Re- Lodged Objection

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,
l make the following observations for which l request under the freedom of information act , full disclosure of all held records for :-
My lodged objection with Land Registry in March 2009 where l was advised by Evelyn Holt ( Objections Officer / Peterborough Land Registry ) to inform The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and also on Ms Holt's direct advice l further copied The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry into aforesaid communication that was made through my elected Member of Parliament|( Sir Peter Tapsell ) , to the PHSO in March 2009.
This was in relation to my being allocated through The Clerk to the Solicitors at Land Registry , Miriam Brown to be my investigating Solicitor and whose office Ms Holt worked in.
Despite these measures there has been perceived " constructive issues " ( n.b- " constructive ... describes something which may not be set out in law, but will be considered to exist all the same"), where my lodging my objection in March 2009 was overlooked in order for a wrongly placed case to go forward before the AHMLR on the 28 th & 29 th May 2009 and before a person ( being the Deputy Adjudicator / Barrister, sitting for the hearing ), whose level of there being conflict of interest matters already in play and recorded back as far as March 2000 for, was considerable enough to have negated his involvement automatically at that time.
Involvement of John Edon and his line manager Steve Coveney ( Assistant Registrar and Registrar respectively at Kingston upon Hull Land Registry ), together with my involving The Financial Ombudsman ( Alan Freedman) and my conveyance solicitors ( Bridge Mc Farland Solicitors) , ticked all the boxes required under the LRA2002 for required remedy of my already accepted to be registered title , that a manager at Inland Revenue confirms both l ( in 1995 ) and the vendors before me ( in 1994 ) paid stamp duty land tax on the entire acreage for.
The collaboration of the CSM at KUH Land Registry involving herself with non-disclosure of the needed declarations for what by Land Registry's own admissions were a "totally paperless claim", with these named solicitors on the 23 rd October 2007 and in strict direct opposite to the claims made by Land Registry in their recorded reply to the Adjudication of The Advertising Standards Authority's " Adjudication" of the 30 th May 2007, whereby Land Registry stated no one could make a claim of adverse land possession against land that was already registered land.
Mine was such registered land and confirmed to be such by way of the TID dated the 13 th February 2007 and further confirmed verbally by Yvonne Owen at KUH Land Registry on the 15 th February 2007 .
I bind into this FOIA request inclusion's to occur , to further reveal all reasoning for the failure to include into my request for copy of The Final Responses Log, my visiting KUH Land Registry on the 26 th September 2008 with the AP1 Form provided to me by John Edon ( Assistant Registrar) that Mark Lawson declined taking from me and it observationally being further intentions to imply remits of Land Registry's role were being out-sourced to assist what amount to fraudulent intentions of obtaining already registered land with no payment made for acquiring such,

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

Allen, Jane, Land Registry

Dear Ms Smith,


Thank you for your email dated 23 January 2018. The only request that
falls under the remit of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) is the
request made in paragraph 1 of your email relating to your application
lodged in March 2009 with HM Land Registry (HMLR) for the registration of
an "objection" as stated by you. I shall reply to your FOIA request
accordingly as below. However, please note that the rest of the text in
your email relates to your past registration issues and matters upon which
we are no longer in contact with you about because a final response has
been made.  It is important to emphasise that making an FOIA request does
not entitle you to re-open issues that have already been addressed whether
in respect of FOIA requests, or title matters upon which there is to be no
further correspondence with HM Land Registry.


It is important that this is brought to your attention in order to manage
your expectations as to what HMLR is able to do for you. This part of the
request does not fall under the remit of the FOIA and will not be replied.


Notice under s.14 of the Freedom of Information Act

In reviewing the correspondence, it is apparent to me that you have made
seven FOIA requests and 4 internal reviews were undertaken in the year
2017 alone. Almost all of your requests included your past registration
issues and matters, each varying slightly upon which you are disengaged.
These requests should have been treated as vexatious requests.


I consider that you are using the Freedom of Information Act process to
re-open issues upon which Land Registry is not communicating with you
about because these issues have been concluded.


It is for these reasons that it is appropriate in this letter to give you
notice under s.14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act that any subsequent
requests received from you of a similar nature will be refused.  Section
1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for
information if the request is vexatious


With regard to your FOIA request for full disclosure or documents held by
HMLR in relation to this matter, I can only repeat that under section 21
of the FOIA we are not required to provide information in response to a
request where it is reasonably accessible by other means. Certain
information held by HMLR is available as of right under the Land
Registration Act 2002 and Land Registration Rules 2003. Under section 66
of the Land Registration Act 2002 anyone can have access to the register,
title plans and any document held by the registrar that is referred to in
the register or relates to an application (upon application and payment of
the relevant fee). Any request for such information is governed by the
Land Registration Act and Rules and not the FOIA. This is because
information that is available to an applicant via other legislation is
information that is reasonably accessible by other means. If information
is available through the Land Registration Act 2002 and 2003 Rules, it
therefore falls outside the FOIA.


