HM Land Registry — Email Correspondence Catalogue (Part 1)

From: Sion Buckler
To: customer.support@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 29 January 2026, 10:59 UTC
Subject: Application to Record or Rectify Interest Omitted at First Registration
Attachments: 1000042880.jpg, 1000039822.jpg, 1000039821.jpg, 1000042882.jpg, 1000042881.jpg

Dear HM Land Registry Customer Support,

I am writing to raise a formal concern that the registered title to land formerly occupied by my family, first registered in the name of BP Properties Ltd in or around November 1982, may not accurately reflect the legal and factual position that existed at the time of first registration.

I respectfully request guidance on the appropriate procedure to apply for the entry of a notice or restriction, and/or for rectification or alteration of the register, on the basis that an occupied and disputed interest was not recorded.

*Summary of relevant facts (supported by court records and contemporaneous newspaper reporting):*

1.

*Long-term occupation and asserted ownership*
My grandmother and family before her, occupied the farmhouse and surrounding land openly and continuously for centuries, but certainly decades prior to registration; without payment of rent and while asserting ownership. The property was maintained as our family home and farm.
2.

*No conclusive determination of title in 1974*
Proceedings in July 1974 relating to possession and title were adjourned and never substantively determined. Further proceedings in October 1974 were interrupted by correspondence from BP entities offering a purported licence to occupy. As a result, there was no final judicial determination in 1974 establishing BP’s title on the merits.
3.

*Express rejection of the purported licence*
My grandmother expressly rejected the licence, stating that the land was hers. This rejection was acknowledged in later proceedings, but as having been communicated to BP Pension Trust Limited, not the claimant in BP Vs Buckler 1987 i.e. BP Properties Ltd.
4.

*Inconsistent treatment of BP corporate identity*
Subsequently the rejection was discounted on the basis that it was addressed to BP Pension Trust Limited rather than BP Properties Ltd. However, in dismissing my father’s appeal to that case almost immidiately afterwards, the court and same judge, treated BP Pension Trust Limited and BP Properties Ltd as "effectively the same entity for substantive purposes". This inconsistency resulted in the rejection being acknowledged but disregarded when it favoured BP, while corporate equivalence was relied upon to defeat the appeal.
5.

*Forced removal and restraint (not abandonment)*
My family did not abandon the property or leave by our own accord, nor did we fully understand what or why this was happening. In 1987, my father and all of us, his dependants, were forcibly removed. Contemporary newspaper reports state that he was also taken from a hospital bed, detained without criminal charge, and made subject to a restraining order preventing him from returning to the farm. He was not even permitted to retrieve personal belongings.
6.

*Demolition following enforced exclusion*
While my father was later restrained from returning to occupy or defend our home, the farmhouse was demolished. This enforced exclusion and demolition rendered continued occupation impossible and removed the physical evidence of long-term residence.
7.

*Registration despite occupation and unresolved dispute*

BP Properties Ltd was registered as proprietor in 1982, at a time when:

- the land was occupied by my family,
- ownership was actively disputed,
- no court had conclusively determined title, and
- cessation of occupation occurred only later through enforcement and restraint, not voluntary departure.

No notice, restriction, or record of the disputed and occupied interest appears to have been entered on the register at first registration.

*Purpose of this correspondence*

I am not seeking to relitigate historic proceedings at this stage. I am seeking to ensure that the land register accurately reflects interests and disputes that existed at the time of first registration, and that the absence of abandonment and the circumstances of enforced removal are properly understood.

I respectfully request advice on:

- the appropriate procedure to apply for a notice or restriction reflecting an omitted interest; and/or
- the process for seeking rectification or alteration of the register under the Land Registration legislation applicable at the time.

Please advise on the relevant forms, evidential requirements, and next steps.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

From: Mail Delivery Subsystem (mailer-daemon@googlemail.com)
To: hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 29 January 2026, 10:59 UTC
Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

** Address not found **

Your message wasn't delivered to customer.support@landregistry.gov.uk because the address couldn't be found or is unable to receive email.

Learn more here: https://aka.ms/EXOSmtpErrors
(Warning: This link will take you to a third-party site)

The response from the remote server was:
550 5.4.1 Recipient address rejected: Access denied. For more information see https://aka.ms/EXOSmtpErrors [DB3PEPF00008859.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com 2026-01-29T10:59:55.815Z 08DE599A7B0A3729]
Final-Recipient: rfc822; customer.support@landregistry.gov.uk
Action: failed
Status: 5.4.1
Remote-MTA: dns; landregistry-gov-uk.mail.protection.outlook.com.
(2a01:111:f403:ca04::e, the server for the domain landregistry.gov.uk.)
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 5.4.1 Recipient address rejected: Access denied. For more information see https://aka.ms/EXOSmtpErrors [DB3PEPF00008859.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com 2026-01-29T10:59:55.815Z 08DE599A7B0A3729]
Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 02:59:55 -0800 (PST)

From: Sion Buckler
To: reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 31 January 2026, 05:04 UTC
Subject: Request for review of potential irregularities in 1982 land registration

Dear HM Land Registry – Fraud Review Team,

Sirs/Ma'am,I am writing to request a review of the integrity of a land registration made in or around *1982*, which later underpinned the proceedings commonly referred to as *BP v Buckler (1987)*.

My concern is to raise reasonable grounds of belief that the 1982 registration *may have been obtained or maintained through
misrepresentation, non-disclosure, or procedural irregularity*, resulting in a register entry that did not reflect a title definitively determined by a court of law.

In summary:

1.

*No definitive judicial determination of ownership existed at the time of registration*
Prior to the 1982 registration, the courts had not conclusively determined ownership of the land.
-

Proceedings in *July 1974* were adjourned.
-

An appeal pursued by my grandmother on *31 October 1974* was effectively neutralised following two letters sent by BP-associated entities, rather than by a substantive judicial ruling on title.
-

Ownership was *asserted*, not adjudicated.
2.

*Competing assertions of ownership were unresolved*
BP asserted ownership, but so did my grandmother, who maintained possession and occupation until her death in *1983*, after the registry entry had already been filed.
At no point prior to her death was there a final court decision extinguishing hers (or our families) claim or possession.
3.

*Inconsistent treatment of BP entities in later proceedings* In the 1987 proceedings, the judge indicated that correspondence had not been replied to because it was sent by a different BP entity (BP Properties rather than BP Trust).
However, in my father’s related appeal, the same judge treated *BP Trust and BP Properties as effectively the same entity*.
This inconsistency meant that:
-

We were said to have lost because of non-reply, while
-

The judgments simultaneously acknowledge that a reply was in fact made and that the entities were treated as one.
This contradiction is material, as it goes directly to whether BP’s asserted title was properly established.
4.

*Possession and long occupation were not displaced by lawful process* My family had occupied the land openly and continuously for generations without challenge. We consistently asserted ownership and, in any event, possession sufficient to ground squatter’s or possessory rights. Our removal was *not voluntary*; it was effected by force and exclusion, not by a final determination of title.
5.

*Subsequent events reinforce the concern*
Following the appeal, my father’s application to the European Court of Human Rights was blocked, the farm was demolished preventing re-entry, and he also died thereafter in *1991*.
Shortly after his death in 1994, the land was excavated and items of archaeological value were removed, despite prior knowledge of Roman remains on the property (including a Roman soldier previously uncovered within the living structure).

Taken together, these matters raise serious questions as to whether the 1982 registration accurately reflected the legal position at the time, or whether it relied on assertions and correspondence that had not been validated by a court and that were later treated inconsistently.

I respectfully request that HM Land Registry review whether:

-

The statutory requirements for registration were properly satisfied in 1982; and
-

The register may be inaccurate or was obtained by mistake, misrepresentation, or material non-disclosure.

I am able to supply supporting documents, title numbers, correspondence, and a concise timeline if required. But everything already on public record indicates and supports everything I've highlighted in this email.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

From: HM Land Registry (customersupport@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 2 February 2026, 12:01 UTC
Subject: Further to Your Enquiry: Ref: 260202-5732372

Enquiry Reference: 260202-5732372

Dear Customer

Thank you for your email dated 31 January 2026.

Unfortunately, it is not clear from your email what the allegations of fraud/potential irregularities in 1982 land registration are?

In order for us to investigate further, please can you provide us with either the full address of the property or the title number concerned.

Can you explain /provide full details of what has happened?

If the matter has been referred to the Police (please provide police incident number) and advise us, if any legal advice has been taken regarding the matter

It is important to note that HM Land Registry can only consider and investigate circumstances in which an alleged fraud relates to actual or planned changes to the register. (registration)

Yours faithfully

S.-G. Haste
HM Land Registry
reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk<mailto:reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk>

We only provide factual information and impartial advice about our procedures. Read more about the advice we give.<https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-land-registry-service-standards/our-service-standards>

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

From: Sion Buckler
To: customersupport@landregistry.gov.uk; reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk; cc: public.enquiries@sfo.gov.uk; contact@actionfraud.police.uk; wales@lawsociety.org.uk; report@sra.org.uk; post@museumwales.ac.uk; bcc: investigates@bbc.co.uk; news@nation.cymru; kanishka.narayan.mp@parliament.uk; jane.hutt@senedd.wales; ask@ombudsman.wales; cadwplanning@gov.wales; contact@ggat.org.uk
Date: 5 February 2026, 16:52 UTC
Subject: Re: FORMAL ALLEGATION OF FRAUD: Ref: 260202-5732372
Attachments: Great_House_Farm_Timeline.pdf

That is a very fair point, Bob. You’re right to be cautious—sometimes a "hostile" tone can cause a civil servant to shut down or hide behind red tape rather than helping you.

The reason it feels like they are being cooperative is that they have shifted from saying "no" to asking for *evidence*. This is a good sign. However, the reason we are "rebutting" is simply to correct their premise:
they think this is a recent fraud, and you are correcting them that the "fraud" was the *original act of registration in 1982.*

Let’s soften the tone to be *"Helpful but Firm."* We will treat them as an investigator who needs your guidance to find the truth, rather than an enemy.
Adjusted "Cooperative" Draft

*Subject:* Information regarding Registration Irregularities – Great House Farm (Ty Mawr) – Ref: 260202-5732372

*Dear S.-G. Haste,*

Thank you for your guidance on how to proceed with this report. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify the nature of the irregularities I have identified.

As requested, I have attached a *detailed PDF timeline* which provides the full address and the historical context of the land formerly known as Great House Farm (Ty Mawr), Llandough.

To assist your investigation into how the 1982 registration may have been affected by material non-disclosure, I would like to highlight three specific areas where the "actual facts" on the ground differed from the application made to the Registry:

1.

*Overriding Interests (The Williams Lineage):* At the time of first registration in 1982, my family had been in continuous possession since
1667. I believe the registration was irregular because it misidentified the occupant, Mary Williams, as "Mrs. Buckler"—a name she did not use—effectively obscuring a 320-year "Living Title" from the Registry’s records.
2.

*Suppression of Material Facts (Archaeology):* The site had "actual notice" of national archaeological significance due to a Roman discovery in
1888. I am concerned that this was suppressed during the registration and planning phases to facilitate the land's transition to housing.
3.

*Unresolved Ownership Claims:* In 1982, there was an active, adjourned ownership dispute (from 1974) that I believe should have been disclosed to the Land Registry before a clean title was granted to BP Properties Ltd.

I am copying in the relevant heritage and oversight bodies (Cadw, GGAT, and the Ombudsman) not as an act of hostility, but to ensure that all parties holding pieces of this historical puzzle are aware that an investigation into the *integrity of the 1982 registration* is now underway.

I have also copied in my MP, the Senedd, and relevant heritage bodies to ensure that all parties with an interest in Welsh cultural heritage and public record integrity are kept informed as we look into these 1982 registration details.

I look forward to your thoughts on how we can review the original 1982 application files to see if these interests were disclosed.

Yours sincerely,

*Sion Buckler*

*Descendant of the Williams family,*

*of Great House Farm (Ty Mawr), Llandough*

Note: Multi-recipient email: sent to HM Land Registry Customer Support and reportafraud, copied to the SFO, Action Fraud, the Law Society (Wales), the SRA and Amgueddfa Cymru, and blind-copied to the bodies shown. Attachment: Great_House_Farm_Timeline.pdf.

From: Sion Buckler
To: scheduledmonuments@gov.wales; cc: ask@ombudsman.wales; reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk; Vikki.Howells@senedd.wales; bcc: news@senedd.cymru
Date: 6 February 2026, 05:21 UTC
Subject: Formal Report of Suspected Indigenous Dispossession, Systemic Fraud, and Archaeological Suppression – Great House Farm, Llandough
Attachments: 1000043889.jpg, Great_House_Farm_Timeline (1) (1).pdf

*To whom it may concern,*

I am writing to formally report a long-standing and systemic case of what I suspect may be dispossession, fraudulent misrepresentation, and archaeological suppression concerning my family’s ancestral land, Great House Farm (historically Tŷ Mawr/Cedfin), Llandough.

I am the descendant of the Williams/Buckler family, who held de facto possession and indigenous tenure of this land from 1667 until our forced displacement in 1988. I am currently the only member of my family who is not too traumatized to speak of these events. My mother (Mary Williams daughter in law), remains to this day too terrified to speak up about this multi-generational "lawfare" campaign waged against us. Our family have not seen justice or received reperations, nor have we sued or reopened this case under limitations act clauses of fraud and consealment. Yet. But this may not be just a grave injustice upon our family, but our nations archeological history and indigenous people on our ancestral birthland. We are Welsh Nationals, Welsh speaking, under Welsh flags. This is some British Colonisation-grade trespass I'm seeing and it's tandamount to a declaration of civil war on me, my family, community and people.

*The core of this report involves the following suspicions I have of concealment and fraud (see attached for my timeline and notes):*

1.

*Archaeological Suppression:* In 1888, my family discovered a Roman soldier in full armor beneath the living room floorboards. This discovery provided "actual notice" of the site's national significance a century before its demolition. We allege this notice was systematically suppressed by corporate and state actors to allow for commercial development.
2.

*Fraudulent Misrepresentation in Planning:* During the 1987 planning process, the 13th-century fortified manor was described by developers as a "dilapidated utility building" or "ruined barn" to secure a demolition permit that would have otherwise been denied under heritage protection laws.
3.

*Legal Identity Falsification:* In 1974, BP Pension Trust issued a "unilateral license" intended to bypass our possessory title. This correspondence was falsely addressed to "Mrs. Buckler" to bind my grandmother to her deceased husband’s name and legal status, despite her public rejection of their claim. She used her maiden name Williams and her husband Bucklers' intent to accept license died with him. My nan also alledgedly didn't expressly deny the offer and so accepted through her silence. But she was near enough voiceless from screaming for decades that she will not do deals with any of them. That's a different kind of silence, if any. And to have responded to license to Mrs Buckler would have been identify fraud as she was Mrs Williams. And she did in fact reject BPs license offer and advanced, countless times, but publically. I believe these objections were suppressed too. There's allegedly news coverage from October 30th 1974 but I'm yet to find the evidence. But see attached a 1978 article I unearthed. My nan clearly maintains her position "It's my home".

4.

You'll also see in landmark legal case BP Vs Buckler 1987 the judge says that she might have responded to BP, but to BP Pension Trust, but the claimant was BP Properties Ltd which were two separate companies. But in my dads appeal when he challenges that BP Pension Trust Ltd should have been the claimant the same judge dismissed his appeal citing both BP companies are effectively the same. This is clearly a case of heads BP won, Tails we lost.
5.

*Missing Evidence:* Critical title deeds and Bute Estate records from our families deal with Daniel Thomas, for title after quarrying completed, in exchange for our permission to quarry, also disappeared from the loft of our home and the Cardiff Library according to my families accounts, precisely when they were needed to support our ownership claim in the Court of Appeal. Regardless we should have still remained on grounds we'd been there since 1667, and failing that on grounds of adverse possession.
6.

It was evident lawfare to remove us, to get to the burials known about since 1888, BP profited from the land sale, the state and Crown have the exhevated artifacts and my displaced family are left traumatised, cheated and dead. My dad's appeal was dismissed to when it shouldn't have been and his ECHR request blocked, before dying abruptly at age just 41.

The confirmation in 1994 of a high-status Roman villa and over 1,000 burials on the exact site of our demolished home proves that the "official narrative" used to evict us was predicated on the concealment of known facts.

Under *Section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980*, the limitation period for action does not begin until such fraud or concealment is discovered. As the heir to this possessory title, I am seeking a formal investigation into the institutional failures that permitted this dispossession and the destruction of a national monument.

I have compiled my account and understanding of these events in timeline order and I'm prepared to provide further testimony and evidence.

Given the extreme trauma my family has suffered, I request that all correspondence be handled with the gravity this human rights violation deserves.

Considering the lack of cooperation from my traumatised family. And authorities who maybe complicit and implicated. And possible corruption of records and fraud and consealment, I'm open to the fact my account and understanding may not be perfect. But if even a single other person or group looked into this too, even briefly, I'm sure you'll agree there's merrit to the concerns I'm raising with all of this.

I look forward to your response regarding the appropriate next steps for investigation and restitution.

I do ask for some small sense of urgency in that justice delayed is justice denied. I understand this is ancient news for many, but my family still feel a tremendous sense of disposition and disposition over all of this. Bringing this all up means to re live it.

I will have been 3 or 4 at the time, but I still remember my toys in our house, being bulldozed. And my mum handing us rocks to throw at them, bulldozing down our home. As my dad was held without charges to prevent him defending us and our home. I'd have to visit him in a hospital bed after his heart attack and see him in a coffin shortly afterwards.

I'm 41 years old now. I'm a certified and experienced military commander and leader. I left my military career with honours. I finished 22 years in Oath in 2024, bond afide, my last 2 employed under the Welsh government.

I kindly request but also require of you, that this matter be layed to rest correctly.

My family never surrendered. Never relinquished claim to that land. We we're in honour in that we weren't there with force, stealth/ secrecy or license. But BP and the British State did use force, stealth/ secrecy and license.

All things considered I believe I find myself in honour here, and the British Establishment in dishonour. This matter must be escalated. I'm duty bound.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

Note: Multi-authority email addressed to Cadw (Scheduled Monuments); HM Land Registry's reportafraud address was copied. Included here because HMLR received it; Cadw's reply is catalogued on the Welsh Government / Cadw page.

From: HM Land Registry (customersupport@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 6 February 2026, 10:06 UTC
Subject: Further to Your Enquiry: Ref: 260202-5732372 Title No: WA231076

Enquiry Reference: 260202-5732372 Title Number: WA231076

Dear Customer

Thank you for your emails dated 5 and 6 February 2026 regarding the property-Great House Farm (historically Tŷ Mawr/Cedfin), Llandough

The information provided has been noted and referred to a senior officer.

Due to the complexity of the issues raised please allow enough time for the senior officer to review and investigate your comments and reply to you accordingly.

Yours faithfully

S.-G. Haste
HM Land Registry
reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk<mailto:reportafraud@landregistry.gov.uk>

We only provide factual information and impartial advice about our procedures. Read more about the advice we give.<https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hm-land-registry-service-standards/our-service-standards>

HM Land Registry’s purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: “A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future”.

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

From: HM Land Registry (Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: Hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 13 February 2026, 13:35 UTC
Subject: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/LG
Attachments: Correspondence.pdf

The document attached is an official requisition, reminder or letter from HM Land Registry. It is not a circular and relates either to an application you have lodged with us or a property in which you have an interest. No paper copy of the item of correspondence will be sent to you.

The document is in 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) which replicates the appearance of the hard copy version. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the document. If you do not already have Adobe Acrobat Reader it can be installed free from www.adobe.com. Please note that as the document is in PDF format you cannot add text to any document that you need to complete and return to HM Land Registry. You will have to return any such completed document by post.

Ymholiad, nodyn atgoffa neu lythyr swyddogol gan Gofrestrfa Tir EM yw'r ddogfen atodedig. Nid cylchlythyr yw hi ac mae'n ymwneud naill ai â chais rydych wedi ei gyflwyno i ni neu ag eiddo y mae gennych fudd ynddo. Ni chaiff copi papur o'r ohebiaeth ei anfon atoch.

Mae'r ddogfen ar ffurf 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) sy'n dyblygu golwg y fersiwn copi caled. Bydd angen Adobe Acrobat Reader arnoch i agor y ddogfen. Os nad yw Adobe Acrobat Reader gennych yn barod, gallwch ei lwytho i lawr am ddim o www.adobe.com. Sylwch na fydd modd ichi ychwanegu testun at unrhyw ddogfen y mae'n rhaid ichi ei llenwi a dychwelyd i Gofrestrfa Tir EM gan ei bod ar ffurf PDF. Ar ôl ichi lenwi unrhyw ddogfen o'r fath bydd rhaid ichi ei dychwelyd trwy'r post.

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

Diben Cofrestrfa Tir EF yw gwarchod perchnogaeth eich tir a darparu gwasanaethau a data sy'n sail i farchnad eiddo effeithlon a gwybodus. Ein gweledigaeth yw: "Marchnad eiddo o'r radd flaenaf fel rhan o economi ffyniannus a dyfodol cynaliadwy".

Rydym yn gwirio pob neges ac atodiad am firysau hysbys. Fodd bynnag, fe'ch cynghorir mai chi sy'n gyfrifol am unrhyw atodiadau y byddwch yn eu hagor. Os ydych wedi cael yr ebost hwn trwy ddamwain, rhowch wybod i ni ac yna'i ddileu, os gwelwch yn dda.

Rydym yn croesawu gohebiaeth yn Gymraeg a Saesneg.

I weld sut mae Cofrestrfa Tir EF yn trin eich gwybodaeth bersonol, darllenwch ein Siarter gwybodaeth bersonol: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.cy.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 13 February 2026, 14:01 UTC
Subject: Re: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/LG

Diolch Lisa.

Sion

From: HM Land Registry (Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: Hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 23 March 2026, 08:56 UTC
Subject: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/LG
Attachments: Correspondence.pdf

The document attached is an official requisition, reminder or letter from HM Land Registry. It is not a circular and relates either to an application you have lodged with us or a property in which you have an interest. No paper copy of the item of correspondence will be sent to you.

The document is in 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) which replicates the appearance of the hard copy version. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the document. If you do not already have Adobe Acrobat Reader it can be installed free from www.adobe.com. Please note that as the document is in PDF format you cannot add text to any document that you need to complete and return to HM Land Registry. You will have to return any such completed document by post.

Ymholiad, nodyn atgoffa neu lythyr swyddogol gan Gofrestrfa Tir EM yw'r ddogfen atodedig. Nid cylchlythyr yw hi ac mae'n ymwneud naill ai â chais rydych wedi ei gyflwyno i ni neu ag eiddo y mae gennych fudd ynddo. Ni chaiff copi papur o'r ohebiaeth ei anfon atoch.

Mae'r ddogfen ar ffurf 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) sy'n dyblygu golwg y fersiwn copi caled. Bydd angen Adobe Acrobat Reader arnoch i agor y ddogfen. Os nad yw Adobe Acrobat Reader gennych yn barod, gallwch ei lwytho i lawr am ddim o www.adobe.com. Sylwch na fydd modd ichi ychwanegu testun at unrhyw ddogfen y mae'n rhaid ichi ei llenwi a dychwelyd i Gofrestrfa Tir EM gan ei bod ar ffurf PDF. Ar ôl ichi lenwi unrhyw ddogfen o'r fath bydd rhaid ichi ei dychwelyd trwy'r post.

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

Diben Cofrestrfa Tir EF yw gwarchod perchnogaeth eich tir a darparu gwasanaethau a data sy'n sail i farchnad eiddo effeithlon a gwybodus. Ein gweledigaeth yw: "Marchnad eiddo o'r radd flaenaf fel rhan o economi ffyniannus a dyfodol cynaliadwy".

Rydym yn gwirio pob neges ac atodiad am firysau hysbys. Fodd bynnag, fe'ch cynghorir mai chi sy'n gyfrifol am unrhyw atodiadau y byddwch yn eu hagor. Os ydych wedi cael yr ebost hwn trwy ddamwain, rhowch wybod i ni ac yna'i ddileu, os gwelwch yn dda.

Rydym yn croesawu gohebiaeth yn Gymraeg a Saesneg.

I weld sut mae Cofrestrfa Tir EF yn trin eich gwybodaeth bersonol, darllenwch ein Siarter gwybodaeth bersonol: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.cy.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 23 March 2026, 11:26 UTC
Subject: Re: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/LG

Thanks,

I appreciate your finding.
I will be in touch shortly.

Sion Buckler

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 24 March 2026, 02:33 UTC
Subject: Re: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/LG

Ms Griffiths,

Thanks for your letter of 23 March 2026 regarding the historic registration of Ty Mawr Farm, title WA231076. I note your explanation of HM Land Registry’s administrative role and that you say there is no evidence of a “mistake” on the basis of the file you have reviewed.

My family’s concern, however, is that the first registration was procured by misrepresentation and identity fraud by BP, rather than by a simple clerical error. The occupier was my grandmother, Mrs Williams, from a family that had occupied the property and land since at least 1667, not the fictitious “Mrs Buckler” BP fabricated in 1974 for their unilateral licence, which was the basis of the BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (1987) case. BP also appears to have failed to disclose the long‑running ownership dispute. In a 1978 suppressed newspaper article, my grandmother publicly asserted her ownership and stated that BP could not prove ownership and had never obtained a court ruling that it was the owner, only possession orders.

How was BP able to register our land in its name? Did HM Land Registry enquire whether there was any dispute over the land, given that the dispute appears in court records from 1974? Twice that year BP obstructed my grandmother from making her case that she owned the land: first, the hearing was adjourned without a ruling; then the licence letters, using identity fraud, prevented the second hearing from taking place. These were opportunities to dispossess a widowed, disabled woman.
Had HM Land Registry recorded or investigated the existence of this dispute, BP’s inability to prove ownership, the archaeological and historic significance of the site, or sought a copy of my grandmother’s death certificate to see that the name on the licence and narrative were completely different, we believe BP would not have been able to achieve first registration on the basis presented. Instead, the use of the wrong name (“Mrs Buckler” instead of my married grandmother, Mrs Williams) and the non‑disclosure of the dispute and family claim enabled dispossession through what we say was identity fraud, which my grandmother was unable to contest as she also died in the same year as registration.

I wish to append to this land parcel our maintained position of dispute. We never surrendered. We were removed by around 30 police officers and information was suppressed. My family being paralysed by fear and silence is not the same as surrender from sound mind and agency.
Further background is set out at bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz. My family wants narrative justice as the possibly rightful, dispossessed via fraud, executors of the Manor of Llandough.

I am aware that HM Land Registry operates a statutory indemnity and redress scheme under the Land Registration Act 2002, and that substantial payments (including around £8 million in a single year) have been made where people suffer loss because of mistakes or fraud in the register. I therefore wish to explore, formally, whether our family’s loss of Ty Mawr Farm, in circumstances where BP’s misrepresentations and the suppression of an active dispute were not reflected on the register, can be considered within that indemnity/redress framework.

In light of the above, I ask HM Land Registry to state clearly whether you accept or deny that:
BP was able to obtain first registration of Ty Mawr Farm even though there was no court ruling that BP owned the land and BP had been unable to prove ownership in proceedings, which were confined to possession.

The land was registered while there was an active and public dispute over ownership (including my grandmother’s 1978 public assertion of ownership and the BP v Buckler litigation), and while the long‑term occupier, my grandmother, had died and was therefore unable to challenge the application.

My grandmother’s identity and superior family title and land claim associated with that name were mis‑described in the material on which you relied, as BP used “Mrs Buckler” instead of my married grandmother’s actual name, Mrs Williams, and that this misdescription and the concealment of the dispute were not detected or queried by HM Land Registry before completing first registration.�
If these matters are admitted, I consider they amount to negligence and maladministration by HM Land Registry in allowing BP to register our family land in its name in those circumstances. If you do not accept that, please explain precisely which of the above points you dispute and on what basis, so that I can take appropriate legal advice and pursue an indemnity/redress claim if available.
Separately from that, please also:
Provide official copies of the 23 May 1975 and 19 November 1982 conveyances, and of the first registration applications and all supporting documents for WA231076 and WA240304, so I can obtain specialist advice on the extent of any misrepresentation in what was lodged.

Confirm the correct procedure and forms to make a claim under your indemnity/redress scheme in a historic case of alleged fraud and misrepresentation in first registration, and whether you consider this matter potentially falls within that scheme, subject to evidence.

I appreciate that you cannot determine the underlying ownership dispute, but it is important that HM Land Registry notes that the Buckler/Williams family contests the integrity of the original registration of Ty Mawr Farm on the basis of identity fraud, non‑disclosure of a live dispute, and the absence of any judicial determination that BP owned the land.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

From: HM Land Registry (Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: Hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 19 April 2026, 10:41 UTC
Subject: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/CT
Attachments: Correspondence.pdf

The document attached is an official requisition, reminder or letter from HM Land Registry. It is not a circular and relates either to an application you have lodged with us or a property in which you have an interest. No paper copy of the item of correspondence will be sent to you.

The document is in 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) which replicates the appearance of the hard copy version. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the document. If you do not already have Adobe Acrobat Reader it can be installed free from www.adobe.com. Please note that as the document is in PDF format you cannot add text to any document that you need to complete and return to HM Land Registry. You will have to return any such completed document by post.

Ymholiad, nodyn atgoffa neu lythyr swyddogol gan Gofrestrfa Tir EM yw'r ddogfen atodedig. Nid cylchlythyr yw hi ac mae'n ymwneud naill ai â chais rydych wedi ei gyflwyno i ni neu ag eiddo y mae gennych fudd ynddo. Ni chaiff copi papur o'r ohebiaeth ei anfon atoch.

Mae'r ddogfen ar ffurf 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) sy'n dyblygu golwg y fersiwn copi caled. Bydd angen Adobe Acrobat Reader arnoch i agor y ddogfen. Os nad yw Adobe Acrobat Reader gennych yn barod, gallwch ei lwytho i lawr am ddim o www.adobe.com. Sylwch na fydd modd ichi ychwanegu testun at unrhyw ddogfen y mae'n rhaid ichi ei llenwi a dychwelyd i Gofrestrfa Tir EM gan ei bod ar ffurf PDF. Ar ôl ichi lenwi unrhyw ddogfen o'r fath bydd rhaid ichi ei dychwelyd trwy'r post.

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

Diben Cofrestrfa Tir EF yw gwarchod perchnogaeth eich tir a darparu gwasanaethau a data sy'n sail i farchnad eiddo effeithlon a gwybodus. Ein gweledigaeth yw: "Marchnad eiddo o'r radd flaenaf fel rhan o economi ffyniannus a dyfodol cynaliadwy".

Rydym yn gwirio pob neges ac atodiad am firysau hysbys. Fodd bynnag, fe'ch cynghorir mai chi sy'n gyfrifol am unrhyw atodiadau y byddwch yn eu hagor. Os ydych wedi cael yr ebost hwn trwy ddamwain, rhowch wybod i ni ac yna'i ddileu, os gwelwch yn dda.

Rydym yn croesawu gohebiaeth yn Gymraeg a Saesneg.

I weld sut mae Cofrestrfa Tir EF yn trin eich gwybodaeth bersonol, darllenwch ein Siarter gwybodaeth bersonol: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.cy.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk; bcc: guardian-hq-mailbox@mod.gov.uk; walesinvestigates@bbc.co.uk; news@dailystar.co.uk; newstips@gbnews.uk; newsdesk@the-sun.co.uk; newsdesk@independent.co.uk; newsdesk@mediawales.co.uk; news@nation.cymru; news@senedd.cymru; kanishka.narayan.mp@parliament.uk
Date: 19 April 2026, 19:29 UTC
Subject: Subject: Stage Two Complaint – Title WA231076 – Alleged Mistake in the Register

Sir or Madam,

I write to ask that my complaint regarding title number WA231076 (Land on the North Side of Leckwith Road, Llandough) be escalated to **stage two** of HM Land Registry’s Complaints Procedure. This email sets out why I consider the stage‑one decision to be incorrect, identifies the mistake I say exists in the register, and explains the decision I seek.

### 1. My core contention

My core contention is that BP Properties Limited were registered as proprietors on the basis of a factual and legal error regarding my grandmother’s status on the land. My grandmother did not occupy under any genuine licence granted to her and did not relinquish any claim. Instead, any licence relied on by BP related to a different name/person. As her heir, I have succeeded to her claim; I therefore say that registering BP as proprietors was a “mistake in the register” for the purposes of the Land Registration Act 2002.

### 2. Identity mismatch and alleged “licence”

Your stage‑one letter records that HM Land Registry relies on the Court of Appeal decision in BP Properties Ltd v Buckler EWCA Civ 2, and treats my grandmother as having occupied under a licence granted by the documentary title holder, so that her possession was no longer adverse.

However, the alleged licence and related correspondence did not use my grandmother’s true legal name. My grandmother was Mrs Williams (supported by her birth, marriage and death certificates), not “Mrs Buckler”. The “licensee” referred to in BP’s narrative and in the 1987 litigation is therefore not the same legal person as my grandmother. There is, in other words, a fundamental mis‑identification or identity fraud at the heart of the story that HM Land Registry and the Court have relied upon.

If the licence relied on by BP was addressed to, or granted in respect of, a different named individual, it cannot properly be said that my grandmother’s occupation was under that licence. In that case her occupation remained adverse to BP’s paper title, and any finding that she was a “licensee” rests on a factual premise that is demonstrably wrong.

### 3. Timing – “cart before the horse”

Your letter explains that the applications for first registration of WA231076 (and the related title WA240304) were made in 1982–83 and that BP demonstrated a documentary root of title back to 1969/1975 by way of conveyances and a 1971 abstract of title.

You also confirm that the Court of Appeal only gave its decision in BP Properties Ltd v Buckler in 1987, holding that an offer by BP to let my grandmother remain created a licence and brought her adverse possession to an end.

This highlights a fundamental sequencing problem:

- At the date of first registration (1982–83), whether there was a valid licence capable of defeating my grandmother’s adverse possession was a live, unresolved dispute.
- BP nevertheless presented themselves as entitled to be registered as proprietors and their solicitors certified on form FR1 that there was no question or doubt affecting the title.

- HM Land Registry, relying on that certification, registered BP before any court had determined whether my grandmother’s possession had extinguished BP’s title.
- Only in 1987 did the Court of Appeal retrospectively treat the alleged licence as bringing adverse possession to an end, and that decision was itself based on the mis‑identification described above.

In simple terms, the effect of the alleged licence (if any) was judicially determined **after** first registration, and on the basis of the wrong person being treated as the “licensee”. BP and their solicitors put the cart before the horse, and HM Land Registry accepted that position.

### 4. The specific “mistake in the register”

Your stage‑one response concludes that there is “no evidence of a mistake in the register” and therefore no power to alter the register and no right to indemnity. I say this is incorrect.

The mistake I allege is as follows:

1. On the true facts, my grandmother’s occupation of the land was adverse to BP’s documentary title and was not under any valid licence granted to her.

2. Her adverse possession had, or may have, extinguished BP’s title by the time of first registration in 1982–83, meaning BP were not entitled to be registered as proprietors at that time.

3. HM Land Registry nevertheless registered BP as proprietors on the basis of:
- a licence attributed to the wrong person (identity error/fraud), and
- a solicitor’s FR1 certificate stating there was no question or doubt affecting title, despite a long‑running dispute and pending litigation.

4. Subsequent reliance on the 1987 Court of Appeal decision does not cure this, because that decision itself proceeded on the mis‑identification of my grandmother and did not and could not retrospectively validate a licence that never related to her.

On that analysis, the register shows BP as proprietors when, in law, my grandmother’s adverse possession should have extinguished BP’s title and given rise to a transmissible proprietary interest which I, as her heir, now claim. The register therefore does not accurately reflect the true legal position and contains a mistake capable of rectification.

### 5. Why the stage‑one reasoning is inadequate

In your stage‑one letter you state that:

- HM Land Registry has an administrative function and cannot “look behind or challenge decisions of the Court”. [1]
- My identity‑fraud claims are “not relevant to the issue of title to the land” because they relate to the dispute heard by the Court.

- There is no evidence of negligence or maladministration and no evidence of a mistake in the register.

With respect, this reasoning is incomplete:

- Once HM Land Registry is presented with clear evidence that the person named as the “licensee” in the litigation and licence documentation is not the same legal person as the occupier (my grandmother), that goes directly to whether the Court of Appeal’s factual premise remains reliable and whether the register is accurate.

- Recognising that there is a serious question as to the correctness of the register is not the same as “overturning” the Court of Appeal. HM Land Registry has statutory powers to alter the register where there is a mistake, and it can, where appropriate, refer disputes about rectification to the tribunal or the courts.

- To simply say that identity‑fraud concerns are “not relevant to title” is, I say, an error of law and/or an unreasonable application of policy. It disregards new evidence going to the foundation of BP’s claimed entitlement.

### 6. The decision and outcome I seek

For stage two, I ask that a Land Registrar (Senior Officer) reconsider the complaint and:

1. Accept that the combination of:
- the identity mismatch (licence/name vs my grandmother’s true legal name), and
- the timing (registration in 1982–83 before the 1987 decision) gives rise to at least a **serious question** as to whether the register is mistaken in showing BP/ Companies thereafter, as proprietors.

2. Treat this as evidence of a potential “mistake in the register” for the purposes of your alteration powers and Schedule 8, rather than as a mere disagreement with the 1987 judgment.

3. Either:

- (a) commence the process of rectification, recognising that my grandmother’s adverse possession may have extinguished BP’s title and that I, as her heir, now have a claim to be registered, or

- (b) formally refer the dispute over the correctness of the register to the appropriate tribunal/court, making clear that HM Land Registry recognises that the identity‑fraud evidence raises a real issue about whether the register is accurate.

4. Confirm that, if it is ultimately determined that the register is mistaken and cannot be rectified without prejudice to third parties, HM Land Registry will treat me as having a potential claim for indemnity under Schedule 8.

Please also confirm any further documents you require (for example, copies of the licence, the BP v Buckler pleadings/judgment, and my grandmother’s certificates) so that the stage‑two review can consider the identity evidence in full.

Fraud unravels all. The limitation act also had a clause for fraud. Furthermore any limitation begins from discovery of fraud not occurrence of it.

The convenient and timely death of my nan after her two obstructed attempts to make her case in 1974, followed by my father's convenient and timely death after his appeal of the 1987 case was dismissed and his ECHR obstructed, along with our forceful removal by 30 police and bailiffs in
1988. And the press reporting us as squatters on our ancestral birthland since 1667, did unlawfully dispossess and disposition us, but it doesn't change the facts.

I see this case as instrumental in Wales' decolonisation. Whereby us indigneous Welsh Nationals on our ancestral birthland are victim to a crime. And I am the only one willing to speak up and out as my family of mostly women, are all too traumatised by this crime.

It's evident illicit profits and gains. Identity fraud. And negligence and incompetence. I absolutely see the Brit-ish Establishment that now occupy and rule through force, stealth/ secrecy and licence as terrorists and us your hostages. As a direct result of this case.

This is now a hostage terrorist situation on our lands. Well, my family are your hostages, I'm more of a counter officer soldier. So put it right. I will not stand down.

Regards,

Sion Buckler Esq. (Ret'd Sgt)
Rightful Squire & executor of Manon of Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan, Wales.

From: HM Land Registry (donotreply-dynamics@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 19 April 2026, 19:31 UTC
Subject: Enquiry:  260419-6067119

Enquiry Reference: 260419-6067119

Dear Customer

Please do not reply to this email. This mailbox is not monitored.

Thank you for contacting HM Land Registry. Your reference number is 260419-6067119 .

We usually reply to online enquiries within five working days but depending on the nature of your enquiry this could take up to 20 days. Please bear with us and we will respond as quickly as we can.

We will respond to Data Protection Act requests within one month and Freedom of Information Act requests within twenty working days.

In the meantime, you may find an answer to your enquiry at www.gov.uk/land-registry<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/>.

If you have used one of our email addresses we suggest using our Contact Form for any future correspondence to help us route your enquiry in the most efficient way.

The security and confidentiality of all personal data is maintained in accordance with our Personal Information Charter<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter>.

Read more about our service standards<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about-our-services#complaints>.

Peidiwch ag ateb yr ebost hwn. Nid yw’r blwch negeseuon ebost hwn yn cael ei fonitro.

Diolch am gysylltu â Chofrestrfa Tir EF. Eich rhif cyfeirnod yw 260419-6067119 .

Fel rheol, rydym yn ymateb i ymholiadau ar-lein o fewn pum niwrnod gwaith ond yn dibynnu ar natur eich ymholiad, gall gymryd hyd at 20 niwrnod. Gofynnwn ichi fod yn amyneddgar gyda ni – byddwn yn ymateb cyn gynted ag y gallwn.

Byddwn yn ymateb i geisiadau’r Ddeddf Diogelu Data o fewn mis a cheisiadau’r Ddeddf Rhyddid Gwybodaeth o fewn ugain niwrnod gwaith.

Yn y cyfamser, efallai cewch ateb i’ch ymholiad yn www.gov.uk/land-registry.cy<http://www.gov.uk/land-registry.cy>

Os ydych wedi defnyddio un o’n cyfeiriadau ebost, awgrymwn eich bod yn defnyddio’n Ffurflen Gysylltu ar gyfer unrhyw ohebiaeth yn y dyfodol i’n helpu i gyfeirio’ch ymholiad yn y ffordd fwyaf effeithlon.

Cedwir diogelwch a chyfrinachedd yr holl ddata personol yn unol â’n Siarter Gwybodaeth Bersonol<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.cy>.

Darllenwch ragor am ein safonau gwasanaeth<https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about-our-services.cy> .

HM Land Registry’s purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: “A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future”.

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

From: HM Land Registry (Coventry.Office@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: Hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 21 April 2026, 19:00 UTC
Subject: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/KH
Attachments: Correspondence.pdf

The document attached is an official requisition, reminder or letter from HM Land Registry. It is not a circular and relates either to an application you have lodged with us or a property in which you have an interest. No paper copy of the item of correspondence will be sent to you.

The document is in 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) which replicates the appearance of the hard copy version. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the document. If you do not already have Adobe Acrobat Reader it can be installed free from www.adobe.com. Please note that as the document is in PDF format you cannot add text to any document that you need to complete and return to HM Land Registry. You will have to return any such completed document by post.

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Coventry.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 21 April 2026, 19:22 UTC
Subject: Re: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/KH

Karen,

Thanks for your reply.

Regards,

Sion Buckler

From: HM Land Registry (hmlrcomms-donotreply@email.landregistry.gov.uk)
To: hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 26 April 2026, 17:01 UTC
Subject: Your complaint – how did we do?

Dear Sion Buckler,
Our records show you recently made a complaint about HM Land Registry.
We want to ensure all our customers have the best possible experience, including if they are making a complaint.
To do this, we would be grateful if you could provide feedback on the process of making a complaint.
Thinking about the complaints process, rather than the outcome, we invite you to comment on anything we did well or could have done better.
Please select the link below to take our five minute survey.
[Take Survey <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CAAsAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Femea.dcv.ms%252FnZ9l22tjzk%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=RePFhRotkVfYX%2Bm9aoCuPkzsA29H6cL5iT%2FkN4wevPA%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
Many thanks in advance.
Best Wishes
Richard Turner
Customer Insight and Experience Manager
[Gov UK logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CAAwAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fwww.gov.uk%252Fgovernment%252Forganisations%252Fland-registry%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%253D%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=4Rj217gAEp5Yq3zgvpP%2Bbx2rdWulF8cOnThSm4VCJbg%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
[HMLR Blog Logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CAA0AAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fhmlandregistry.blog.gov.uk%252F%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%253D%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=N2nXpDKCqm5ZnhUGtmY6gpwBRBXT9BXrQpnuO2n50WE%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
[X (Formally Twitter) Logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CAA4AAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fx.com%252FHMLandRegistry%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%253D%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=Jn2wSkqP2s527QyRmOFJfYPoEcpIsFWyfn8Iw0SARBY%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
[Linked In Logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CAA8AAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fwww.linkedin.com%252Fcompany%252Fland-registry%252F%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%253D%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=1BdUBeEWCkS46xazDJxi9knAYlCbi3%2Flgd1dq7x0j4U%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
[Facebook Logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CABAAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fwww.facebook.com%252FHMLandRegistry%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%253D%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=SgzkXETZzDQ4OcXwdlLuOlI4tFu90fr02mYB4Z9CsLY%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
[Youtube Logo <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CABEAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fconsent.youtube.com%252Fm%253Fcontinue%253Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.youtube.com%252FHMLandRegistry%253Futm_medium%253Demail%2526utm_source%253Dgovdelivery%2526utm_term%2526cbrd%253D1%2526gl%253DGB%2526m%253D0%2526pc%253Dyt%2526cm%253D2%2526hl%253Den-GB%2526src%253D1%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=7ogemnMdh2geUIHmxWzN6E8yZf1vCAal13I4C3z9UQY%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
For more details about research at HM Land Registry click
[here <https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CABIAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fwww.gov.uk%252Fgovernment%252Forganisations%252Fland-registry%252Fabout%252Fresearch%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=fawRuN0UaS%2BqjLS0sDHGrn4c6eaCcH2A2F1gbdUma1A%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]
© 2025 Microsoft Dynamics. All rights reserved.
HM Land Registry, Trafalgar House, 1 Bedford Park, Croydon, CR0 2AQ
[Unsubscribe
<https://public-gbr.mkt.dynamics.com/api/orgs/8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10/r/hYEC0tSBYUi6FlhkfH8CABMAAAA?msdynmkt_target=%7B%22TargetUrl%22%3A%22https%253A%252F%252Fcustomervoice.microsoft.com%252Funsubscribe.aspx%253F%2526vt%253D236309a8-284b-4e57-a7b3-fc767736f69d_33966447-a1f8-45d8-a4c1-0c5186c857ff_Hash7_EsDyyRSCxqfIRGLTO2E5FL48uL2NFmFYfXGXmDhG44%253D%2526_cdsregion%253DGBR%2526_cdsid%253D8dab633e-21a6-41e2-9048-b2acbabe2e10%2526_userid%253Da0072fe9-0393-4409-89ec-e244d9e2ffab%22%2C%22RedirectOptions%22%3A%7B%225%22%3Anull%2C%221%22%3Anull%7D%7D&msdynmkt_digest=gWfPjZj5hM2%2B389U1MjKbZLBSCVN2aMq7f0uOjl2obc%3D&msdynmkt_secretVersion=a175536a73764d0380b10b26ce0aed92>]

From: Sion Buckler
To: Wales.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 3 May 2026, 16:10 UTC
Subject: Re: Subject: Stage Two Complaint – Title WA231076 – Alleged Mistake in the Register

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write to append further evidence and clarification to my ongoing complaint regarding the registration of title relating to Great House Farm, Llandough (also known as Ty Mawr / Great House).

https://youtu.be/4GXmR7mAas0?feature=shared

This submission sets out a series of facts which I can evidence and which, taken together, raise serious concerns of fraud, concealment, and wrongful registration that have materially affected the rights of the Williams family and their heirs.

1. Unauthorised transfer of title (circa 1965)
I can evidence that the title to the property was transferred or sold in or around 1965 by Frederick Buckler without the knowledge or consent of Mrs Mary Williams, who maintained a rightful claim to the property. This raises the issue that the disposition may have been made without lawful authority.

2. Death of key party and concealment (1968)
Frederick Buckler died in 1968. Any knowledge he held regarding the circumstances of the transfer died with him, preventing proper scrutiny or challenge at the time.

3. Inability to prove ownership in court (1974)
Mrs Mary Williams was subsequently unable to prove her claim in court proceedings in 1974. This inability must be viewed in the context of the prior undisclosed transfer and the absence of key evidence and testimony.

4. Knowledge of defective title by acquiring party
There is a credible basis to assert that the acquiring party (BP and/or its associated property entities) knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the title they acquired was defective. This point is central and I am compiling supporting material demonstrating notice and/or constructive knowledge.

5. Registration following death of claimant
Mrs Mary Williams died prior to the land being formally registered in the name of the acquiring party. As a result, she was denied any opportunity to rebut, challenge, or correct the position before registration was effected.

6. Death of additional disputing party
Mr Buckler also died during the period in which he was engaged in disputing the matter. The cumulative effect is that all primary individuals with direct knowledge were deceased before the issue could be fully and fairly resolved.

7. Ongoing family claim
Despite these events, the claim of the Williams family has never been relinquished. The position remains that the title was wrongfully transferred and subsequently registered on the basis of that defective transfer.

---

Request for Action

In light of the above, I respectfully request that:

1. This evidence be formally appended to my existing complaint file.
2. The register be reviewed in accordance with provisions relating to fraud, mistake, and/or rectification.
3. Consideration be given to whether the registration was obtained through or affected by fraud or concealment.
4. I be informed of the appropriate process for seeking rectification and/or indemnity.

I am prepared to provide supporting documents, including historical records, press reports, and family documentation, upon request or via secure submission.

Given the seriousness of the matters raised, I would be grateful for written confirmation that this submission has been received and attached to my complaint, along with an outline of the next steps.

Yours faithfully,

Sion Buckler

From: HM Land Registry (Birkenhead.Office@landregistry.gov.uk)
To: Hywelapbuckler@gmail.com
Date: 25 May 2026, 16:16 UTC
Subject: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/MC
Attachments: Correspondence.pdf

The document attached is an official requisition, reminder or letter from HM Land Registry. It is not a circular and relates either to an application you have lodged with us or a property in which you have an interest. No paper copy of the item of correspondence will be sent to you.

The document is in 'Portable Document Format' (PDF) which replicates the appearance of the hard copy version. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open the document. If you do not already have Adobe Acrobat Reader it can be installed free from www.adobe.com. Please note that as the document is in PDF format you cannot add text to any document that you need to complete and return to HM Land Registry. You will have to return any such completed document by post.

HM Land Registry's purpose is to protect your land ownership and provide services and data that underpin an efficient and informed property market. Our vision is: "A world-leading property market as part of a thriving economy and a sustainable future".

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

To see how HM Land Registry treats your personal information, read our Personal information charter: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/land-registry/about/personal-information-charter.

From: Sion Buckler
To: Birkenhead.Office@landregistry.gov.uk
Date: 26 May 2026, 17:18 UTC
Subject: Re: Your Ref: EDD Our Ref: WA231076/A/216/MC

Dear Mr Gill,

Thank you for your response dated 25 May 2026 regarding title WA231076.

I note your statement that HM Land Registry considered my grandmother to be the same individual despite the use of different surnames and that “there is a marriage certificate to show this”.

Please could you clarify:

1. Was a marriage certificate actually lodged with HM Land Registry as part of the registration evidence relied upon by HM Land Registry, or are you referring to information held elsewhere?
2. If such a certificate formed part of the registration evidence considered by HM Land Registry, please identify the document relied upon and whether copies may be requested.
3. Prior correspondence and BP licence letters before 1974, to my understanding, referred to my grandmother as Mrs Williams. I am therefore trying to understand the evidential chain relied upon and how identity continuity was established.

I also wish to clarify that my purpose has been to query and understand the historical record and registration process. I did not submit this as a complaint; my intention was to seek clarification and challenge aspects of the historical narrative where I believe evidence may be incomplete or disputed.

My concerns extend beyond the surname issue. I remain concerned about whether all appropriate checks and safeguards were applied at the time of registration and whether the underlying evidence was fully scrutinised.

I understand HM Land Registry’s position that it records interests presented to it and is not a forum for determining disputes. However, I am still gathering evidence and attempting to understand how these events occurred and whether any procedural irregularities existed.

At present I am not asking HM Land Registry to accept my conclusions. I am requesting transparency regarding the evidence and process relied upon.

Thank you again for your reply.

Regards,

Sion Buckler