Subject: Re: Formal Notice for Record: Church View Close, Llandough / BP vs Buckler 1987 From: Sion Buckler Direction: sent Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 17:49 UTC Institution: The National Archives Refs: none Archive id: gm-19c71df73d432ce4 ------------------------------------------------------------ Dear Mr Gale, Thank you for your reply of 12 February. I would like to clarify and narrow my request to ensure there is no misunderstanding regarding the records I am trying to locate. My correspondence is *not* seeking an adjudication of ownership or title — I fully accept the stated remit boundaries of the Manorial Documents Register (MDR). Rather, my enquiry concerns the existence of *any archival reference, index card, catalogue entry, or pointer to a document historically known as the “Williams Title”*, which was, according to contemporaneous family testimony, at one point: 1. Held in the *local public library* in the first half of the twentieth century; and 2. Indexed in some manner (e.g., an index card or catalogue reference) that persisted even after the original document could not be located. My understanding of the MDR — as described on your own website — is that it exists to provide brief descriptions of manorial records and details of their locations: “An official index of English and Welsh manorial records providing brief descriptions of documents and details of their locations… It does *not* include title deeds or conveyances, and is *not* a register of ownership of manorial lordships or rights.” https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/manor-search Based on that description, I would be grateful if you could confirm whether: 1. *Any catalogue entries, index cards, reference pointers, or archival descriptions* relating to the *Manor of Llandough* or the *Williams family title* exist in the MDR or related archival catalogues. 2. If so, the *reference identifiers* and information on how these can be consulted in person or via digitised records. To be precise, I am looking for historical references to the *index card or listing* for the Williams Title — whether held in a library, local record office, or other institutional archive — rather than a claim for ownership judgment itself. If such a reference does not currently appear in the MDR, I would greatly appreciate guidance on where any known catalogue cards or entry lists for manorial documents from *Glamorgan / Llandough* prior to 1950 might now reside (e.g., regional archives, National Archives holdings, or affiliated local repository catalogues). Anyway I anticipate your forgiveness, if I have erred in writing to you earlier. Thank you again and in advance for your assistance. Yours sincerely, Sion Buckler On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 at 14:30, Philip Gale < [email redacted]> wrote: > 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 > > > > > > [image: The National Archives logo] > > *Philip Gale *|* Head of the Collections and Cultural Property Team* > T: 020 3908 X 9193 | W: nationalarchives.gov.uk > > Twitter: @UkNatArchives > The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey [postcode redacted] > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sion Buckler <[email redacted]> > > Sent: 10 February 2026 22:15 > > To: Archives Sector Leadership <[email redacted]> > > Cc: [email redacted]; [email redacted]; > Paul Egan <[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]. Learn > why this is important > > > > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >