Subject: Re: Freedom of Information Request: Reference CAS-347296-M0V4Y1 CRM:007302479 From: Sion Buckler Direction: sent Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 02:49 UTC Institution: The National Archives Refs: CAS-347296 Archive id: gm-1a0d677d2f33f0ab ------------------------------------------------------------ FOI Team, I write in response to your disclosure dated 23 September 2026 concerning my Freedom of Information request regarding Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr and records relating to BP Properties Ltd v Buckler. I appreciate the additional catalogue references and the release information provided. However, your response also identifies a number of matters concerning the scope, timing and methodology of the searches undertaken which require clarification. Please therefore treat this email as a *formal request for internal review*, as well as a request for clarification of the matters set out below. 1. Physical accession/transfer of YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536 Your response states that: “The series that this record formed part of were released on our catalogue on Discovery on 20th May 2026.” You also state that TNA *holds transfer paperwork* for: *YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536 – Judicial Papers A-C 1-63* Please therefore confirm, insofar as the information is recorded in TNA's transfer/accession records: - the date on which the physical records comprising YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536 were transferred into the custody of The National Archives; - the accession/transfer reference associated with that transfer, if recorded; - whether the transfer paperwork identifies the transferring body or institution; - whether the physical records were already in TNA's custody during my earlier enquiries in August 2026, notwithstanding that their catalogue description was only released on Discovery on 20 May 2026; and - whether the *20 May 2026* date refers solely to publication/release of catalogue metadata on Discovery, rather than the date on which the physical records entered TNA custody. I am particularly seeking to distinguish *physical custody/accession* from *catalogue publication*, as these are not necessarily the same event. 2. Scope and methodology of the initial search Your response states: “The initial response from our records enquiries team looked for the four terms (‘Great House Farm’, ‘Ty Mawr’, ‘Llandough’ or ‘Cedfin’) within the PRO and RW series and did not find any relevant information.” My original request, however, expressly identified a number of alternative search routes, including: - Western Ground Rents Ltd; - BP Pension Trust Ltd; - BP Properties Ltd; - Mountjoy Ltd; - BP Properties Ltd v Buckler; - the 1982–1983 registration; - the 1980–1988 government/public campaign; - the 1988 eviction and demolition; - Cadw and central-government communications; - ECHR Application 14464/88; - transfer, destruction or disposal records; and - HMC9/311 and related archival references. Your present response confirms that a wider catalogue search was subsequently undertaken and that searching *BP Properties Ltd* produced the House of Lords judicial record. Please therefore clarify: - whether the *initial search* was in fact limited to the four property/location terms and the PRO/RW series stated in your response; - why the named corporate litigant *BP Properties Ltd*, expressly identified in my request, was not included in that initial search; - whether any search log, enquiry record, search worksheet or other recorded audit trail exists showing the terms, series and dates searched at each stage; and - whether the later wider search was materially different from the initial search in a way that explains why the judicial record was not identified earlier. I recognise that TNA cannot necessarily undertake an unlimited historical research exercise. My question here is narrower: *what searches were actually undertaken, when, and against which terms/series?* 3. Search undertaken after 20 May 2026 Your response states that the relevant parliamentary series had been released onto Discovery on *20 May 2026*, yet the subsequent correspondence records a negative result until the search parameters were expanded to include the named legal/corporate party. Please explain, insofar as this is recorded: - whether any searches of Discovery or relevant TNA catalogue data concerning this matter were conducted between *20 May 2026 and 13 August 2026*; - if so, whether those searches included “BP Properties Ltd” or the case title *BP Properties Ltd v Buckler*; and - if no such search was undertaken before 13 August 2026, please confirm that fact. This is important because the chronology appears to be: *20 May 2026 – catalogue release of the relevant series* *earlier enquiries – negative result* *13 August 2026 – explicit instruction to search the named corporate/legal party* *subsequent wider search – judicial record identified* I am seeking to establish the documentary search history accurately, rather than infer the reason for the earlier negative result. 4. Transfer, retention, destruction or disposal records Your response states that TNA holds transfer paperwork for YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536 and has disclosed three documents concerning its release/manifest arrangements. Please confirm whether those records contain, or whether TNA otherwise holds, information showing: - the date of transfer or accession; - the previous custody/location of the records; - whether the records were transferred directly from the Parliamentary Archives or another repository; - whether any associated material was excluded, withheld, destroyed, disposed of or retained elsewhere; and - whether the transfer documentation identifies any earlier repository or custodial history. I am not asking TNA to reconstruct the contents of uncatalogued material. I am asking what *recorded provenance and custody information* TNA holds concerning the records now identified. I would also take this opportunity to ask again, if you hold any more information I've asked for, not disclosed to me, please disclose in your next reply. This case went before ECHR (Buckler vs United Kingdom 1989) and their window to reopen that ruling based on such matters as concealment, is as I understand, 6 months. It would be a grave injustice to deny or delay or tortioustly interfere with our quest for justice, anymore than has already been the case for my heavily dispositioned family by this whole already very prolonged, very traumatising matter. 5. Internal-review outcome Please review the original response in light of the above and confirm whether TNA considers that the searches undertaken adequately addressed the scope of my original request. Where TNA considers that information is not held, please distinguish where possible between: *(a)* information establishing that no such records were ever transferred to TNA; *(b)* information showing that records were transferred elsewhere; *(c)* information showing that records were destroyed/disposed of; and *(d)* the absence of a discoverable catalogue reference or search hit. These are materially different conclusions for the purposes of my documentary research. I would be grateful for the internal-review response within 14 working days. Regards, Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant) Royal Signals Cyber/ Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member On Wed, 23 Sept 2026, 17:12 FOI Requests, < [email redacted]> wrote: > Dear Ret'd Sergeant Sion Buckler, > > > > Thank you for your enquiry in which you asked for the information > concerning the existence, provenance, transfer, retention, destruction or > disposal of records relating to Ty Mawr / Great House Farm. > > > > Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act > 2000. The FOI Act gives you the right to know whether we hold the > information you want and to have it communicated to you, subject to any > exemptions which may apply. > > > > I can confirm that The National Archives holds some information relevant > to your request. We are pleased to be able to provide some of this > information to you. > > > > *Our response * > > > > The initial response from our records enquiries team looked for the four > terms (*“Great House Farm”, “Ty Mawr”, “Llandough” or “Cedfin”*) within > the PRO and RW series and did not find any relevant information. We have > now tried those terms and the further twelve terms that you have specified > in a wider catalogue search. We have provided the results of our search > below. > > > > The crux of your query is local land ownership dispute in Glamorgan and > the demolition of some buildings by a private company; generally speaking, > these are not matters dealt with by central government and we would not > expect to see anything within our collections. As such, there would have > been no records to transfer. The exception is the court case relating to BP > properties, which generated some papers. Links to the catalogue pages for > these records can be seen below. > > > > There are likely to be records of the farm in the 1940s as part of the > National Farm Survey series but these cannot all currently be searched > online by farm. > > > > We are unable to conduct this research on the archival collections on your > behalf without charging fees to conduct research on your behalf (Paid > Search). A public authority is allowed to charge fees under section 9 of > the Freedom of Information Act and within this section of the Act it > states: *"provision is made by or under any enactment as to the fee may > be charged by the public authority for the disclosure of the information" > (S9(5) FOIA). * > > > > The Public Records Act (1958) enables a statutory instrument to be made > setting out the fees which may be made in connection with the supply of > information from The National Archives. The prices we charge are set out by > our Fees Regulations . > > > > If you are interested in paying for research to be conducted on your > behalf, then details of our Paid Search service and other options for > paying for research are available here: Paying for research - The > National Archives > > > > > If you would prefer to conduct this research yourself then you may find > the following research guide to be of assistance: National Farm Survey of > England and Wales 1941-1943 - The National Archives > > > > > There are Agricultural Executive Committee minutes and papers for > Glamorgan; but again, these cannot be searched online by name of farm and > we are unable to conduct this research without charging a fee: Browse > records of other archives | The National Archives > > > > > We can provide the following advice regarding the search terms you have > specified: > > > > 1. > > *Western Ground Rents Ltd* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 2. > > *BP Pension Trust Ltd* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 3. > > *BP Properties Ltd* > > > > Judicial Papers A-C 1-63 | The National Archives > > (House of Lords as court of appeal) > > > > 4. > > *Mountjoy Ltd* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 5. > > *Proceedings in BP Properties Ltd v Buckler [1987] EWCA Civ 2* > > > > Judicial Papers A-C 1-63 | The National Archives > > (House of Lords as court of appeal) > > > > 6. > > *1982–1983 registration and associated government or administrative > records* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 7. > > *1980–1988 public campaign and governmental correspondence* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 8. > > *1988 eviction and demolition* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 9. > > *Cadw or central-government communications concerning the property* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 10. > > *European Commission of Human Rights Application 14464/88* > > > > Relevant information not found. > > > > 11. > > *Records concerning transfer, destruction or disposal of potentially > relevant material* > > > > Within the results of our search, it revealed a record within the > parliamentary collection. > > > > This is *Judicial Papers A-C 1-63* > > . The parliamentary records and the provision of a service for them by > The National Archives, was done in phases, with their collections loaded > into Discovery in stages. The series that this record formed part of were > released on our catalogue on Discovery on 20th May 2026. > > > > This is an open record and available to the public here at The National > Archives, Kew. To note, this record requires preparation for production and > will take four working days to prepare > > > > TNA holds transfer paperwork for *YHL/PO/JO/10/11/2536 - Judicial Papers > A-C 1-63* > . > The below table is a schedule of the documents that we have attached to > this response. > > *Document Title* > > *Document Description* > > *TNA’s Notes* > > Item 01 > > *Release Schedule: On Discovery* > > This schedule shows the release date of 20th May. > > > > Relevant information to request provided. Some of the information is > additionally redacted as ‘out of scope’ and not relevant to the request. > > Item 02 > > *Release Schedule: High Level Delivery Schedule* > > This schedule shows that it was scheduled for release in May > > Relevant information to request provided. Some of the information is > additionally redacted as ‘out of scope’ and not relevant to the request. > > Item 03 > > *Collect 27 Series 11 Spreadsheet: Manifest* > > This spreadsheet is the manifest TNA received from the Parliamentary > Archives > > Relevant information to request provided. Some of the information is > additionally redacted as ‘out of scope’ and not relevant to the request. > > > > > > 12. > > *HMC9/311 or related archival references* > > > > This is Manorial Documents register returns the county of Glamorgan > organised by Manor alphabetically. The Manorial Documents Register > can now be > searched online, by manor or parish and the results display in Discovery. > This search summary says it lists records 1189-1925 held at National > Library of Wales, Glamorgan Archives and West Glamorgan Archive Service: Search > results: llandough | The National Archives > . > This date range is too early, individual farm names are not listed in the > titles, and the records are not held at TNA. > > > > This is the limit of what our catalogue metadata and corporate records > allow us to confirm. > > > > This concludes our response to your request. > > > > If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request or the decision > which has been reached, you have the right to ask for an internal review. > Internal review requests must be submitted within two months of the date > of this response and should be addressed to: > > > > Quality Manager > > Visitor Experience > > The National Archives > > Kew > > Richmond > > Surrey > > [postcode redacted] > > [email redacted] > > > > Please mark your complaint clearly. You have the right to ask the > Information Commissioner (ICO) to investigate any aspect of your complaint. > However, please note that the ICO is likely to expect internal complaints > procedures to have been exhausted before beginning his investigation. > > > > > > Yours sincerely, > > > > *FOI Assessor* > > The Freedom of Information Centre > Government and Archives Leadership > The National Archives > > > > > > > > > *Your request* > > > > *Original email dated 13/08/2026:* > > > > *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.* > > > > *Follow-up email dated 20/08/2026* > > > > *In addition, please expand the scope of the search to include any records > held relating to the Glamorgan War Agricultural Executive Committee (“War > Ag” / CWAEC) and Great House Farm / the relevant land at Llandough, > covering approximately 1936–1950 (with particular focus on 1939–1945). This > should include, where held:* > > > > - > > *Any orders, notices or decisions taking possession of, directing > cultivation of, or otherwise requisitioning land forming part of Great > House Farm (or the specific parcel now associated with Llandough Motor > Sales / Llandough Trading Estate).* > - > > *Any compensation claims, assessments, payments or settlements under > the Compensation (Defence) Act 1939 or related wartime legislation, > including the identity of the recipient(s).* > - > > *Relevant minutes, correspondence or case files of the Glamorgan CWAEC > concerning the farm or land in question.* > - > > *Any related material in the MAF series that links the National Farm > Survey entries with wartime agricultural possession or compensation.* > > > > *I hold original documents recording compensation payments in connection > with this land and am seeking to identify the wartime status of the holding > and the party recognised as entitled to compensation.* > > > > *Clarification email dated 02/09/2026* > > > > *In summary, I am seeking recorded information held by The National > Archives concerning:* > > > > - > > *Existence, transfer, retention, destruction or disposal of records > relating to Great House Farm / Ty Mawr (and earlier descriptions) and > associated entities, litigation and administrative processes (as previously > detailed).* > > > > - > > *National Farm Survey / MAFF records for the holding.* > > > > - > > *Any Glamorgan CWAEC / War Ag records, possession/requisition orders, > cultivation directions, and compensation claims/payments under the > Compensation (Defence) Act 1939 or related wartime legislation in respect > of the land (or the parcel now associated with Llandough Motor Sales / > Llandough Trading Estate), including identity of any compensation > recipients.* > > > > *I am not asking for an open-ended research exercise. I am asking for > confirmation of what recorded information (including transfer, accession, > disposal or destruction records) is held, the series searched, and the > results of those searches.* > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >