From: HOC Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 11:40:42 +0000 Subject: RE: Systemic governance concern regarding historic land registration and administrative reliance - BP vs Buckler 1987 (inc. BP Land Registry 1982) Message-ID: Dear Sion Buckler, Thank you for contacting the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee. Unfortunately, this is not a matter within the remit of the Committee. The role of the Committee is to examine constitutional issues; the quality and standards of administration provided by Civil Service departments; and the reports of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). You can find out more about the work of the Committee here: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee - Summary - Committees - UK Parliament Best wishes, Kate Kate Johal Second Clerk Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) House of Commons, Palace of Westminster, London SW1A 0AA parliament.uk [cid:image001.png@01DC9694.40B40CA0] The House of Commons welcomes feedback. If you have any compliments, complaints or comments, about the service that you have received please send an email to feedback@parliament.uk From: Sion Buckler <[redacted]> Sent: 31 January 2026 06:14 To: HOC Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee Subject: Systemic governance concern regarding historic land registration and administrative reliance - BP vs Buckler 1987 (inc. BP Land Registry 1982) Dear Committee Members, I am writing to draw your attention to a historical land matter which I believe may illustrate potential vulnerabilities in public administration, record-keeping, and the governance of land registration. My purpose is solely to provide factual information for consideration, rather than to request remedial action. The matter concerns land formerly known as Great House Farm, Llandough, Vale of Glamorgan, later developed for residential use and historically associated with BP v Buckler (Court of Appeal, 1987). Chronology of relevant events (as reflected in public records): * July 1974: Court proceedings involving my grandmother were adjourned without determination of ownership. * 31 October 1974: A subsequent hearing did not proceed substantively, following correspondence received from BP entities that same day. No judgment on ownership was issued. * Throughout this period, my grandmother was not included in dealings concerning the land, while the opposing party continued to assert ownership. * 1982: The land was registered in the name of BP entities, despite unresolved competing claims and no final judicial adjudication. * 1983: My grandmother passed away after the registration, with ownership never conclusively adjudicated. * 1987 Court of Appeal: The record reflects an apparent inconsistency in the treatment of correspondence and corporate entities. Specifically: * The court noted that my grandmother had replied to correspondence on 31 October, asserting ownership. * The reply was treated as directed to the “wrong” corporation (BP Pensions Trust Ltd rather than BP Properties Ltd). * In a later appeal by my father, the same judge acknowledged that both BP entities were effectively treated as the same for the purposes of the ruling. * These circumstances resulted in the court upholding the opposing party’s registration despite prior correspondence demonstrating an assertion of ownership. * Following these proceedings, my father’s application to the European Court of Human Rights was blocked. * The family home was demolished, preventing re-entry, even for the retrieval of personal belongings. * Despite its historical significance and a petition to protect it, the property was not preserved. The house had prior heritage interest, including documented connections to Marconi. * 1991: My father passed away at just 41. * 1994: The land was subsequently excavated, with items of archaeological interest removed. Taken together, these events demonstrate a situation in which land registration and subsequent reliance by public bodies proceeded without definitive adjudication of ownership, raising questions regarding administrative safeguards, procedural coherence, and record integrity. I am submitting this information purely for institutional awareness. I am not making allegations of misconduct, nor requesting investigation. I am able to provide a concise factual timeline and references to public records should it assist the Committee’s understanding. Yours faithfully, Sion Buckler UK Parliament Disclaimer: this e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.