Tandem misinformation provided to the UK Public, involving rights of owners of property / land

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Land Registry should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Land Registry,
having recieved no acknowledgement from writing to your newly elected Chair ( Michael Mire) on the excepted to be correct e- mail address :- [email address], I today contacted your customer services and then copied them into the communication , to recieve a ref number - 160826/000852.
Under the Freedom of Informarion Act -
I request details of statistics of persons , being UK residents, who l perceive must be on a " list" , to be flagged up as not persons who are entitled to make information requests.
1) Please define / name / identify the "list / register" of such persons
2) Please define on what legislation such depriving of informations , is based
3) Please define the differences to be picked up by Land Registry Staff as the requisites needed to allow refusing information requested under the FOA
4) Please state any involvement of persons listed statistically on the aforementioned referred to " list / register" and to their involvement of having being provided with :-
a) The misleading Land Registry literature adjudicated upon by The Advertising Standards Authority on the 30 th May 2007 & 25 th July May 2007
b) The misleading literature of The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry sent out between early February 2009 - to late October 2009
5) Please set out separate statistics of persons provided with both or all three sets of the recorded to be misleading information provided in the literature Land Registry and The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry published to the UK Public

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

To anyone reading my above FOIA request.
It is becoming apparent that the information that has previously been provided to the UK Public via websites of the Land Registry and The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry was constructed to mislead along with published literature that was being sent out in the same timeframes.
The denying of the evidence to support this , requested quite properly under Information Acts being Acts of Parliament , is further illustration of suppression of the ability to complain over errors / mistakes or downright maladministration of the staff at the agencies involved and ultimately misleading of the courts.
Hindsight would have perceived the elements likely to come out of allowing Land Registry to have in effect it's " own judiciary" with the setting up of the Land Registration Act 2002 and the provision of the AHMLR, would allow for manipulation to occur , and the covering up of financial enrichment at the behest of greedy people seeking to deprive rightful owners of valuable property and land.

Sondh, Gurmale, Land Registry

Dear Diana Smith,

Thank you for your email of 26 August 2016 requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) as detailed below questions 1 to 5.

Your request is being dealt with under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and will be answered within twenty working days.

In some circumstances a fee may be payable and if that is the case, I will let you know. A fees notice will be issued to you, and you will be required to pay before we will proceed to deal with your request.

If you have any queries about this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Senior Corporate Information Officer
Corporate Legal and Assurance Services
Land Registry Head Office, 4th Floor, Trafalgar House, 1 Bedford Park, Croydon, CR0 2AQ GOV.UK | @LandRegGov | LinkedIn | Facebook

=======================================================================================================================================

show quoted sections

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

I have already called Gurmale Sondh out in e- mails sent direct to him, over his suitability for his role as Information Officer for Land Registry , and requested someone of a more honest background should be dealing with matters .

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

The LR don't seem to understand FOIA Section 16- help and assistance.

It's a duty, not a choice.

It doesn't look like you've had any...

https://ico.org.uk/media/1624140/duty-to...

Sondh, Gurmale, Land Registry

Dear Diana Smith,

Thank you for your email of 26 August 2016 in which you made the following request:

“Under the Freedom of Information Act –
I request details of statistics of persons, being UK residents, who l perceive must be on a " list", to be flagged up as not persons who are entitled to make information requests.
1) Please define / name / identify the "list / register" of such persons
2) Please define on what legislation such depriving of information, is based
3) Please define the differences to be picked up by Land Registry Staff as the requisites needed to allow refusing information requested under the FOA
4) Please state any involvement of persons listed statistically on the aforementioned referred to " list / register" and to their involvement of having being provided with :-
a) The misleading Land Registry literature adjudicated upon by The Advertising Standards Authority on the 30th May 2007 & 25th July May 2007
b) The misleading literature of The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry sent out between early February 2009 - to late October 2009
5) Please set out separate statistics of persons provided with both or all three sets of the recorded to be misleading information provided in the literature Land Registry and The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry published to the UK Public”

I am writing to advise you under Section 1.1(a) of the Freedom of Information Act that following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that Land Registry does not hold the information you requested.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. If you are dissatisfied with this response to your request, you may seek an internal review within two months of the date of our reply.

Internal reviews will be dealt within 20 working days. If at the end of this time we are unable to respond, we will write to you explaining the reasons and giving you a new date.

If you seek an internal review please write to:
Louise Booth Head of Corporate Legal Services (Core Services) Head office Trafalgar House 1 Bedford Park Croydon CR0 2AQ
Email: [email address]

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) within two months of the reply for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by Land Registry.

The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely,

Senior Corporate Information Officer
Corporate Legal and Assurance Services
Land Registry Head Office, 4th Floor, Trafalgar House, 1 Bedford Park, Croydon, CR0 2AQ GOV.UK | @LandRegGov | LinkedIn | Facebook

Your land and property rights: guaranteed and protected. Since 1862 Land Registry has given assurance and confidence to the property market in England and Wales. Find out more at www.gov.uk/land-registry.

If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, and then delete it. Please treat our communications in confidence, as you would expect us to treat yours. Land Registry checks all mail and attachments for known viruses, however, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk.