was wrong. HM Land Registry’s own letter of 23 March 2026 (Lisa Griffiths, ref N610CGV) separates the two acts.
1982–83 was first registration of two live titles, not a merger.
30 November 1982: application to first-register WA231076. The Court of Appeal later treated BP Properties Ltd as registered proprietors of “the farm” from November 1982.
23 February 1983: application to first-register a second title, WA240304.
26 March 1983: Mary Williams died. On the family’s case, notice of those applications did not reach us until after her death, while the family was in mourning. She had no window in which to object. The family was not in a position to use any window that arrived after that.
Those two titles remained separate through first instance.
24 July 1986: Hollis J. Both titles were still live. The judgment language treats Great House Farm as one holding. It had not been one holding on the register. On the family’s case it had not been one holding since the 1877 split: Parcel A (house, buildings, garden/yard and about 10 acres, the Thomas/Williams line) and Parcel B (the eastern fields retained by Bute and later WGR/BP).
2 February 1987: application to amalgamate the two titles. WA240304 was then closed and registration continued under WA231076. That is the merge. It was made after the 1986 ruling and before the Court of Appeal gave judgment on 31 July 1987.
So 1983 is silent first registration of a second title while Mary was still in Parcel A, or had only just died. 1987 is the administrative merger, carried out while the appeal was still open.
This was not a dispute about a single land parcel that BP already owned. Mary was on Parcel A, which the family says she owned, with occupation on that house parcel running in the family from at least 1667. BP, and WGR before it from 1949, were the neighbouring interest on Parcel B. From 1949 onwards the family’s case is that those neighbours ran a decades-long series of tenancy offers, “whole farm” wording, possession orders and the 1974 letters to make her occupation of her own parcel look permissive, and to make both parcels look like one estate they had acquired. They never produced a conveyance of Parcel A. What they had was an unfounded claim that her occupancy was permissive.
Please treat any earlier letter from me that said the titles merged in 1983 as corrected by this email. The dates that matter are:
1982/83 — first registration of two titles, without the occupier being heard;
24 July 1986 — first-instance judgment describing one farm while two titles still stood;
2 February 1987 — amalgamation, before the appeal ended;
31 July 1987 — Court of Appeal.
Yours faithfully,

Sion Buckler
Refs where relevant: N610CGV; 260919-6726246; titles WA231076 and WA240304.
Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com

Note: Multi-recipient correction; Heneb received it by blind copy. Replies from other bodies in this thread are catalogued on their own pages.

From: Barbara Rees (Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk) — automatic reply
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 27 September 2026, 04:15 UTC
Subject: Automatic reply: Great House Farm, Llandough

My next working day is Wednesday, 30th September.

Diolch.

From: Sion Buckler
To: hello@heneb.org.uk, her@heneb.org.uk (cc Barbara.Rees@heneb.org.uk)
Date: 27 September 2026, 04:15 UTC
Subject: Formal complaint — GGAT / Heneb: Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — HER identifiers and the 1978–1995 record

Chief Executive / Complaints Officer,

This is a formal complaint to Heneb: The Trust for Welsh Archaeology, as operational successor to the Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust, and to Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Limited (The), company 01276976, which remains an active company with its registered office at Heneb's address.

It concerns Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan (near Penarth / Cardiff); ST 1681 7331; NPRN 20182. Cadw and RCAHMW have supplied three unreconciled HER references for the same site: GGAT02038s, GGAT03586s and GGATE003872.

This is not a chaser of my records request of 8 September 2026 or the schedule of 19 September (ref GHF/HENEB/2026-09-20). That request remains open and is due a response by 6 October. Please treat this complaint as a separate file and give it a complaint reference.

What this is not. It is not an allegation that GGAT demolished the house, advised that it be demolished, or decided that it should not be listed. It is not an allegation of dishonesty, bad faith or criminal conduct. It is not a title claim and I do not ask you to adjudicate BP v Buckler. GGAT's letters of 13 and 15 December 1993, recommending a Breach of Condition Notice when Condition 18 had not been met, were the Trust doing its curatorial job. That is recorded here so it is not lost in what follows.

The charge, put narrowly. GGAT was the public curator of the regional record; the adviser who told the planning authority it could not determine 89/01396/OUT without an archaeological assessment; the body which, in the same document, specified machine-trench evaluation, quoted £2,000 and two weeks, and recorded that it was already negotiating that work with BP Properties; the contractor who then executed that evaluation on a churchside monastic site its own 1978–80 excavations and its own 1982 letter had already flagged; and the author of a zoning map which treated as empty ground in which, four years later, inhumations were found a few centimetres below the topsoil. Disclosure of the dual role was not management of it. The public record still does not reliably carry what was found. Heneb's entire substantive reply since May is one sentence about corporate form.

I enclose GGAT — Forensic Critique, Version 4.0.0 (21 September 2026). It distinguishes established fact, reasonable inference, what cannot be established, and facts that cut against the criticism. Where earlier versions were wrong, the corrections are printed and kept. The critique is the sourcing. This letter is the complaint. Please answer the letter. Treat the critique as the schedule of sources, not as a substitute for numbered answers.

1. I have not seen the HER

I do not assert the wording of GGAT02038s, because I have not been allowed to read it. Cadw has said the content of the HER is managed by Heneb. RCAHMW and Cadw have given three different identifiers for the same site. Tests of Archwilio on 20 September 2026 did not return an error for unresolved records. They returned a different record, from a different trust, for a different site, with no warning:

GGAT02038s → GAT46242 (Gwynedd desk-based assessment)
GGAT03586s → GAT92911 (farmstead, Warwick Place, Gwynedd)
GGAT02038s, alternative path, three attempts → E001657 each time

A control query for an indexed record returned correctly. Please test those three queries, correct the substitution if confirmed, and tell me the outcome. Then permit inspection of the source file and supply an index of every linked site and event record with its correct reference.

2. "Partially recorded" is RCAHMW's phrase, not a finding I have verified on the HER

On 10 June 2026 Dr Adam Coward quoted NMR 6048945: "The house remained partially recorded because of problems created by an ownership dispute. The house and farm buildings were suddenly and completely destroyed by B. P. Properties Ltd. on 6th December 1988 amid considerable local controversy."

That is the Royal Commission's file. I hold H. J. Thomas's measured ground-floor plan of 26 April 1974, at 1:100, identifying the principal rooms including the Dairy and recording the beams. GGAT reproduced that plan as Figure 2 of its 1990 assessment, by kind permission. A measured ground-floor survey that could not reach the first floor and roof is not, without more, a failed survey.

Please state, from records you hold:
(a) whether the HER uses the phrase "partially recorded", and if so from which source;
(b) what parts of the building the 1974 survey measured, and what it did not;
(c) what contemporaneous document, if any beyond NMR 6048945, establishes that access was restricted by the ownership dispute, by whom, on what date, and to whom;
(d) whether Trench 7 of 1990 (north-east corner / former dairy, stone floor, mortared partition) was ever reconciled against the 1974 plan, and if the Trench 7 drawings, photographs and grid survive.

3. What GGAT held in 1988, and what it did not do

On 1 October 1982 GGAT told the Vale that occupation might continue north of the church and that thorough investigative work should precede development. Between that letter and November 1988 no GGAT act concerning this site has been identified. RCAHMW added to its 1974 plan on 12 December 1988, six days after the demolition. There is no equivalent GGAT event. The 1990 report notes architectural features "observed in the rubble" and then begins GGAT's own account with the words "Following the demolition… GGAT entered into discussion with Debenham Tewson".

Please state what the SMR entry contained immediately before December 1988; whether the 1982 advice was on it; whether any emergency building record, watching brief on the demolition or the rubble, or post-demolition fabric report exists; and where the carved stone and other architectural material later referred to now is.

4. "County treasure"

GGAT 1989 §2.3: "At present our information on the Great House Farm area is limited to the records of the recently demolished property which was listed as a 'county treasure'." The phrase conferred no statutory protection. Identify the list or card, the date, the criteria, and what information about the building accompanied it. If you do not hold that document, say so.

5. Specify, price, bid, execute

In one 1989 consultee report GGAT advised that 89/01396/OUT should not be determined without an assessment; specified machine-excavator trial trenching; quoted two weeks at £2,000; and recorded that negotiations with BP Properties via Debenham Tewson were already under way. BP then commissioned GGAT. The 1990 report disclosed a "dual role" and invited either party to go elsewhere. Disclosure is recorded. It is not the same as management.

