2026

Today at Tŷ Mawr · 22 Oct 2026

Office of the ICR, 21 October 2026:

“She has asked me to confirm that her decision not to investigate further was final.”

Their words, 21 October 2026:

“The ADS holds the following metadata records and digital resources”

In short: The records team lists five metadata records and digital resources on Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr and describes the catalogue and library searches undertaken.

Their words, 21 October 2026:

“She has asked me to confirm that her decision not to investigate further was final.”

In short: Confirms that the decision not to investigate further is final.

Their words, 21 October 2026:

“We have also found a record from RACHMW Coflein which may relate to the material from us”

In short: The records team states no information is held under EIR 12(4)(a) but identifies microfiche archaeological reports transferred to RCAHMW on 12 January 2018 and provides a Coflein link.

Every name the records use for the same thing, in one place

nomenclature.bucklerfamily.estate is live: 25 things, 147 names, each with the record that uses it and the date.

Filed today: EV-0294, a sheet of the 1923 Welsh Women’s Peace Petition

National Library of Wales, petition sheet 1/92. Esther Williams is the eighth signature on page 1; her address reads “Llandough”, with no farm name. The other addresses on the sheet (Lewis Road, Cogan, Llwyn-yr-Eryr “Near Cardiff”) put it on the Penarth side.

The statutory deadline passed with no reply (ref 00211463).

In short: Provides a disclosure letter addressing retention schedules and searches, indicating some information may not be specifically recorded.

In short: Provides an attached response letter concerning Welsh Office/Cadw papers for Great House Farm following the earlier related request.

Great House Farm (Tŷ Mawr), Llandough, from the 1877 split of the farm to the 1987 judgment and the demolition of December 1988, with the document behind each slide named on screen.

In short: Describes the search methodology used, confirms predecessor accession registers were included, and states no further search log exists.

In short: The HER team answers a 48-item schedule, citing public availability or 'not held' for most items and withholding change-log data as personal information.

Historic Environment Record team, 14 October 2026:

“Having undertaken a physical search of our records, I can confirm that no further information is held within the HER source file.”

In short: The HER team confirms digitisation of the source file onto Archwilio and states a physical search found no further information held.

In short: The registrar states no death record or burial/cremation record was found locally and gives a reference for ordering a certificate elsewhere.

In short: States Cardiff does not hold the death registration, cites an index reference, and suggests obtaining a certificate from head office.

In short: States no separate record exists documenting why certain findings were excluded from FOI 2026-024's scope, and confirms nothing withheld.

In short: States no separate exclusion schedule exists, reclassifies MS 3360/3 as unrelated to the Llandough property, and maintains prior position on Ref 13.2.

The Clerk, for the Council, 11 October 2026:

“We estimate that this work will take in excess of 18 hours of effort by our staff.”

In short: The clerk refuses the request under section 12, citing an estimated 37 hours to review 14 years of minutes, and suggests narrowing the date range.

Freedom of information request refused under section 12 (cost); the request narrowed on 20 October

The Clerk’s reply of 11 October 2026 refused the family’s request under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act (cost). A narrowed request followed on 20 October 2026, with the agenda for the council’s remote meeting of 22 October 2026.

Reply to an enquiry, 10 October 2026:

“an application has been captured internally by HM Land Registry to investigate and correct any error that may have been made.”

Decision letter, ICR/090/26, 9 October 2026:

“In the circumstances, the ICR has decided that further investigation by this office would not serve any useful purpose.”

In short: A liaison officer sends the outcome of an internal review regarding an earlier Freedom of Information Act request.

In short: Planning and Environment Decisions Wales confirms it holds no records for the property or the named planning applications.

In short: The FOI officer states no further recorded information identifying Great House Farm exists within MS 3360/3 beyond what was disclosed.

In short: The FOI officer states no filtered schedule is held but supplies parish, acreage, and tenant details from MS 3360/3 and confirms Ref 13.2's description.

In short: States searches across registered files and the NMRW archive were extensive, confirms no further records, and offers a scan order with associated charges noted.

