Subject: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough / BP vs Buckler 1987
From: Philip Gale
Direction: received
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 17:30 UTC
Institution: The National Archives
Refs: none
Archive id: gm-19c71cdbcbd7eb09
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr Buckler,

Thank you for your e-mail of 10 February whose contents are noted. The National Archives does not hold any records relating to your enquiry. The Manorial Documents Register which this department administers is a register for the location of manorial documents and not of the ownership and descent of manorial titles:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/finding-records-in-discovery-and-other-databases/manorial-documents-register/

A similar position holds for The National Archives responsibilities for public records and concerns about the past management of official records is a matter for the relevant government department such as HM Land Registry.

Yours sincerely


[The National Archives logo]
Philip Gale | Head of the Collections and Cultural Property Team
T: 020 3908 X 9193 | W: nationalarchives.gov.uk<http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/>
Twitter: @UkNatArchives
The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey [postcode redacted]



-----Original Message-----
From: Sion Buckler <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>>
Sent: 10 February 2026 22:15
To: Archives Sector Leadership <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>>
Cc: [email redacted]<[email redacted]>; [email redacted]<[email redacted]>; Paul Egan <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>>; [email redacted]<[email redacted]>; [email redacted]<[email redacted]>
Subject: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough / BP vs Buckler 1987

        You don't often get email from [email redacted]<[email redacted]>. Learn why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>


EXTERNAL: This email originates from outside of The National Archives.

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 [address redacted], Dinas Powys, Vale of Glamorgan, Wales. https://bpvsbuckler.datro.xyz/ <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.
Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- National Archives Disclaimer This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------