The IFA Code of approved practice for contractual arrangements was adopted on 17 September 1990, after the assessment was delivered. It does not bind that commission. The Welsh Archaeological Trusts' Code of Practice dates from November 1997 and is not applied retrospectively. What did bind the 1989–90 arrangement, as contemporaneous standards rather than as a pleaded cause of action: the IFA Code of Conduct in force from June 1985; the BADLG Code, which GGAT expressly endorsed in the 1989 report; section 13 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 as the implied standard of care between GGAT and BP (the family was not a party); and the fiduciary duty of charity trustees to identify and manage conflicts, not merely to notify two commercial counterparties.

On 18 May 1994 GGAT's Curatorial Section wrote, of another contractor: "An archaeological contractor should never be in the position of writing his own Brief as well as carrying out the work." That principle was not met by GGAT's own 1989–90 arrangement.

Please identify who wrote the 1989 recommendation, who accepted the commission, whether those functions were separated, whether trustees or Cadw were told, and who wrote the 1990 brief. If you hold Appendix "B" to the officer's report (GGAT's further comments of 8 February 1990), Appendix "D" (the representation from a County Councillor identified as a member of GGAT), or Appendix "E" (the applicant's agents' written response to GGAT's report), produce them. None of those three is in the planning file released in 2026. Appendix "A" is. I do not assert that GGAT removed them. I ask whether copies survive in GGAT/Heneb files.

6. The 1990 method against GGAT's own model

GGAT had excavated an early-medieval cemetery, a Roman villa and a Tewkesbury Abbey grange immediately south of the same church, on the same alkaline Liassic geology, and had written that occupation might continue north of it. It chose eight machine-cut trenches, some placed "at random", and then rated uninvestigated eastern ground "non existent to low" potential. That rating converted a logistical limit into an empirical claim. Cotswold's December 1994 preliminary report recorded that burials continued into that zone and "lay only a few centimetres below the topsoil".

I do not say a 1990 evaluation had to predict 1,026 burials. I ask whether the method was capable of detecting shallow inhumations on ground where GGAT's own experience predicted excellent bone survival, and whether the 1990 evaluation has ever been reviewed against the 1994 results. If it has not, will Heneb review it now.

7. Human remains and the 1981 Act

GGAT identified the Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 and found disarticulated human bone by the churchyard wall. That Act turns on whether the land is a burial ground. A colour-coded potential map cannot answer it. What legal advice was obtained, when, and from whom? What evidence set the burial-ground boundary? Was a review undertaken after 1994?

8. Two burial figures, both correct

Cotswold's December 1994 preliminary report, §4.2: 858 inhumations and 152 disarticulated bone groups. Holbrook and Thomas, Medieval Archaeology 49 (2005): 1,026 burials comprising 814 articulated inhumations and 212 disarticulated bone groups, of which 801 skeletons received full osteological analysis; "by far the largest Early-medieval burial population so far recovered from Wales". They are the same excavation counted twice. Please confirm which figure the HER now carries, and that both stages are identified as such.

9. The c.1880 ironwork sentence, and what Amgueddfa Cymru now holds

GGAT 1990: "it is likely that some medieval ironwork which is held by the National Museum of Wales was discovered under the rear wing c 1880 (RCAHMW 1988)." By 2005 that hedged sentence had become flat assertion in print.

Amgueddfa Cymru's disclosures of 25 August 2026 (FOI 2026-024 and internal review 22 September 2026) and 22 September 2026 (FOI 2026-032) establish the following, so far as the Museum holds recorded information:

(a) No accession, donation, transfer or deposit answering a visor, lance, helmet, armour, soldier, horse, or nineteenth-century discovery under the farmhouse floor.
(b) Accession 82.44H is the 1979 GGAT excavation assemblage. Collected by Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd, 1979; donated 14 June 1982 by Wales & West Housing Association Ltd; bibliographic reference Owen-John
1988. The collections database locality field is "Llandough Roman Villa", NGR ST 168 733 — not "Great House Farm".
(c) Accession 95.56H is the 1994 Cotswold Archaeological Trust cemetery assemblage. Collected by CAT, 1994; donated 28 July 1994 by Ideal Homes Wales Ltd. Locality field: "Great House Farm Llandough", NGR ST 1681 7331. Period on the human-remains entries: Early Medieval (c.400–c.1070).
(d) Accession 63.24 is objects stated to have been found at Church Farm, Llandough, in 1858. The Museum's explanatory note of 22 September 2026 records that this is the only paperwork on that file, and that staff consider it possible those objects are the basis of the later local story. That is the Museum's observation, not a finding I ask you to adopt as fact.

