Subject: Re: Response to National Archives enquiry. Case number CAS-344046-K1S1R2 CRM:021100306 From: Sion Buckler Direction: sent Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 23:43 UTC Institution: The National Archives Refs: CAS-344046 Archive id: gm-19ff85c058b1ec5d ------------------------------------------------------------ Sarah Abbott, Thank you for your response. I have considered it carefully. Unfortunately, it does not appear to answer the FOI enquiry I submitted. My request was deliberately framed more broadly than a simple catalogue search for the words “Great House Farm”, “Ty Mawr”, “Llandough” or “Cedfin”. I specifically asked The National Archives to identify recorded information concerning the *existence, transfer, retention, destruction, disposal or absence of records*, including records that might not be catalogued under the property's later or local names. Your response confirms only that you searched the PRO and RW series using: “Great House Farm” OR “Ty Mawr” OR Llandough OR Cedfin combined with “Glamorgan”, and that this produced no catalogue results. You also correctly state that Discovery searches catalogue titles and descriptions rather than the contents of records. That qualification is important, because it means the search described cannot establish that relevant records did not exist, were never transferred, or were destroyed. In particular, your response does not appear to address the other categories expressly identified in my request, including searches or recorded information relating to: - Western Ground Rents Ltd; - BP Pension Trust Ltd; - BP Properties Ltd; - Mountjoy Ltd; - the proceedings in *BP Properties Ltd v Buckler* [1987] EWCA Civ 2; - the 1982–1983 registration and associated government or administrative records; - the 1980–1988 public campaign and governmental correspondence; - the 1988 eviction and demolition; - Cadw or central-government communications concerning the property; - European Commission of Human Rights Application 14464/88; - records concerning transfer, destruction or disposal of potentially relevant material; and - HMC9/311 or related archival references. These alternative lines of enquiry are intentional. The purpose is to establish whether relevant information can be identified through the *government bodies, corporate entities, court proceedings, administrative processes and archival transfers associated with the property*, rather than relying solely upon the modern name by which the property is known. I am conducting corresponding enquiries with other repositories and public bodies. This is specifically intended to triangulate the documentary history where records may have been catalogued under a different creator, department, legal proceeding, estate, corporate body or administrative function. I therefore ask that you do not treat the absence of a Discovery keyword hit as an answer to the substantive questions raised. Please clarify: 1. *Whether the searches undertaken were limited to the PRO and RW catalogue series and the four property/location search terms identified in your email.* 2. *Whether The National Archives searched for the named corporate bodies, court proceedings and application references identified in my request*, rather than only searching the property names. 3. *Whether The National Archives holds any recorded transfer, accession, disposal, destruction or retention information* indicating that records concerning the relevant property, estate, companies, litigation or government involvement were transferred elsewhere, destroyed, or otherwise disposed of. 4. If such information is not held, *whether this is because no such records are held, because no relevant records were ever transferred to TNA, or because TNA's catalogue/search systems contain no discoverable description of them.* 5. Whether *HMC9/311* or related series have been checked, or whether that reference falls outside the search undertaken. 6. Whether there are *central-government, court, departmental or administrative records relating to the litigation and entities identified above which may contain references to the property without using “Great House Farm”, “Ty Mawr”, “Llandough” or “Cedfin” in the catalogue description.* For the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking The National Archives to infer the contents of uncatalogued records or to undertake an unlimited research project. I am asking for confirmation of the *recorded information held by TNA concerning the existence, provenance, transfer, retention, destruction or disposal of potentially relevant records*, and for the searches undertaken to locate that information. That distinction is particularly important because a catalogue search returning no result is not equivalent to a finding that no relevant historical, governmental or archival records existed. I would therefore be grateful if this could be reconsidered as a response to the scope of the original FOI enquiry rather than treated solely as a request for assistance with a Discovery keyword search. I am continuing parallel enquiries with the National Library of Wales, Glamorgan Archives, Cadw, RCAHMW, HM Land Registry and other relevant bodies. The purpose of these enquiries is to establish the documentary chain independently and to identify where records were created, transferred, retained or potentially destroyed. I have had a lot of months, over a year in fact, of very carefully worded emails in response to my FOI's and GDPR's. It's possible I discovered a major mistake or oversight was made in our landmark legal case BP vs Buckler 1987, which resulted in our ownership claim of our 800 year old home, on land we'd occupied since 1667, being ignored - And so my terminally ill father, pregnant mother and myself and infant sister and brother were dragged from our home by force and it demolished within hours of our eviction, right in front of us. The first time we'd been out of our house since the 16th century. 20 houses were then built on land we appear to still own after my nan conveniently died in the two week window she had to challenge BP registering our land in their names at the land registry. And my father conveniently dying in between BP applying for and being granted planning permission. It's very damning for the land registry and courts if my theory is correct. I'm not just the child from this case. I am a military warfare professional. I have 2 decades of evidence collected. I have family testimony ans heirlooms too. We are looking at an Erin Brockvick type movie sequeal from what I'm uncovering in this case. What has happened here is beyond belief and is a matter of public interest not just a family matter, because of the historic and archelogical significants of our land and property, subsequently characterised by GGAT as a “county treasure”, which CADW, under very questionable and unanswered circumstances refused to list to prevent its demolition, least of all while we were still living in it as a family for the 3rd consecuting century. The planning/development process did not correctly engaged with the archaeological significance and a significant site of national interest was demolished. The long standing councillors clerk took his retirement when I challenged his initial reply of electing not to assist. CADW have admitted destroying records after not listing. The land registry sent me the most cryptic legal jargon making their "mistake" very evidence. My nan was a disabled, widowed pensioner. My dad a terminally ill man. They endured decades of corporate pressure. My dads ECHR (Buckler vs United Kingdom 1989) was dismissing in lieu of BP's rights, citing them as the owners - yet there has never a ruling of their ownership claim and our ownership claim has never been estinguished. I really do not mean to burden you or your office with this matter more than is welcomed by yourselves. I'm merely just emphasising the importance and significanfs of any and every crumb of information that can be located and disclosed. Every detail is instrumental in my investigation and research and quest for justice for my family. I did pass this case to Police for investigation of the fraud and consealment I am seeing, and within just 3 hours of receipt of the evidence I spent 20 years collecting, they decided against investigating. I am the only one in my family who dares even speak up about this, seeing as anyone in our family who has historically challenged the narrative, has abruptly died. I was already shot at last time I was back in Wales, this while I was employed under the Welsh Government/ Vale of Glamorgan Council in adult care. I am a war veteran, I served in the middle east. I left my military career with full honours. My profession is cyber and electronic warfare and this maybe the reason my dying aunties, sisters and mother, late gran and father, confide so heavily in me. I am questioning a lot having just completed a bona fide 22 years in Oath as a public servant. The MP or Councillor for Llandough will not even reply to me or my family about this matter. ITV declassified footage shows BP Bailiffs to be undercover SAS, which the MOD will neither confirm nor deny. All I can do at this juncture is appeal to your offices and look forward to any clarification of the searches undertaken and the recorded information held by The National Archives and your offices final position on this matter, for the history books and record. And I thank you in advance and for your co-operation. Regards, Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant) Royal Signals Cyber & Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member On Wed, 12 Aug 2026, 09:24 RESO Records Enquiries, < [email redacted]> wrote: > Dear Sion Buckler, > > Thank you for contacting The National Archives of the United Kingdom. > > Records relating to the transfer, retention or destruction of material can > be found on our catalogue within the record series created by the Public > Record Office (departmental code PRO) and The National Archives > (departmental code RW). > > I have searched our catalogue, via the advanced search page > for records > using ("Great House Farm" OR "Ty Mawr" OR Llandough OR Cedfin) AND > Glamorgan as search terms within the file series PRO and RW. As you can > see here, this search did not yield any results > . > You can try some similar searches yourself. > > I recommend you consult our guides to searching for records relating land > and maps > > and civil court records > > to assist with other aspects of your enquiry. These guides will help you to > use *our catalogue* , or > other online sources, effectively and focus your search. > > Records are represented in our online catalogue by a title, a reference > and a brief description. When you search our catalogue using keywords you > are searching across these titles and descriptions, rather than the > contents of the records themselves. > > By clicking on any search result, you can see whether the record is > available online or if you need to visit us to view the original. You can > also request copies of records from their catalogue description page. > > If the record is held by another archive, you will need to contact them > directly to find out how you can access it. > > You can also watch this video > for more advice on using > our online catalogue. > > You are welcome to visit us >  to continue your > research here in person, where access to our records is free of charge. > Before you visit, please check our website for information regarding our opening > hours > and ID requirements > , > and videos with tips on how to handle and photograph original documents > > . > > If you are unable to visit, or would like someone to pursue this research > on your behalf, please see the available paid search options > > on our website. > > Yours sincerely, > > Sarah Abbott > > Remote Enquiries Duty Officer > *www.nationalarchives.gov.uk* > > Please complete our brief, three question survey > to let us know what you think about your > recent contact. Your views are important in helping us improve our service. > > *Enquiry:* > > > > > You don't often get email from [email redacted]. Learn why this > is important > > > *EXTERNAL*: This email originates from outside of The National Archives. > > Dear Patricia Reynolds, > > Thank you for your response of 30 July 2026 (Case number > CAS-343481-X5H3M6). > > I note your advice that The National Archives is not the primary > repository for the material described in my original enquiry. However, my > enquiry also concerns whether The National Archives holds any recorded > information relating to the existence, transfer, retention, destruction, or > absence of such records. > > Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I