Subject: Apologies Gentlemen - Disregard Last Email Por Favor
From: Sion Buckler
Direction: sent
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 03:25 UTC
Institution: Llandough Community Council
Refs: none
Archive id: gm-1a1334ac831c541a
------------------------------------------------------------

Apologies Gentlemen,

I am on a night excercise and my attention was elsewhere trying to respond
to your email. It has my full attention now. Please disregard my last email
in lieu of this one. Thank you in advance for your patience and
understanding.

Mr Egan (& cc Mo),

Thank you for your email of 11 October 2026. I acknowledge your refusal of
my information request and your statement that the other matters raised in
my correspondence “will be considered at the October meeting of the
council”.

Not to sound like a stickler, but your email does not identify the date,
time, venue, public-access arrangements or agenda for that meeting, nor
does it direct me to a published notice containing those particulars. This
omission prevents me from verifying when the promised consideration is to
take place, whether the relevant matters are scheduled for consideration,
and whether I can attend or monitor the proceedings. Please provide those
particulars immediately or identify where the Council has published them.

Below are my position, formal request for an internal review, further
request for recorded information and subject access request for my personal
data. Please record and process each part under the applicable procedure.
None is intended to withdraw, narrow or replace any of the others.

*1. Position concerning Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr*

As stated previously and repeatedly, my research into this case concerns
the legitimacy of my family's historic title and the treatment of Great
House Farm, its buildings and associated land.

The two-parcel estate, one parcel of which was and still appears to be
ours, is an evidence-based position advanced from the documentary record
concerning the distinct identities and conveyancing histories of the land.
Parcel A comprised the farmhouse, farm buildings, garden, yard, associated
woodland and what is now the green at Church View Close. Parcel B comprised
the eastern agricultural land, east of our Parcel A, which was WGR's and
BP's parcel and the focus of their possession claim.

My argument, again, is that our parcel of land and home, dating back to
1667, was treated as one and the same as Parcel B under the blanket term
“whole farm”.

Our Parcel A—or a synthetic imitation of it, arising from a long-running
and rejected series of attempts to make our occupancy appear permissive—was
stealthily registered by BP in 1983 and merged into Parcel B in 1987. My
grandmother died at a particularly convenient point in this sequence, and
no notice of the registration was given during the appeal window. The
parcels were merged in 1987 before my late father's appeal against the 1987
ruling had concluded.

Our county's treasured home was also demolished in 1988, before our appeal
had even begun, let alone concluded, following Cadw's decision not to list
it as a Grade II building, leaving it open to demolition.

None of this should be downgraded to speculative theory simply because the
Council has not adjudicated it. The chronology of the evidence is painting
a damning picture of what appears to be everything needed to reopen this
case: fraud, concealment and government involvement. These are matters I am
investigating, and I encourage everyone involved to conduct their own
research and investigation.

Before returning to the formal substance of this communication, I will give
you the courtesy of some colloquialism, so that you have the courtesy from
me of being treated like a human being and understand that you are also
dealing with one. I have received some very gracious emails from Chris
Franks, the coroners, and other family and community members whose families
have been allied with mine for decades and, in some instances, centuries.

First, I wholeheartedly reject what I regard as a terrorist/hostage
situationship with local authorities here. I also reject the transformation
of our town, county and country into one giant corporate concentration work
camp, with voters being imported by traitors to keep themselves in power. I
served under Tony Blair's orders, and I called David Cameron into an
international treaty process that I helped stop at WCIT 2012. I know a
great deal about what the other mammals on this island get up to.

What happened to our stronghold, and the destruction of our ancient
history, heritage and family, is tantamount to ethnic cleansing and a
declaration of war on everything I hold sacred: my family, home, land,
history, reality and faith. The situation was untenable enough back then.
The more the full picture of what happened in this case becomes apparent,
the less legitimacy I can accept in the occupation and rule of my
birthplace by the authorities currently exercising power over it.

Unless I am mistaken and this has all been one big misunderstanding, with
nobody to blame, that needs to be demonstrated through evidence and clear
answers. I am not receiving much reassurance from any of you that I am
mistaken.

I understood you to have already retired, which was a misunderstanding on
my part. Much like I misunderstood the 1987 merger of the parcels to have
occurred in 1983 until recently, this is a complex case. I do not claim to
understand every aspect of it myself. It will take a village, and I am here
hoping to feel my village's warmth, with three others due to arrive shortly
after me this month.

Legitimacy is the only authority I will recognise here. Two of my
close-protection officers are three-times-decorated Gulf War veterans and
former police officers, and I have shared this matter with them. If the
local authorities will not cooperate, I have no issue drawing on my own
security group and resources in Britain and America. I am giving the local
authorities here the opportunity to answer for what you all did to my
family over the past 40 years.

As you may be able to tell, I have more or less abandoned the idea that
this is a democracy or that a lawful system of government operates here. I
know the British State is a terrorist organisation because I have been part
of the forces carrying out comparable operations to the siege and assault
on my home and family in Llandough in 1988. I was behind a machine gun in a
helicopter during the illegal invasion of Iraq. So, while you may fancy
yourselves crazy here, holding my family hostage under a web of deceit, I
may actually be a little bit worse.

My flight back to Cardiff last month was synonymous with an earlier
military tour of the Middle East in 2005, when two SAS personnel were held
hostage by Iraqi police and were about to be decapitated. We had to smash
down the prison walls and get them out. I am here to see that my family
gets out of the captivity they are being held in. The walls of this
terrorist/hostage situationship are not physical; they are more like some
demonic realm, a spell everyone has been kept under. Perhaps it is the same
source as whatever is going into the water that is making frogs turn gay.

The circus this case appears to be, if not rectified, will surely damn and
curse that small, pale village to hell. This is no small matter. The
armed-forces world I know is nothing compared with the forces being messed
with in this case. None of us can now claim innocence or ignorance of the
facts being brought forward. My older brother, sisters, mum, aunties and
cousins are also seeing this for the charade and circus it is. I am
bringing the matter to everyone's attention to give you all the opportunity
to respond. So far, all I have experienced is barriers, delays, walls,
paywalls and excuses.

You yourself kindly pointed us towards things such as the 1939 agreement,
which excludes our parcel. But let us not forget that your initial response
was an unwillingness to become involved.

Understand that I bring this matter to the local authorities—whose
legitimacy in this case I dispute—after considerable personal trauma, a
difficult personal trajectory, misinformation, fragmented information and
expense to myself. I attended private boarding school, and my career began
in military intelligence, but we were nevertheless knocked into a different
life after 1988.

More recently, I left my wife and daughter at our villa in the Caribbean
and spent the past year in a cabin in southern Argentina, trying to
understand this case. While you are all taking your merry old time dragging
this out for months, that has contributed to the end of my marriage and
another family separation. I do not know where you all imagine I am going
each time you give me the finger.

I am a military warfare professional, and I am very committed to
understanding this. That is why I flew 7,000 miles to your doorstep. If
this is my family's land, how did it come to be that you are all on it? I
am not convinced by the answers you keep providing.

Perhaps those answers sufficed when I was an infant, my mum was pregnant
and my dad was terminally ill. But my disabled, widowed, pensioner
grandmother, Mary Williams, had seven children, who had many other
children, and generation on generation has now produced a small and very
hungry army. I have more than 50 former soldiers in my US-based private
security group, with a satellite office here.

I say this because my family here are a lot bigger and uglier. I am no
longer based here with any of you. I am resigned to the conclusion that the
British State is ethnically cleansing Welsh nationals in Wales. That is why
I am now based in Patagonia, Argentina, where Welsh nationals, our history
and our heritage are celebrated, and where I am pursuing legal personhood
arrangements for my AI agents.

I am only here to light the metaphorical fuse of this powder keg. The
aftermath will be between the local authorities and everyone affected by
what has happened. I am quietly gathering evidence, particularly for the
replica of Great House Farm I am constructing in Patagonia as a museum and
third home. If I uncover fraud, concealment and government involvement in
that process, so be it. The case reopens.

https://bpvsbuckler.bucklerfamily.estate

My wife, soon to be my ex-wife, and I will not even allow our unregistered
daughter to set foot in Wales until it is decolonised or the British
Establishment and UK Government have been overthrown.

I also exported my dog from our livery yard in Monknash in 2024 after an
Afghan migrant entered our horse yard and indoor riding school, allegedly
attempting to steal and eat him.

My first child was abducted at 36 days old in 2013 and has never been seen
by me again. It feels as though a demonic realm is ruling this island and
everyone is under its spell.

The reason my business associates, former soldiers and family members are
gathering around this matter and flying into the region is that, if I am
right about this case and corruption in the local authorities, it is the
catalyst and nexus event of the land-market bubble we are now experiencing.
I am not saying that this case alone meets the threshold for reopening; I
am saying that it may be one of the earliest, possibly the first, of many
parallel cases nationwide.

That means there is a very real possibility of something like what we saw
in Cyprus, in which I was directly involved while serving as guard
commander at RAF Akrotiri. In that context, the United Nations in Nicosia
would have to award land back to its native owners after decades of
occupation or provide reparations. Decolonisation is not all political and
figurative; it is very literal, Paul. It is logistical and operational. You
will soon see that through this case or the increasing number of others now
emerging nationwide.

Having recently worked on setting up the car-finance reparations claims
scheme and its information systems, against the background of the FCA's
work and last year's court rulings, I see a definite parallel here as more
cases resembling my family's experience in Llandough emerge nationally and
globally.

Do you see the parallel? The following websites illustrate it. In my view,
neither underlying system should be able to function as it currently does
without scrutiny and accountability.

https://car.financecheque.uk

https://bucklerfamily.estate

But I digress. To continue from my earlier point, I am not asking Llandough
Community Council to adjudicate title or pronounce on matters outside its
legal remit. The Council's institutional authority is not itself proof of
the legitimacy of a title position. Its responsibility is to account
accurately for its own records, knowledge, representations, decisions and
referrals, and to disclose the recorded information it holds.

The question of legitimacy must be assessed against the underlying
documents and relevant legal acts, rather than presumed from administrative
status or the repetition of an earlier account. I expect the Council to
distinguish primary documentary evidence, recorded statements, family
evidence and inference when dealing with these matters.

*2. Formal request for internal review — refusal dated 11 October 2026*

Please treat this section as my formal request for an internal review of
the refusal of my original request, submitted on 21 September 2026.

That request covered:

   1. Records created after 2002 concerning Great House Farm / Tŷ Mawr,
   Church View Close, the green—including references to VG41—and the roadside
   verge beside the churchyard wall.
   2. Photographs, postcards and other images, of any date, depicting the
   farmhouse, farm buildings, green or surrounding church area.
   3. Records concerning material transferred from Penarth Town Council
   during the 1982 local-government reorganisation, and information held by
   the Council about the whereabouts or deposit of earlier Llandough community
   records.

Your refusal explains that searching minutes and related documentation
across a period of approximately 2002–2016 would exceed the appropriate
cost limit. It refers to 224 sets of records and estimates 20 minutes to
read each set and a further 10 minutes to assess it, but gives a total of
2,240 minutes, or approximately 37 hours.

Those figures are internally inconsistent. At 30 minutes per set, 224 sets
would amount to 6,720 minutes, or 112 hours. The stated 2,240 minutes
equates to 10 minutes per set. More importantly, the response does not
explain precisely which activities have been included in the estimate.

Please have the reviewer consider the following matters:

   - How the estimate was calculated, including the number and nature of
   the records assumed to require examination.
   - Whether the estimate was applied to every part of the request,
   including photographic material and records concerning the 1982 transfer,
   rather than treating all categories as if they required the same search.
   - Whether existing indexes, catalogues, minute headings, document
   descriptions, filing systems or other finding aids permit targeted searches
   before individual records are examined.
   - Whether a targeted search using the place names, former names, dates
   and subjects identified in my request could provide a materially less
   costly route to the information.
   - Whether the requested environmental information must be considered
   under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, rather than being
   refused solely by reference to the Freedom of Information Act cost limit.

Please identify how the stated 20 minutes for reading and 10 minutes for
assessment per set correspond to the permitted activities under regulation
4(3) of the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit
and Fees) Regulations 2004. In particular, distinguish time spent
determining whether the requested information is held, locating, retrieving
or extracting it from time spent on activities that cannot lawfully be
included in the section 12 estimate.

If the Council relies on regulation 12(4)(b) of the Environmental
Information Regulations, please identify that exception expressly, provide
the relevant reasoning and carry out the required public-interest
assessment, including the presumption in favour of disclosure. Do not treat
the FOIA section 12 estimate as a substitute for determining which legal
regime applies to each category.

Please also address the duty to provide reasonable advice and assistance
under section 16 FOIA and, where applicable, regulation 9 of the
Environmental Information Regulations. Your suggestion that I narrow the
date range to 2002–2006 is noted, but I ask the reviewer to consider what
targeted searches or available indexes could reasonably be used to address
the original request before concluding that the information cannot be
provided.

Please confirm receipt of this internal review request, identify who will
conduct the review, and provide the anticipated response date. Where
reasonably practicable, the review should be undertaken by someone
independent of the original refusal.

*3. Further request for recorded information — 1986–1990 and associated
land matters*

In addition to the original request, please treat this section as a new
request for recorded information under FOIA and, where applicable, the
Environmental Information Regulations. It is directed to records held by
the Council and does not presume that any particular document exists.

*A. Great House Farm: occupation, title, development and demolition*

Please disclose minutes, agendas, reports, correspondence, letters, notes,
complaints, representations, referrals and other recorded information
created between 1 January 1986 and 31 December 1990 concerning Great House
Farm / Tŷ Mawr, including its occupation, title, tenure, proposed
development, removal of the occupants, or demolition of the farmhouse and
associated buildings.

This includes records of communications with Vale of Glamorgan Council,
planning authorities, developers, solicitors, landowners, police, heritage
bodies or other public authorities concerning those subjects.

Please include any records containing statements attributed to my late
father, William “Billy” Buckler, about the property, occupation, title or
alleged fraud. References to alleged fraud identify a subject for the
search; they are not a claim that a Council record or finding establishing
fraud necessarily exists.

*B. Planning records and annexes*

Please identify and disclose the Council-held planning records, plans,
supporting documents, annexes, correspondence and associated material
relating to application 89/01396/OUT and any related consideration of the
redevelopment of the site.

I have been unable to locate certain associated annexes in my copy. Please
confirm whether the Council holds them and, if not, whether its records
identify another custodian or archive.

*C. Green, verge, trees and woodland*

Please disclose records held by the Council concerning the history, status,
boundaries, maintenance, planting, ownership representations or public use
of the green, the roadside verge beside the churchyard wall, and the
woodland associated with the former farm.

This includes relevant correspondence, complaints, maps, plans, site-visit
records, referrals and communications with landowners, residents,
charities, Vale of Glamorgan Council or other responsible bodies.

I have also received information raising a concern that some gardens at
Church View Close may extend beyond their recorded boundaries into
adjoining woodland. I identify this as an unverified concern requiring
documentary clarification, not as an established finding of encroachment or
wrongdoing. Please disclose any Council-held records relating to the
boundaries, complaints or enquiries about this area.

I recognise that the official VG41 registration file is understood to be
held by Vale of Glamorgan Council. I am requesting records held by
Llandough Community Council, including any copies, correspondence,
representations or referrals concerning the green or its registration. I am
not suggesting that this Council is the custodian of another authority's
file.

Please search relevant paper and electronic records, including
correspondence and records held in archived or transferred collections that
remain accessible to the Council. If any part of this request is considered
too broad, please identify the specific part and explain what narrower
search is practicable. If records are not held, please say so and identify
any known transfer or deposit location where possible.

*4. Subject access request — my personal data*

Separately, I make a subject access request under Article 15 of the UK GDPR
and the Data Protection Act 2018 for personal data about me, Sion Buckler,
held by the Council.

The request covers personal data concerning my childhood association with
Great House Farm, the events surrounding the removal of my family from the
farmhouse and its demolition in 1988, and subsequent Council records
referring to me or recording information about me in connection with these
events.

Please search relevant Council-held correspondence, minutes, reports,
notes, referrals, photographs and other records, whether paper or
electronic. This request concerns my personal data; it is not a request for
unrestricted disclosure of every record concerning my late father or the
property.

Please acknowledge this as a subject access request and deal with it under
the applicable data-protection procedure. If you require proportionate
identification information to verify my identity, please specify what is
required.

*5. Matters said to be for the “October meeting”*

Your email of 11 October states that other matters raised in my
correspondence “will be considered at the October meeting of the council”
and that you will provide the Council's views afterwards.

Please confirm whether that meeting has already taken place.

If it has, please provide the exact date, the relevant agenda and papers,
the minutes or other formal record of consideration, and any decision or
action arising in relation to the matters I raised.

If it has not yet taken place, please provide the confirmed date, time,
venue and public-access arrangements, together with the draft or published
agenda showing which of my matters are scheduled for consideration.

Those matters include:

   - The Council's historic knowledge of Great House Farm, its surroundings
   and the green, and any representations or records it holds concerning these
   matters.
   - The available documentary and photographic record relating to the site
   and its redevelopment.
   - The concerns raised about the adjoining woodland and garden
   boundaries, insofar as they fall within the Council's records or remit.
   - The availability of the relevant planning annexes and the location of
   any missing records.
   - Whether the Council would consider suitable historical interpretation
   or a memorial for the former farmhouse and its significance to the local
   community.

I also repeat my request that the Council pass my contact details to any
former councillor, clerk or local resident who is willing to contact me
about relevant historical knowledge. I am not asking the Council to
disclose those individuals' personal contact details without their consent.

I remain willing to give a short presentation on the documentary record at
no charge if the Council considers that useful. Please record the offer and
advise whether it will be considered.

If the meeting is open to the public, please also advise how a member of
the public may make representations on relevant business, having regard to
section 48 of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 and the
Council's meeting arrangements.

If the Council does not provide these particulars or identify the relevant
published notice, please explain the basis on which I am expected to verify
that the promised consideration has occurred or will occur. I will retain
the omission and any subsequent response as part of the record of the
Council's handling of these matters.

*6. Clerk's appointment and responsibility for records*

For completeness, I ask for clarification of the present clerking and
records arrangements because they bear directly on the identification and
custody of the records requested, and on responsibility for reviewing the
refusal.

I have seen public references to your retirement from a separate role with
One Voice Wales in 2026, earlier references in 2021 to possible retirement
from Llandough Community Council, and subsequent discussion about whether
the Council had a clerk. I do not treat those references or social-media
comments as verified facts, and I draw no adverse inference from them. I
raise the matter openly because responsibility for the Council's records
and for reviewing the refusal should be clear.

Please confirm:

   - Whether you currently hold the appointment of Clerk to Llandough
   Community Council and act as its Proper Officer.
   - Whether any change of appointment, acting arrangement or transfer of
   responsibility has affected the custody or management of the relevant
   records.
   - Who is currently responsible for the Council's records and who will
   conduct the internal review.

*7. Charges and response*

I have not authorised any discretionary paid search. Please do not treat
this email as agreement to incur a charge. If you consider that any part of
the request may lawfully attract a fee, please identify the legal basis,
the precise work proposed and the amount in writing before proceeding on
that basis.

Please acknowledge each procedural element of this email, distinguish the
internal review from the further information request and subject access
request, and identify any part you consider cannot be processed as
submitted, together with the reason and the available remedy.

I expect the Council's response to address the recorded evidence and the
applicable obligations directly. I am not asking the Council to endorse my
conclusions merely because I advance them; I am asking it to disclose and
account for the records within its custody and to distinguish what the
records establish from what remains uncertain.

Regards,

Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
Royal Signals Cyber/Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member

On Sun, 11 Oct 2026, 10:42 Paul Egan, <[email redacted]> wrote:

> Dear Mr Buckler,
>
> Thank you for your email of  21 September 2026 making a request for
> information.
>
> We are treating your correspondence as a request for information under the
> Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the act).
>
> Under the provisions of the act and as defined by "The Freedom of
> Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations
> 2004" (the regulations) , an authority is not obliged to comply with a
> request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of
> complying with the request would exceed the "appropriate limit".  This
> appropriate limit is set by the regulations at £450 for our type of
> authority.
>
> In the regulations our staff time is valued at £25 per hour.  This has the
> effect of imposing a time limit of 18 hours of staff time for activities
> specified in the regulations.
>
>  The regulations make the following activities by an authority countable
> towards the cost limit.
>
>    - determining whether it holds the information,
>
>
>    - locating the information, or a document which may contain the
>    information,
>
>
>    - retrieving the information, or a document which may contain the
>    information, and
>
>
>    - extracting the information from a document containing it.
>
>  We have estimated the time and therefore costs as provided by the
> regulations, and in doing so have taken into account the above activities.
>
>  We estimate that this work will take in excess of 18 hours of effort by
> our staff. As we have a significant amount of documents on file from the
> period 2002-2016 where minutes are in documents rather than published on
> the website or in archives.
>
>  We estimate this will exceed the limit provided for by the regulations
> and therefore your request is refused on the grounds provided for under
> section 12 of the act.
>
> Our estimate of time is based on the requirement to search all minutes of
> the council and its committees for a period of 14 years. It is estimated
> that it will take about 20 minutes to read each set of minutes of which
> there are estimated to 224 sets of minutes. It is considered that this is
> likely to take about 10 minutes to assess each set of minutes a total of
> over 2240 minutes which equates to 37 hours.
>
>  We may may be able to provide some information if you are able to reduce
> or refine your request to bring the cost of compliance under the
> regulations limit.  We suggest that you could limit the time frame of
> minutes that we would need to look through. For example 2002-2006.
>
>  Please contact us if you would like to refine your request.
>
>  If you are not satisfied with this response or you wish to complain
> about any aspect of the handling of your request, then you should contact
> us in the first instance and we will undertake an internal review.
>
>  If after the internal review you wish to complain further then you can
> complain to the Information Commissioners Office http://www.ico.gov.uk and
> request a decision notice.
>
> The other matters you include in your email will be considered at the
> October meeting of the council and I will let you have the views of the
> council after the meeting.
>
>  Kind regards,
> ---
> Paul R. Egan BA, Chartered MCIPD, CiLCA, F. Inst. LM, FIPSM
>
> Clerk to Llandough Community Council,
>
> [address removed]
> [map link redacted]
>
> Vale of Glamorgan [postcode redacted]
> [map link redacted]
>
> Telephone [phone redacted]
>
> Website www.llandough-cc.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
> When you contact us
>
> The information you provide (personal information such as name, address,
> email address, phone number, organisation) will be processed and stored
> to enable us to contact you and respond to your correspondence, provide
> information and/or access our facilities and services.
>
> Your personal information will be not shared or provided to any other
> third party. Your information may however be published in the public domain
> if you require the Council to discuss the matter raised.
>
>
>
> For further information please see our full privacy notice on our website
> www.llandough-cc.co.uk
>
>
>
> The Council's mission statement is 'Serving our community, preserving our
> identity' The Council will always strive to:
>
>  ·  Be open and accessible in all our decision making
>
> · Be accountable in all our council activities
>
> · Be responsive to the needs of the community
>
> · Encourage community participation
>
>
> On 2026-09-21 03:59, Sion Buckler wrote:
>
> Dr Misra,
>
> Thank you for replying, and for doing so promptly and at a weekend. Good
> drills Sir. What an honour. I know you and the Council serve as volunteers,
> and I am grateful for the time.
>
> Let me set out plainly what I am asking of the Council, which is narrow.
> If you'll allow me?
>
> I am not asking your Council to revisit Mr Egan's answer of 14 June 2026.
> He explained that the minute books from 1982 onwards were deposited with
> Glamorgan Archives in 2002, and I am pursuing those there.
>
> What I am asking about is what that answer did not cover. Llandough
> Community Council is a public authority under Schedule 1, Part II,
> paragraph 7(b) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Act applies to
> the recorded information set out below generally; the Environmental
> Information Regulations 2004 apply in addition to any part of it that is
> environmental information.
>
> PART ONE — REQUEST FOR RECORDED INFORMATION
>
> 1. Whether the Council holds any recorded information created after the
> 2002 deposit — minutes, correspondence, reports, emails, photographs or
> files of any kind — concerning Great House Farm (Ty Mawr) / Church View
> Close, the village green in front of St Dochdwy's including registered
> green VG 41, or the roadside verge by the churchyard wall.
>
> 2. Whether the Council holds any photographs, postcards or images of the
> farm, the barn, the green or the church surroundings, of any date.
>
> 3. Whether the Council holds any recorded information showing what, if
> anything, transferred to it from Penarth Town Council at the 1982
> reorganisation, and any recorded information identifying where the pre-1982
> Llandough community records were deposited.
>
> If the answer to any of these is that no such information is held, I would
> be content with a short statement to that effect — but I do need it stated.
> Section 1(1)(a) of the Act requires the Council to confirm or deny whether
> the information is held.
>
> Section 10 (and regulation 5 of the EIR) allows twenty working days from
> receipt, which on my request of 20 September 2026 I calculate as 16 October
> 2026.
>
> If the Council is refusing, section 17 (and regulation 14) requires a
> written refusal notice identifying the exemption or exception relied on;
> section 17(7) requires the Council to give particulars of any complaints
> procedure it operates, or to state that it has none, and to notify me of my
> right to apply to the Information Commissioner; and regulation 11 gives a
> right to an internal review of any refusal under the EIR.
>
> "We have nothing more to add" does not meet those requirements. If the
> period passes without a compliant response I will have no option but to
> complain to the Information Commissioner.
>
> PART TWO — MATTERS FOR THE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION
>
> These are not part of the request above and carry no deadline. They are
> simply things I would be grateful for.
>
> A. I am not asking for the name or contact details of any individual. I am
> asking whether the Council would be willing to pass my details to any
> former member, former clerk or long-standing resident who might remember
> the village between the 1950s and the 1990s, leaving it entirely to them
> whether to contact me. I appreciate the Council may have data protection or
> administrative reasons for declining, and I would not press it.
>
> B. Whether the Council would be willing to table this correspondence at a
> meeting and minute it. I am content for it to be tabled in full.
>
> C. Whether the Council would consider, in due course, whether an
> interpretation board or a plaque near the green would be appropriate. The
> excavation on the land beneath Church View Close recorded 1,026 burials,
> described in the published report as by far the largest early medieval
> burial population so far recovered from Wales, above a Roman villa and an
> Iron Age roundhouse. That history belongs to Llandough as much as to my
> family, and there is nothing on the ground that records it. I would be glad
> to give the Council or the community a short talk on the documentary
> record, without charge, if that would be useful.
>
> I should be grateful for a response to items 1 to 3 by 16 October 2026.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sion Buckler (Ret'd Sergeant)
> Royal Signals Cyber/ Electronic Warfare Professional and Life Member
>
>
> On Sun, 20 Sept 2026, 18:31 Mo Misra, <[email redacted]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Mr Buckler,
> >
> > Thanks for your email of 20th September 2026.
> >
> > I note that our Clerk, Paul Egan, has already directed you to all the
> > information we have on the matter as indicated in paragraph 6 of your
> > email.
> >
> > We have nothing more to add.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Dr M C Misra,
> > Chair Llandough Community Council
>
>