Qualify or withdraw the 1880 sentence if you hold no source beyond the 1990 wording. Carry 82.44H and 95.56H on the principal HER description, with collector, donor, donation date, locality field as catalogued, and NGR. If the HER still points a professional user first to a post-medieval dwelling, that is a record defect against what both excavations produced and what the national museum now catalogues.

Please also confirm whether GGAT retained copies of the 1980 donation correspondence with the National Museum (letters of 14 and 24 April 1980 are on the public record) and of any transfer file for 82.44H.

10. What the public record must now say

If GGAT02038s, or its successor identifier, still leads as a post-medieval farm or dwelling, it does not satisfy the function of a working historic environment record, and it is difficult to reconcile with section 194(2)(j) of the Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023. I have not seen the source file, so I put that as a request for correction if the classification is as described by Cadw officers, not as a finding I have verified on the face of the record.

A professional user needs, in the principal description and not only in a later narrative paragraph: the 1974 measured survey; GGAT's 1978–80 work and 1982 advice; that the 1990 evaluation followed demolition and found human bone; that the 1994 excavation recovered the assemblage above, including in the 1990 low-potential zone; museum accessions 82.44H and
95.56H with their catalogued localities; and a note that the c.1880 NMW ironwork attribution is uncorroborated by the institution said to hold the object.

Please also reconcile the NGRs in use for the farmhouse, the 1990 trenches, the 1994 excavation, the churchyard and the development parcels. Distinguish this site from Great House Farm, Llandough near Cowbridge, and from Llandow. Two Llandoughs sit in the same historic county. Homonym error is a live records risk.

What I ask now

A. A complaint reference, the name of the person who will determine it, the procedure you will apply, the timescale, and any independent review route. Preserve all surviving Great House Farm records pending that determination.

B. Confirm which legal entity holds the records and functions formerly of GGAT Ltd, and who handles HER corrections.

C. Answer sections 1 to 10 from the documents you hold. Where a document does not survive, say when it left the file, under what retention rule, and by whose authority.

D. Correct the HER so that the 1979 and 1994 investigations and accessions
82.44H and 95.56H sit in the principal description, the 1880 attribution is qualified, the 1990 low-potential zone is annotated against the 1994 result, the three identifiers are reconciled, and Archwilio does not silently substitute another trust's site.

E. Test and, if confirmed, correct the Archwilio substitution.

F. If you accept any part of this complaint, say what remedy you offer:
record correction, release of surviving files or an index, a written account of the 1989–90 dual-role arrangement, and a methodological note on the 1990 evaluation against the 1994 excavation.

I do not ask you to adjudicate title. I do ask you to account for what GGAT knew, what it recorded, what it advised, what it then sold and executed, what was found four years later, what the national museum now catalogues from GGAT's own 1979 work, and whether the public record now tells the truth of that sequence.

This letter is sent so that Heneb and GGAT Ltd have a fair opportunity to investigate, answer, and offer remedy before any further process. Please answer each numbered section. A general assurance that the organisation acted appropriately will not do.

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber/Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member hywelapbuckler@gmail.com

Please visit
greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com

Enc: GGAT — Forensic Critique, Version 4.0.0, 21 September 2026 (to be attached before sending)

From: Steven Foulston, HR Manager, Heneb (Steven.Foulston@heneb.org.uk)
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 29 September 2026, 12:31 UTC
Subject: Formal complaint — GGAT / Heneb: Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — HER identifiers and the 1978–1995 record

Dear Mr Buckler,

I acknowledge receipt of your formal complaint dated 27 September 2026.

I have been appointed as the investigating officer in this matter.

I aim to respond to you within five weeks. If that is not possible I will provide you with an update on the timeframe.

Best regards

Steven Foulston
Heneb

Steven Foulston FCIPD
Rheolwr Adnoddau Dynol| HR Manager
07837252366
Steven.Foulston@Heneb.org.uk
www.heneb.org.uk

Ymddiriedolaeth Archaeoleg Cymru | The Trust for Welsh Archaeology
Cadeirydd | Chair: Dr Carol Bell PSG | CEO: Richard Nicholls

Mae Heneb yn Sefydliad Cofrestredig gyda’r Chartered Institute for Archaeologists
Heneb is a Registered Organisation with the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

Swyddfa Gofrestrig: Ty Cornel, 6 Stryd Caerfyrddin, Llandeilo, Sir Gaerfyrddin, SA19 6AE
Registered Office: Corner House, 6 Carmarthen Street, Llandeilo, Carmarthenshire, SA19 6AE

Privacy Policy - Heneb

From: Sion Buckler
To: Steven.Foulston@heneb.org.uk
Date: 30 September 2026, 12:56 UTC
Subject: [3] Re: Formal complaint — GGAT / Heneb: Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — HER identifiers and the 1978–1995 record
Attachments: GGAT-Forensic-Review-v4.0.3.pdf

Mr Foulston,

Thank you for acknowledging the complaint of 27 September 2026 and for confirming you are the investigating officer. I note the five-week target.

Please treat this email as a supplement to that complaint. The attached is my report of GGATs involvement to the extent I know and a current consolidated account of GGAT’s role as curator, advisor, contractor and record-holder at Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough, and of the record now held by Heneb.

Attachment
GGAT — Forensic Critique, Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough, Version 4.0.3 (Final), 30 September 2026.

My AI agent generated report based on the info I hold thus far, does attempt to distinguish established facts, reasonable inferences, matters that cannot be established, and facts that cut against the criticism. I took care not to allege dishonesty, bad faith or criminal conduct by named officers. It records nine defects: the standing building; the 1982–1988 SMR gap; an evaluation method mismatched to GGAT’s own predictive model; specify-price-bid-execute on the same application; a missing representation from a County Councillor identified as a member of GGAT; access converted into a “non-existent to low” zoning; failure to answer the Disused Burial Grounds question GGAT itself raised; a still-misclassified and inconsistently identified HER; and the absence, until your appointment, of any substantive institutional answer.

What I ask Heneb to do on this complaint

1. Give me a complaint reference and confirm the target date for a written response.

2. Confirm which legal entity now holds GGAT’s records for this site (Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust Limited, company 01276976 / charity 505609 / Heneb operationally).

3. Correct or formally review HER GGAT02038s, which remains classified as “POST MEDIEVAL – Farm” despite the 1994 cemetery and the 2005 publication of 1,026 burials as the largest early-medieval burial population then recovered in Wales.

4. Reconcile the HER identifiers already supplied to the family (including GGAT02038s, GGAT03586s and GGATE003872) and supply the source file, not a public summary.

5. Search and disclose, or certify as not held: file S387; the 1 October 1982 letter; the 1989 consultee report on 89/01396/OUT; the 8 February 1990 further comments (Appendix B to the officer’s report); the 1990 assessment archive; any emergency building record, watching brief or fabric report on the December 1988 demolition; and any conflicts register or trustee minute for the 1989–90 commission.

6. Address the nine criticisms in the attached report in writing.

Our family’s wider case, so the complaint is not read as a cataloguing dispute only

Separately from the archaeological record:

I believe there has been fraud, concealment and government involvement resulting in the dispossession of our home and land. The family has occupied and claimed Great House Farm since at least 1667. In 1988, after BP Properties Ltd v Buckler, we were removed. The farmhouse was demolished on 6 December 1988. About twenty houses now stand on that ground. The narrative that followed treated us as peasant squatters evicted from an old farmhouse. That narrative is false.

In reconstructing the house as a Welsh heritage museum in Patagonia I found that our ownership of the house-and-garden parcel was never extinguished. The working case is two parcels: Parcel A (house and garden) belonging to Mary Williams; Parcel B treated as if it were the whole farm; a synthetic title built by decades of false assertion that occupation of Parcel A was permissive. Limitation is postponed if concealment is made out.

That title case is for the Land Registry, the courts and the other bodies already on notice. It is not for Heneb to adjudicate. It is why the archaeological record matters. The same ground GGAT evaluated as largely empty contained inhumations a few centimetres below the topsoil. RCAHMW’s own file records that the standing building remained partially recorded because of the ownership dispute, and was then destroyed.

Our family has suffered shame, dispossession, ostracisation, exile, reputational harm, and the loss of our ancestral home, land and an incompletely recorded building. There were, on our case, serious human-rights failures in how that was done too. Such as my pregnant mum being thrown over the gateway of our property into a puddle, which is why she is in a sling with a dislocated collar bone on ITV News Wales footage afterwards. She was trying to get medicine for my father who lay in hospital after a heart attack. I watched helpless, as a child, while our home was demolished in front of us.

I am giving each institution that held a public function over this site the opportunity to remedy what it accepts. For Heneb that means putting the record right, producing what it holds, and saying plainly where GGAT’s 1978–1995 conduct and the present HER fail the standards that applied then and apply now. Remedy from Heneb is correction of the record, disclosure, and an accountable written position — not a finding on title.

Please confirm receipt of the attached report and that it forms part of the complaint file you are investigating.

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber and Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

From: Steven Foulston, Heneb (Steven.Foulston@heneb.org.uk)
To: Sion Buckler
Date: 30 September 2026, 13:53 UTC
Subject: RE: [3] Re: Formal complaint — GGAT / Heneb: Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — HER identifiers and the 1978–1995 record

Dear Mr Buckler, I acknowledge receipt of your supplementary information.

Best regards

Steven Foulston

From: Sion Buckler
To: Linklaters, Blake Morgan, Darwin Gray, Cotswold Archaeology, BP Archive, Amgueddfa Cymru FOI, Cardiff County Court, Parliamentary Archives (cc incl. enquiries@ggat.org.uk and some 40 other recipients)
Date: 28 September 2026, 21:39 UTC
Subject: Preservation notice — Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — do not destroy records — Matter of public interest

*FORMAL PRESERVATION NOTICE*
*Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough-juxta-Penarth*
*Titles: WA231076, WA240304, WA513690 and WA735527*
*Planning references: 89/01396/OUT and 92/00671/RES*

*URL: **greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com
<http://greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com>*

*To each recipient separately, in your own capacity as a current or potential holder, custodian or controller of relevant records:*

This notice is addressed to each recipient *individually*. It is *not a joint request*, and it does not ask any recipient to speak for, investigate on behalf of, or answer in place of any other person or organisation. Each recipient is asked to respond only in respect of records within that recipient's own possession, custody or control, including records inherited from a predecessor organisation or retained on its behalf.
1. Nature and purpose of this notice

This is a *formal preservation notice* concerning documentary material relating to Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough-juxta-Penarth, adjoining St Dochdwy's, and the subsequent development of the site, including the area now associated with Church View Close.

It is *not a claim form, is not service of proceedings, and is not intended to constitute or replace any FOI request, internal review, complaint, subject-access request or other statutory process already made to any recipient.*

The purpose of this notice is to require the preservation of potentially relevant material while the documentary history, title chain, registration history, planning history, possession proceedings, demolition and subsequent development are being reconstructed.

A separate first-stage preservation notice has been issued or is being issued to Cadw / Welsh Government FOI, HM Land Registry Wales Office and DPO, Heneb / GGAT HER, RCAHMW, Vale of Glamorgan FOI Unit and DPO, Glamorgan Archives, South Wales Police FOI, The National Archives, the Wales Office FOI team, and the National Library of Wales. Persimmon Homes (Wales) Ltd has received a separate preservation letter.

*You are receiving this notice separately because the published documentary record places you, or a predecessor whose records may remain in your custody or control, within the documentary, legal, professional, administrative or development chain concerning this land.*
2. Land and documentary scope

Please preserve, and do not destroy, alter, overwrite, discard, transfer out of custody without a recorded handover, or otherwise dispose of, any record within your possession, custody or control relating to the land or matters identified below.

The scope includes, without limitation, *originals, copies, working papers, drafts, annotations, plans, photographs, negatives, films, tapes, maps, registers, indexes, correspondence, emails and attachments, electronic files, archived mailboxes, databases, metadata, internal notes, meeting records, instructions, client or matter files, survey material and other associated records.*

The material requested includes:

*1. Historical ownership, occupation and conveyancing*

The 1877 split; the 1916 and 1939 tenancies; the 1938 Bute to Western Ground Rents conveyance; the 1969 Western Ground Rents to BP Pension Trust conveyance; and any plans, schedules, abstracts, searches, correspondence or other documents relied upon in relation to those transactions.

*2. Possession proceedings and subsequent litigation*

The 1955 High Court and 1962 Cardiff County Court possession orders; the 1974 proceedings; *BP Properties Ltd v Buckler [1987] EWCA Civ 2*; House of Lords leave papers, including *YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536*; and *Buckler v United Kingdom (1989)*, including associated correspondence, instructions, evidence, plans and working papers.

*3. Land registration*

The first registration of *WA231076*, including the application dated 30 November 1982; the first registration of *WA240304*, including the application dated 23 February 1983; subsequent amalgamation, transfer or closure; and every plan, conveyance, abstract, search, application, correspondence trail or professional file relied upon in connection with those registrations or changes.

*4. 1988 possession and demolition*

The taking of possession on or about *29 November 1988* and the demolition commenced on or about *6 December 1988*, including any planning, listed-building, heritage, police, enforcement, media, contractor, survey, photographic or inter-agency liaison material.

*5. Planning and subsequent development, 1989–1996*

Planning application *89/01396/OUT*; reserved matters application
*92/00671/RES*; conditions 16–18; GGAT / Cotswold Archaeology material; records concerning any *section 52, section 106, planning obligation, local land charge or equivalent instrument*; and the transfer from BP to Ideal Homes dated *3 December 1993*, together with all associated plans, correspondence, approvals, agreements, searches and completion material.

*6. Family records*

Records concerning *Mary Doreen Williams (died 1983)* and *William Buckler*, insofar as those records relate to Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, the land described above, its occupation, ownership, possession, disposal, registration, development or demolition.
3. Predecessor and inherited files

Where you hold, or may hold, a file originating with a predecessor, successor, merged practice, affiliated practice, client or other entity, that material is also within scope.

This includes, without limitation, records originating from:

*Loosemores of Cardiff; Robbins Olivey & Blake Lapthorn / Blake Morgan; Linklaters & Paines; Debenham Tewson / DTZ / Cushman & Wakefield; Wyn Thomas + Partners; Ideal Homes Wales; BP Properties; BP Pension Trust; Cotswold Archaeological Trust; Cardiff Bay Development Corporation; and South Glamorgan County Council.*

The reference to a predecessor file does not assert that you necessarily hold such a file. It identifies material for which a reasonable custody or succession inquiry should be made where applicable.
4. Preservation steps

Please take reasonable steps to prevent the routine destruction, deletion, alteration or overwriting of potentially relevant material, including material held in *archived mailboxes, legacy systems, off-site storage, document-management systems, backup repositories and other electronic or physical stores*.

Where relevant material has been transferred to another repository, archive, successor organisation or third party, please preserve the information necessary to identify the transfer and its current location, including any accession, file, box, reference or custody details.

Nothing in this notice requires the creation of records that do not exist. The request concerns the preservation of records already held or controlled by you.
5. Purpose and legal position

This notice is *not a finding against any recipient*, and I am not asking any recipient to determine title or adjudicate the underlying dispute.

The *1987 Court of Appeal judgment* is relied upon here only for matters actually determined by that judgment, including the issues concerning possession, limitation and the October 1974 letters. This preservation notice does not treat that judgment as having determined the complete documentary root of title to the farmhouse parcel.

The underlying documentary history, including the relationship between the farmhouse parcel and the agricultural land subsequently dealt with through Western Ground Rents and BP, remains a matter requiring reconstruction from the primary records.

Accordingly, preservation is requested precisely so that the documentary record can be established from the records themselves rather than through assumptions based on later registration, later occupation, later planning treatment or secondary descriptions.
6. Acknowledgement and identification of records

Please acknowledge receipt of this notice and, in your own capacity, confirm:

*(a)* the officer, partner, records manager or other person responsible for implementing the preservation hold;

*(b)* what records within your possession, custody or control you have identified as falling within the scope above; and

*(c)* where you identify no records within scope, what relevant systems, files, repositories or predecessor records you searched in reaching that conclusion.

A substantive assessment of title is not requested from you. The immediate requirement is preservation and identification of the documentary material you hold.

The public documentary index and developing evidence record is available at:

*https://greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com/
<https://greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com/>*

Please monitor that site for subsequent identification of documents, references and specific schedules relevant to your organisation's records.

Where a reliable public email address is unavailable, a postal preservation notice will also be sent. For example, a postal notice will follow to
*Loosemores,
Alliance House, 18–19 High Street, Cardiff CF10 1PT*.

Nothing in this notice constitutes an abandonment, waiver or limitation of any claim, position or remedy concerning *title, registration, concealment, limitation, reopening, rectification or alteration of the register, or any associated matter.*

Regards,

*Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)*
*Royal Signals Cyber/Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member*

Note: Multi-recipient notice; GGAT's enquiries address was copied. Replies from other recipients are catalogued on their own pages.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Andy.Wigley@gov.wales, Freedom.ofinformation@gov.wales, Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk, dataprotection@landregistry.gov.uk, hello@heneb.org.uk, her@heneb.org.uk, nmr.wales@rcahmw.gov.uk, FoiUnit@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk, DPO@valeofglamorgan.gov.uk, Glamro@cardiff.gov.uk, information@south-wales.police.uk, FOIRequests@nationalarchives.gov.uk, walesofficefoi@ukgovwales.gov.uk, enquiry@library.wales
Date: 28 September 2026, 21:41 UTC
Subject: Preservation notice — Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough — do not destroy, transfer or dispose

To each recipient, in your own capacity as holder or likely holder of records. Please do not treat this as a joint reply. Answer only for your own holdings.

Sirs/Madam,

This is a preservation notice. It is not a claim form and not service of proceedings. It does not replace any FOI, review or subject access request already with you.

Land: Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr, Llandough-juxta-Penarth, adjoining St Dochdwy's. Titles WA231076, WA240304 (closed), WA513690, WA735527, and any related title. Planning refs 89/01396/OUT and 92/00671/RES.

Please preserve, and do not destroy, transfer out of your custody without a written receipt, or dispose of, any file, plan, photograph, tape or electronic record in your possession, custody or control relating to:

1. The 1877 split, the 1916 and 1939 tenancies, and the 1938 Bute to Western Ground Rents conveyance.
2. The 1955 and 1962 possession orders, the 1974 proceedings, and BP Properties Ltd v Buckler [1987] EWCA Civ 2.
3. First registration: WA231076 application 30 November 1982; WA240304 application 23 February 1983; later amalgamation.
4. The 1988 possession (29 November) and demolition (begun 6 December), including listing, planning, police and any liaison papers.
5. Mary Doreen Williams (died 26 March 1983) and William Buckler, so far as your file concerns this land.

Also preserve, if you hold them, the following planning and land-charge classes. Absence from a 2026 file disclosure is not proof they never existed:

6. Any section 52 Town and Country Planning Act 1971 agreement, later section 106 instrument, deed, undertaking or other agreement regulating the development or use of this land, and any corresponding local-land-charge entry.
7. The historic planning-register entries required by the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988 for 89/01396/OUT and 92/00671/RES (applications, reserved matters, plans and drawings, and decision information).
8. The officer's report annexes to 89/01396/OUT, including Appendix B (further GGAT comments after discussions with the Trust), and Appendices C–E.
9. The condition chain on 89/01396/OUT: conditions 16–18; the Council's October 1990 confirmation of condition 17; GGAT's July 1992 archaeological warning; the September 1992 reserved-matters approval; and the 1993–94 papers on whether condition 18 had been discharged.
10. Any preliminary environmental-assessment / screening determination for the outline application (site described as about 3.4 acres / 1.38 ha).
11. Any record of the statutory consultation route used because the land was, or was treated as, a site of archaeological interest / SMR entry under the 1988 Order.
12. The complete 92/00671/RES file, and any sale, option, conditional-contract or transfer paper on the planning files covering BP Properties to Ideal Homes Wales, including the recorded transfer of 3 December 1993.
13. The application-receipt record for 89/01396/OUT (form dated October 1989; reconstructed Council receipt 8 November 1989).

Please stop routine deletion, including archived mailboxes, for anything in that scope.

The public evidence index is https://greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com/ . The investigation distinguishes the farmhouse parcel from the eastern fields. The 1987 Court of Appeal decided possession, limitation and the October 1974 letters. It did not decide the documentary root of the farmhouse parcel. These records go to that question. This notice is not a finding against any of you.

Please acknowledge, name the officer responsible for the hold, and say what you hold in scope. If you hold nothing, say what you searched.

Nothing in this letter abandons any claim concerning title, registration, concealment, limitation, reopening or alteration of the register.

Yours faithfully,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals
hywelapbuckler@gmail.com

Note: First-stage preservation notice sent directly to Heneb's general and HER addresses. No Heneb acknowledgement is in the mailbox; replies from RCAHMW, the Wales Office and the National Library are catalogued on their own pages.