request confirmation of any > recorded information held by The National Archives relating to Great House > Farm / Ty Mawr, Llandough (Glamorgan), including historical references > under alternative descriptions such as Cedfin or equivalent contemporary > descriptions. > > Specifically, please confirm whether The National Archives holds: > > 1. > > *Manorial and estate records* > > Any catalogue entries, Manorial Documents Register information, finding > aids, transfer records, or related documentation concerning: > > - > > the Manor of Llandough (Glamorgan); > - > > pre-1667 references to occupants, customary tenants, holdings, > surveys, rentals, terriers, or court rolls; > - > > Vaughan family estate holdings at Llandough; > - > > Great House Farm / Ty Mawr or any earlier description of the holding. > > Please include any references to HMC9/311 or related archival series. > > 2. > > *Records concerning disposal, destruction, or transfer of records* > > Any recorded information showing: > > - > > whether records relating to Great House Farm, Llandough, the Bute > Estate, Vaughan family papers, or associated land records were ever > transferred to The National Archives; > - > > whether any such records were destroyed, and if so: > - > > what records were destroyed; > - > > when they were destroyed; > - > > under which retention schedule, disposal authority, or policy; > - > > which body authorised or carried out the destruction. > > If no such records are held, please confirm whether any disposal or > transfer records indicate that relevant material was never deposited or was > destroyed elsewhere. > > 3. > > *Legal and court records* > > Any central court records, indexes, correspondence, or administrative > records concerning: > > - > > possession or title disputes involving Great House Farm / Ty Mawr; > - > > Western Ground Rents Ltd; > - > > BP Pension Trust Ltd; > - > > BP Properties Ltd; > - > > Mountjoy Ltd; > - > > the proceedings connected with *BP Properties Ltd v Buckler* [1987] > EWCA Civ 2. > > > 4. > > *Estate transfers and ownership records* > > Any government-held correspondence, files, or records relating to: > > - > > the Bute Estate; > - > > the 1938 sale or transfer of Great House Farm; > - > > Western Ground Rents Ltd acquisition; > - > > BP Pension Trust/BP Properties involvement; > - > > any government department involvement in the property. > > > 5. > > *Family correspondence and related records* > > Any correspondence, reports, enquiries, or administrative records held by > The National Archives involving: > > - > > Mary Williams; > - > > Fred Buckler; > - > > William Buckler; > - > > the Williams/Buckler family; > - > > Great House Farm / Ty Mawr; > - > > Bute Estate representatives; > - > > Western Ground Rents; > - > > BP entities. > > > 6. > > *1980–1988 period and demolition/eviction matters* > > Any records concerning: > > - > > the public campaign regarding Great House Farm; > - > > parliamentary correspondence or government enquiries; > - > > the 1988 eviction/demolition; > - > > Cadw or government communications; > - > > European Commission of Human Rights Application 14464/88 (Buckler v > United Kingdom). > > If any relevant information is held, please provide catalogue references, > descriptions, and access arrangements. > > If no relevant information is held, please confirm: > > - > > the searches undertaken; > - > > the catalogues, databases, and record series searched; > - > > whether any relevant records were ever held and subsequently > transferred, destroyed, or disposed of. > > I am pursuing parallel enquiries with the National Library of Wales, > Glamorgan Archives and other repositories. This request is specifically > directed at recorded information held by The National Archives. > > Yours sincerely, > > Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant) > Royal Signals Cyber & Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member > > > > On Thu, 30 Jul 2026, 10:56 Contact Centre, < > [email redacted]> wrote: > > >> Dear Sion Buckler, >> >> Thank you for contacting The National Archives of the United Kingdom. >> >> I'm afraid we are not the right place to come to for your enquiry. We >> hold historical records sent to us by central government departments and >> law courts for permanent preservation. I regret, therefore, that I'm unable >> to help you with your enquiry. >> >> I suggest you contact The National Library of Wales >> . >> >> I wish you every success with your research. >> >> Yours sincerely, >> >> Patricia Reynolds >> >> Remote Enquiries Duty Officer >> www.nationalarchives.gov.uk >> >> Please complete our brief, three question survey >> to let us know what you think about >> your recent contact. Your views are important in helping us improve our >> service. >> >> *Enquiry:* >> >> >> >> >> You don't often get email from [email redacted]. Learn why this >> is important >> >> >> *EXTERNAL*: This email originates from outside of The National Archives. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 I request the following >> recorded information held by the National Library of Wales: >> Any manorial court rolls, surveys, rentals, terriers, or related >> documents for the Manor of Llandough (Glamorgan) covering the period >> c.1600–1670 that list or refer to occupants, customary tenants, or holders >> of land later known as Great House Farm (or equivalent contemporary >> descriptions). >> Any estate papers, correspondence, leases, rentals, account books, or >> surveys of the Vaughan family of Llandough (or related Vaughan holdings) >> that mention a lease, renewal, confirmation, surrender, or new grant of >> land at Great House Farm / Llandough around or before 1667. >> Any catalogue descriptions, finding aids, or indexes that identify >> pre-1667 deeds, court-roll entries, or estate surveys referring to the >> family’s holding at this property. >> Please confirm whether such material is held and, if so, provide the >> relevant catalogue references and any available descriptions or copies (or >> advise on access arrangements). If any information is exempt, please state >> the exemption(s) relied upon. >> >> >> Yours faithfully, >> >> >> Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant) >> >> >> 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. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >