Subject: RE: Complaint – Failure to Respond / Failure to Deal Properly with Case – Cllr George Carroll (Llandough) – Great House Farm / Church View Close
From: Davidson, Victoria
Direction: received
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 13:59 UTC
Institution: Vale of Glamorgan Council
Refs: none
Archive id: gm-1a03411e9c3eadf2
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr Buckler,
Thank you for your email.
I note your request for further clarification regarding my decision in my capacity as Monitoring Officer.
The assessment I undertook was limited to considering whether the information provided disclosed evidence which, if established, could indicate a failure by the member to comply with the statutory Member’s Code of Conduct. As Monitoring Officer, I do not have formal investigatory powers equivalent to those of the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales and I am not required to undertake an investigation or obtain representations from a member before deciding whether there is sufficient basis for a referral to be made. My role at this stage is to consider whether the information presented discloses evidence of conduct that appears capable of amounting to a breach of the Code.
In reaching my view, I considered the information provided within your complaint, including the chronology you supplied regarding correspondence sent to Councillor Carroll between February and July 2026. The substance of the complaint was that you had not received substantive responses to a number of emails sent over that period.
For completeness, I considered whether the conduct alleged could potentially engage any of the principal obligations contained within the Member's Code of Conduct. These include requirements that members show respect and consideration for others, do not engage in bullying, harassment or discriminatory behaviour, do not bring their office or authority into disrepute, do not improperly use their position to confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person, and do not misuse Council resources or confidential information.
Whilst I appreciate that the absence of a response to correspondence may be frustrating, the information provided did not disclose evidence of disrespectful behaviour, bullying, harassment, misuse of position, misuse of Council resources, disclosure of confidential information, conduct bringing the office of member or the authority into disrepute, or any other behaviour which appeared capable of amounting to a breach of the Code. In reaching that view, I considered the nature of the conduct alleged, namely a failure to respond to correspondence, and whether that conduct engaged any provision of the Code.
It is important to note that the Member’s Code of Conduct does not impose a general obligation on elected members to respond to all correspondence received from members of the public, nor does it prescribe timescales within which responses must be provided. The Code is concerned with standards of conduct rather than the quality, adequacy or timeliness of constituency casework. Consequently, a decision not to respond, or not to respond in the manner sought by a correspondent, does not of itself constitute evidence of a breach of the Code.
Given that the information provided did not disclose evidence which appeared capable of amounting to a breach of the Code, I did not consider it necessary or proportionate to seek comments from Councillor Carroll before reaching that conclusion. My decision was therefore based upon the information contained within your complaint and whether that information, taken at its highest, indicated a potential breach of the Code warranting further action.
For completeness, any person is entitled to submit a complaint directly to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales if they believe a member has failed to comply with the Member’s Code of Conduct. The Ombudsman is independent of the Council and is responsible for determining whether a complaint should be investigated and, if so, whether any further action is appropriate.
I trust this clarifies the basis of my decision. Having reviewed the information provided, my position remains that I have not identified evidence which would justify further action by me in my capacity as Monitoring Officer.
Yours sincerely,


Victoria Davidson
Monitoring Officer/Head of Legal and Democratic Services / Swyddog Monitro / Pennaeth Gwasanaethau Cyfreithiol a Democrataidd
Director's Office - Resources / Swyddfa’r Cyfarwyddwr - Adnoddau
Vale of Glamorgan Council / Cyngor Bro Morgannwg
tel / ffôn: [phone redacted]
mob / sym: [phone redacted]
e-mail / e-bost: [email redacted]<[email redacted]>

Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
Ystyriwch yr amgylchedd. Peidiwch ag argraffu'r neges hon oni bai fod gwir angen.

Visit our Website at www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk<http://www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk/>
Ewch i'n gwefan yn www.bromorgannwg.gov.uk<http://www.bromorgannwg.gov.uk/>

Find us on Facebook / Cewch ddod o hyd i ni ar Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/valeofglamorgancouncil>
Follow us on Twitter / Dilynwch ni ar Twitter<http://twitter.com/vogcouncil>

Correspondence is welcomed in Welsh or English / Croesewir Gohebiaeth yn y Gymraeg neu yn Saesneg.

From: Sion Buckler <[email redacted]>
Sent: 13 August 2026 00:47
To: Davidson, Victoria <[email redacted]>
Subject: Re: Complaint – Failure to Respond / Failure to Deal Properly with Case – Cllr George Carroll (Llandough) – Great House Farm / Church View Close

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

Ms Davidson,

Thank you for your response.

I accept the distinction you draw between the Council's Corporate Concerns and Complaints Policy and the separate statutory framework governing the conduct of elected members. I am not seeking to use the corporate complaints procedure as an appeal against historic planning, enforcement, land or judicial decisions.

However, I do wish to clarify one important point concerning your decision in your capacity as Monitoring Officer.

My complaint about Councillor George Carroll was not simply that the Council should revisit historic decisions concerning Great House Farm. The specific concern was his repeated failure to provide any substantive response to correspondence sent to him in his capacity as the elected councillor for Llandough, despite repeated approaches over a period of approximately five months and despite the correspondence setting out specific matters concerning his ward.

The chronology supplied with my complaint records correspondence on:

  *   16 February 2026;
  *   4 May 2026;
  *   7 June 2026;
  *   25 June 2026; and
  *   13 July 2026.

My complaint therefore concerned the conduct and handling of that correspondence by an elected member, rather than asking the Monitoring Officer to determine the underlying historical ownership or planning dispute.

You state:

“Having reviewed the information you have provided, I have not identified evidence which would indicate a breach of the Members Code of Conduct.”

I would therefore be grateful for clarification of the basis upon which that conclusion was reached.

In particular, please confirm:

  1.  Which specific provisions of the Members' Code of Conduct were considered in assessing my complaint.
  2.  Whether the complete correspondence chronology and the underlying emails and attachments were considered, rather than merely my summary of them.
  3.  Whether Councillor Carroll was invited to provide an explanation or response concerning the repeated absence of any substantive response to the correspondence.
  4.  If so, whether his response was taken into account in reaching your conclusion.
  5.  If not, please explain how the Monitoring Officer was able to determine that there was no evidence indicating a possible breach without obtaining the member's account of the conduct complained of.
  6.  Please explain, in sufficient detail to enable me to understand the decision, why the documented pattern of conduct was considered incapable of engaging any provision of the Members' Code of Conduct.

I appreciate that failure to answer correspondence does not, by itself, necessarily constitute a breach of the Code. I am not asserting that proposition. My concern is that the Monitoring Officer appears to have reached a definitive conclusion without identifying the relevant Code provisions, the evidence considered, or the reasoning by which that evidence was found insufficient.

I would also ask you to clarify whether you consider that the matter should instead be referred to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales for consideration under its jurisdiction concerning complaints about the conduct of elected members.

I note that your response states that no further action will be taken by you as Monitoring Officer. I will therefore retain your letter, together with my original complaint and the complete correspondence record, for consideration of whether a complaint should be submitted to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not asking you to determine the historical merits of the Great House Farm dispute through the corporate complaints procedure. I am asking for the reasoning and evidential basis for the separate determination you have made concerning the conduct of an elected member.

I would be grateful if you could therefore provide the above clarification and confirm the relevant Code provisions considered.

Regards,

Sion Hywel Buckler
(Ret’d Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber & Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

On Wed, 12 Aug 2026, 11:24 Davidson, Victoria, <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>> wrote:
Dear Mr Buckler,
Thank you for your email regarding Councillor George Carroll and for setting out the background to your concerns relating to Great House Farm (Ty Mawr), Llandough, now Church View Close.
I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence and have carefully considered the matters you have raised.
Having reviewed your complaint, I do not consider that it falls within the scope of the Vale of Glamorgan Council's Corporate Concerns and Complaints Policy. The substance of your correspondence relates to historic planning, enforcement, land ownership, heritage and record keeping matters dating back several decades, together with requests for review, explanation and further investigation of those matters.
The Corporate Concerns and Complaints Policy is not intended to provide a mechanism for challenging or revisiting decisions where there is a separate statutory process or right of appeal; seeking changes to properly made decisions, policies or legislation; pursuing matters which are not the responsibility of the Council; promoting a particular cause or campaign; or addressing matters for which alternative legal or regulatory processes exist.
You have also requested that the matter be considered by me as the Monitoring Officer as a potential breach of the Member’s Code of Conduct by Councillor Carroll.
The role of the Monitoring Officer in this context is limited to considering whether there is evidence that a member has failed to comply with the statutory Members’s Code of Conduct. Having reviewed the information you have provided, I have not identified evidence which would indicate a breach of the Members Code of Conduct.
Accordingly, the issues raised will not be progressed under the Council's Corporate Concerns and Complaints Policy as they fall outside the scope of that procedure. I do not consider there is sufficient evidence to justify referral of the matter for consideration under the Members’s Code of Conduct. No further action will therefore be taken by me in my capacity as the Council’s Monitoring Officer in relation to this complaint.
I appreciate that this response may be disappointing. However, I trust it clarifies the Council's position and the limits of the Corporate Complaints Procedure and the Monitoring Officer's role in the context of the matters you raise.
Yours sincerely,

Victoria Davidson
Monitoring Officer/Head of Legal & Democratic Services / Rheolydd Gweithredol, Gwasanaethau Cyfreithiol
Management Team - Resources / Swyddfa’r Cyfarwyddwr - Adnoddau
Vale of Glamorgan Council / Cyngor Bro Morgannwg
tel / ffôn:
mob / sym: [phone redacted]
e-mail / e-bost: [email redacted]<[email redacted]>


Consider the environment.. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
Ystyriwch yr amgylchedd. Peidiwch ag argraffu'r neges hon oni bai fod gwir angen.

Visit our Website at www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk<http://www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk/>
Ewch i'n gwefan yn www.bromorgannwg.gov.uk<http://www.bromorgannwg.gov.uk/>

Find us on Facebook / Cewch ddod o hyd i ni ar Facebook<http://en-gb.facebook.com/valeofglamorganlife>
Follow us on Instagram / Dilynwch ni ar Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/vog_council>
Follow us on LinkedIn / Dilynwch ni ar LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/vale-of-glamorgan-council>

Correspondence is welcomed in Welsh or English / Croesewir Gohebiaeth yn y Gymraeg neu yn Saesneg.

[cid:image001.png@01DD33D9.2A379B30]<https://www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk/en/our_council/achieving_our_vision/Corporate-Plan.aspx>

From: Sion Buckler <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>>
Sent: 27 July 2026 22:22
To: [email redacted]<[email redacted]>
Cc: [email redacted]<[email redacted]>; [email redacted]<[email redacted]>; Carroll, George D (Cllr) <[email redacted]<[email redacted]>>
Subject: Complaint – Failure to Respond / Failure to Deal Properly with Case – Cllr George Carroll (Llandough) – Great House Farm / Church View Close

You don't often get email from [email redacted]<[email redacted]>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
Dear Monitoring Officer / Corporate Complaints Team,

With great regret I am writing to make a complaint about the persistent failure of Councillor George D. D. Carroll (Llandough ward) to respond substantively to my repeated and reasonable correspondence concerning historic land, planning, enforcement, heritage and related public-interest matters at Great House Farm (Ty Mawr), Llandough (now Church View Close), Vale of Glamorgan.

I have a legitimate and long-standing family interest in the site (Williams/Buckler family connection documented from the 17th century). See attached.

The issues raised include alleged defective notices, loss of opportunity to contest enforcement leading to demolition in 1988, heritage/regulatory oversight, planning and title records, and related transparency failures.

Despite multiple contacts over several months, I have received no substantive replies from Cllr Carroll. This constitutes a failure to respond and a failure to deal with the case properly.

### Full correspondence log with Cllr George Carroll ([email redacted]<[email redacted]>)

| Date       | Subject / Key content                                                                 | Response received |
|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|
| 16 Feb 2026 | Potential gaps in Council planning/record-keeping for Great House Farm (demolished 1988); title fraud and procedural issues relating to Church View Close | None |

| 4 May 2026  | Request regarding BP vs Buckler 1987; shared media/evidence; request for attention as Llandough councillor | None |

| 7 Jun 2026  | “Church View Close, Llandough” – piecing together 1988 events from public records, family testimony and media | None |

| 25 Jun 2026 | “Great House Farm, Llandough” – enquiry whether prior concerns on family dispossession had been reviewed; request for any progress or discussion | None |

| 13 Jul 2026 | “Great House Farm/ Church View Close” – formal follow-up listing the above timeline, restating legitimate interest (family roots since 1667), noting absence of replies, requesting detailed response within 10 working days, and raising the removed commemorative tree | None |

### Remedy sought

1. A full written response from Cllr Carroll addressing the points raised in the logged emails, within 10–15 working days.

2. Confirmation that this complaint has been logged under the Council’s corporate complaints procedure and/or referred to the Monitoring Officer / Standards Committee as appropriate for any potential breach of the councillor Code of Conduct (failure to respond / failure to deal properly with a case).

3. Written confirmation of the process and timescale for investigation and response.

I have retained the full original emails and attachments and can supply them on request. Please acknowledge receipt of this formal complaint.

Yours sincerely,

Sion Hywel Buckler (Ret’d Sergeant)
[address redacted], Dinas Powys, [postcode redacted][map link redacted]
[email redacted]<[email redacted]>
[phone redacted]