In short: The records team discloses further material, including a waterwheel record and an estate sale document page, from additional searches.

Reply, 30 September 2026, on the 1877 Daniel Thomas deed:

“we do not appear to hold any deeds relating to this transaction”

The Welsh Government Complaints Manager, 30 September 2026:

“Your concerns will be addressed by the relevant officials within Welsh Government, who will respond to you directly and as soon as possible.”

In short: States no 1877 deed is held, provides D696 catalogue links, suggests a Bute Estate item, and points to National Archives maps.

In short: States South Wales Police does not hold information relating to named individuals requested.

In short: States no letters or records on the site exist in registered files, cites archive catalogue entries, and quotes a historic-environment description.

In short: States position is unchanged, no further records located, and further enquiries on this property will not be answered.

In short: The FOI officer states no recorded cross-attribution links the two Llandough farms and no separate record explains the earlier 'unrelated' conclusion.

Reply, 24 September 2026:

“The area was not covered by Cardiff Rural District Council but rather Penarth Urban District Council.”

In short: States a petition is not held, offers a paid record search, and redirects scheduling and planning-file questions to other bodies.

FOI reply, 23 September 2026:

“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.”

In short: Provides catalogue results and some court case records, states most material is not expected to be held, and offers paid research for further searches.

FOI response 26FOI 103, 22 September 2026:

“We have carried out a search of our digital records and have determined that the Wales Office does not hold the information requested.”

In short: Internal review upholds the original location-based search methodology for FOI 2026-024 as reasonable and proportionate.

In short: Discloses records on other archaeological discoveries at Great House Farm and Church Farm, redacting third-party personal data under s.40(2).

In short: States the Wales Office does not hold the requested records and suggests contacting the Welsh Government for transferred files.

The Chair, Dr M C Misra, 20 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.”

In short: The council chair states the clerk already provided all available information and there is nothing more to add.

His office, forwarding HM Land Registry’s reply, 18 September 2026:

“We are sorry to provide what we understand may be a disappointing reply but trust that the information is accurate and goes someway to clarify their position.”

In short: Concludes member conduct issue outside complaints policy, declines to adjudicate land ownership, confirms checking records on tree removal.

In short: Forwards a response from HM Land Registry's Chief Executive and states a Ministry of Justice reply is still awaited.

In short: Reiterates no records relating to the property or requester were located and cannot confirm whether any records once existed.

In short: Supplies a 1965 land conveyance and purchase price, states no record found indicating a below-market or gifted transfer.

In short: Provides a corrected catalogue description and full transcription of a 1877 lease, confirming no mention of the other locality, and offers a plan copy.

In short: Confirms the second entry is still not held locally, declines to comment on individual case details, and redirects to GRO head office.

The Chief Executive and Chief Land Registrar, Iain Banfield, to Stephen Doughty MP, 9 September 2026:

“HM Land Registry examines applications and registers interests based on the evidence and information provided. We are not an investigatory body and cannot determine disputes of fact or revisit decisions made by the courts.”

The Chief Land Registrar, 9 September 2026:

“Our records do not show that HM Land Registry was made aware of a competing claim before the registrations took place.”

In short: Confirms holding of one death entry with purchase options, states the second requested death entry cannot be located.

In short: Internal review upholds the original decision that no further records on furniture or movable property from Great House Farm are held.

In short: Provides details on a named deed, confirms no further deeds or quarrying records, and redirects to other bodies for additional material.

Final reply, 4 September 2026:

“it would be inappropriate for me to speculate on the events around the listing assessment without our own contemporary evidence being available to me to substantiate precisely what occurred.”

In short: The FOI officer reaffirms that all held information has been provided and directs the requester to the Welsh Government complaints process.

In short: Subject-access response (held privately; content not published).

In short: States no records relating to the property or requester were located, citing 1980s demolition and standard retention periods.

Official reply, 27 August 2026:

“it is likely that records of unsuccessful listings were only retained for a short period, usually about 3 years.”

In short: The FOI officer confirms no further records are held, explains historic and current retention policy, and redirects HER queries to Heneb.

In short: The archive assistant reports no documents located prior to 1955, noting BP acquired the property only in the 1960s.

In short: The FOI officer states no records of the visor, lance, or related discovery are held, aside from unrelated archaeological finds.

Cardiff county court (HMCTS), 24 August 2026:

“No surviving court file relating to the proceedings specified in your request has been identified.”

The Monitoring Officer, 24 August 2026:

“The substance of the complaint was that you had not received substantive responses to a number of emails”

In short: Monitoring Officer explains the assessment process and states no evidence of a Code of Conduct breach was disclosed.

In short: States register holdings for two parishes are limited, offers a searchable Llandough register, visit details, and paid research service.

In short: The records team confirms no surviving records, finding aids, or destruction registers were located, citing general retention and destruction procedures.

In short: The Medical Examiner Service states it holds no records this far back and suggests contacting the local registrars office.

In short: The Medical Examiner Service states it holds no records and has no knowledge of either patient.

In short: States coroners hold office under the Crown and are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act's access regime.

In short: States no system records were found for either individual and directs pre-2002 Cardiff and Vale cases to the Glamorgan Archivist.

In short: The archive assistant states only pre-1955 material is available and post-1954 records are not open to external access.

In short: The FOI officer describes further searches of collections and archived systems and reaffirms that no relevant records are held.

In short: Monitoring Officer response declining to progress the complaint under the corporate complaints policy and finding no evidence of a Code of Conduct breach.

In short: States a catalogue search using specified terms produced no results and directs requester to guides and paid search options.

Case IC-546505-W6P0, 10 August 2026:

“FOIA and the EIR do not require public authorities to generate information or provide explanations in order to respond to requests for information.”

In short: An archives team lists several digitised catalogue entries and images relevant to the enquiry, with further records available by appointment.

In short: The archivist confirms the full date range and catalogue scope were searched, states no restricted material applies, and reiterates that relevant items are held at BT Archives.

In short: The records team states no records were found on its case management system and suggests contacting the Land Registry for further information.

In short: Subject-access response (held privately; content not published).

In short: The FOI officer states no furniture or movable property records from Great House Farm are held, excluding archaeological material.

In short: The archivist details the keywords searched, confirms catalogued and uncatalogued items were checked, and finds no relevant matches apart from unrelated or BT Archives items.

In short: States no further records or destruction documentation exist, confirms searches complete, and notes right to complain to the Information Commissioner.

In short: Provides an attached response document addressing the request for Great House Farm records.

In short: Provides the attached internal review outcome considering the requester's clarification of 20 July 2026.

In short: The archivist reports no records found for the farm, Llandough, Lavernock, or a named individual, and suggests BT Archives and Glamorgan Archives for further research.

In short: The archivist states that searches using the requested keywords returned no relevant results and that Marconi-related files are held at BT Archives.

In short: The archivist details the search methodology, confirms all listed terms were used, and states no relevant records exist or were transferred elsewhere.

In short: The archivist confirms a catalogue search found no records relating to Post Office engineering activities, Marconi's experiments, or related connections.

In short: An archives team reports no results from catalogue and accession-register searches and suggests a local library's Marconi-related books.

In short: An archives team states it holds no Cardiff Post Office or General Post Office records and suggests Glamorgan Archives instead.

In short: The archivist states Glamorgan Archives holds no records of past Post Office employees and suggests contacting the Postal Museum and Archives.

In short: The institution provides a Freedom of Information response with an attached document addressing the request for property-related items.

FOI response 719/26, 16 July 2026:

“South Wales Police hold no information in relation to this request.”

In short: An archives team states no engineering staff named Williams appear in university calendars for the listed academic years.

In short: States South Wales Police holds no information relating to the request about bailiff attendance, eviction, and related matters.

In short: Confirms photographs relate to a 1988 listing assessment, states no official file survives and records were likely destroyed.

EIR reply 00210772, 7 July 2026:

“Following searches of Planning records, no additional information has been identified within the scope of your request.”

In short: The council states relevant planning records are publicly available via its register and that further archaeological records are not held, suggesting another body.

In short: Provides the internal review outcome letter responding to the earlier review request.

In short: States the Ministry of Justice does not hold the requested court proceeding records and suggests the County Court as a discretionary pointer.

Reply, 19 June 2026, on the name Ty Mawr:

“could be translated to Large House or Great House, but this is only speculation”

In short: The institution provides specific archival references for deeds and estate leases, noting a possible place-name match and suggesting an in-person visit for further records.

The Clerk, for the Council, 14 June 2026:

“The minutes of all council minutes for the period in question were deposited in the Glamorgan Records Office in 2002. These cover the period from 1982 when Llandough Community Council was first formed.”

Minutes from 1982 deposited at Glamorgan Archives in 2002

Reply to a freedom of information request of 18 May 2026 (section 21): the council’s minutes from 1982 were deposited at Glamorgan Archives in 2002. The council’s meeting of 22 October 2026 is remote (agenda of 20 October).

In short: Identifies two planning applications relevant to the site and directs to the online planning register for details.

In short: Library staff report no matching records for the searched terms and suggest contacting Glamorgan Archives for further materials.

In short: Archivist confirms no plans for the farm, provides catalogue references, and directs enquirer to other bodies for related records.

In short: Provides two 1988 survey photographs of the farmhouse and barn along with a written response letter.

In short: The records team supplies accession details for three archives, notes on two others, and offers search room viewing and paid summaries for the rest.

In short: Provides a link to the full archive list and explains how to view titles, dates, and descriptions.

In short: The archives team lists catalogue records relating to sales and estate papers referencing the farm and nearby Llandough estate.

FOI/EIR reply 00210772, 2 June 2026:

“Neither the Council nor its predecessor authorities, the Vale of Glamorgan Borough Council or the former South Glamorgan County Council were involved in the case of BP Properties Ltd v Buckler.”

In short: The archivist states no petition record exists for the farm and suggests searching the online catalogue.

In short: Repeats prior archive details, supplies an electronic copy link, and states no correspondence about the site is held.

Stage-two complaint decision, 25 May 2026:

“HM Land Registry operates a two-stage internal complaints procedure, and this constitutes our second and final response.”

Official reply, 21 May 2026:

“I have searched our electronic records relating to Great House Farm and Barn and I can confirm they were assessed and rejected for listing in the 1988 community survey of Llandough.”

Official reply, 21 May 2026:

“The "YYY" marking on the rear of the photo indicates that the buildings were considered marginally below the bar for listing.”

In short: Confirms 1988 listing assessment rejected the property, provides two photographs, states no further electronic records held, and continues a paper-file search.

In short: The archive identifies a funds ledger covering 1974 Cardiff County Court payments but notes access is restricted due to data protection concerning infants and asks for more case details.

Stage-one complaint decision, 19 April 2026:

“HM Land Registry has an administrative function and it is not for the Registrar to look behind or challenge decisions of the Court.”

Letter on title WA231076, 23 March 2026:

“HM Land Registry does not have any investigative powers and on the basis of a review of the files we hold there is no evidence of a mistake in the register.”

In short: The records team provides specific catalogue references including a court book and Bute estate archive collections, and notes no further index cards exist.

In short: The records team shares the original 1920s manorial return, states it adds little detail, and suggests National Library of Wales catalogues for further research.

Official reply, 25 February 2026:

“Any advice or correspondence that Cadw may have provided should be preserved in the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales (RCAHMW) National Monuments Record of Wales (NMRW).”

In short: The records team explains MDR scope, lists repositories holding Llandough manorial records, and notes review of original 1920s survey returns.

In short: The archive confirms that a record is kept on file noting when withdrawn items were removed and by whom.

In short: The archive explains that original paper catalogues and cards were not retained after digitisation and that withdrawn documents' catalogue descriptions are removed.

In short: Institution states it holds no relevant records, clarifies Manorial Documents Register scope, and redirects to HM Land Registry.

In short: Institution explains it does not annotate disputed records and confirms searched judicial series contain no relevant material.