Subject: Application to Record or Rectify Interest Omitted at First Registration
From: Sion Buckler
Direction: sent
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 10:59 UTC
Institution: HM Land Registry
Refs: none
Archive id: gm-19c0968af71d61f9
------------------------------------------------------------

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