The Land Registration Rules specify the application forms to be used when
applying for copies of documents held by HMLR which are available under
section 66. In this case, form OC2 accompanied by the appropriate fee
should be used. I would refer you to our Practice Guide 11, which is
available on our website, for further details as to how information can be
obtained from HMLR; the guide can be accessed using the following link:


Please note that it is also open to you to make a personal inspection of
HMLR’s files at any of our offices should you wish to do so (please see
section 8 of Practice Guide 11). If you wish to inspect information that
is available “as of right” under the Land Registration Act and Rules a
request should be made in form PIC which can be downloaded from our
website using the above link (details of the fees payable are also set out
on the website) or obtained by writing to any HMLR office. Appointments
can be made using the “Appointment Request” form on our website or by
calling Customer Support on 0300 006 0411.


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 with 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



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
three months of the reply for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a
decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by HM
Land Registry. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The
Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire SK9 5AF.


Yours sincerely,


Gurmale Sondh

Senior Corporate Information Officer

Corporate Legal and Assurance Services

Email : [email address] HM Land Registry Head Office,
4th Floor, Trafalgar House, 1 Bedford Park, Croydon, CR0 2AQ GOV.UK |
@LandRegGov | LinkedIn | Facebook


HM Land Registry’s ambition is to become the world’s leading land registry for speed, simplicity and an open approach to data. Our mission is: “Your land and property rights: guaranteed and protected”.

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

Dear Allen, Jane,
to simplify and to keep matters at a first stage response level regarding your reply under the FOIA , l do state the following:-
You state- "Thank you for your email dated 23 January 2018. The only request that
falls under the remit of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) is the
request made in paragraph 1 of your email relating to your application
lodged in March 2009 with HM Land Registry (HMLR) for the registration of
an "objection" as stated by you. I shall reply to your FOIA request
accordingly as below."
However- I state and affirm as a matter of recorded / record , that you in fact failed in March 2009 to reply or indeed come back to me , after l had left recorded / message on your personal voicemail service in the matter of my lodging of a Data Protection Act subject access request with Gill Miles as the then Information Officer for Land Registry. I also spoke same day to Sushma Acharya, based in the same offices as yourself and being your colleague. She put the telephone down on me , rather than answer to the problems l was having with Gill Miles dilly -dallying over my DPA(SAR) being a valid request under the DPA.
Two weeks following this l received a confirmation e-mail from Gill Miles to say my DPA(SAR) was a valid request under the DPA and that she would comply with my now accepted to be valid information request within the timelines of my making and lodging such a request.
Gill Miles did not come back to me until some ELEVEN WEEKS later , being too late to put any provided evidence , for the hearing before The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry on the 28 th & 29 th May 2009.
The scant information provided by Gill Miles was stated to be of a FOIA type and included copy of the Land Registry memorandum for October 2002 recording an "URGENT" matter of my reporting the wrong "ADDRESSES" with my registered title, that it was also logged that a member of Land Registry Staff should contact me, and that never in fact occurred.
I will have to presume in law that the wording of my DPA(SAR) was totally correct as :-

a) It was a request worded and directed by Legal Services Commissions Head of Civil Bills ( Robbie Crane).
b) Involvement of The Information Commissioners Office as was advised by Grace Cunningham of Communities and Local Government , stated l should lodge my DPA(SAR) again and to word it exactly as l had for my March 2009 lodged DPA(SAR).

I would therefore state for record, that your involvement now , is further breaching of information acts, that has already been proved to be the case , with my only being provided with files by Gurmale Sondh ( as Gill Miles replacement ) on the 28 th October 2011 , and after a period of four years of my asking for Land Registry to investigate their own telling me the land ( that later became the "disputed land"), was in fact my registered land according to records held by Kingston upon Hull Land Registry.

Deleting unlawfully the FIFTY ACRES OF LAND on the 16 th February 2007, already confirmed to be my registered land on the TID of the 13 th February 2007, and hiding these matters by use of concealing my stolen and told to me as being destroyed in a fire -conveyance document, being the very reason for why my DPA(SAR) was stonewalled to prevent me rightfully receiving office copy of said document , for the legal afrontal of forcing judicial involvement for a case that never held water from the start .
The PHSO and the AHMLR were copied into in March 2009, the reasons why this case was not a case to be heard in this way and l have since received confirmation that TWENTY -TWO CASES passed for the involvement of the AHMLR , were in fact passed by the AHMLR to the Independent Complaints Reviewer for investigation to why Land Registry had referred them in the first place.
This is for the timeframe of March 2009- October 2009.
I opened up communications in March 2009 and was in contact with Edward Cousins the Chief Adjudicator of the AHMLR , receiving reply in October 2009 as he had been led to believe falsely that l had not lodged a request to appeal the decision of his deputy adjudicator , because this deputy adjudicator in writing to me at my personal e-mail account , had over-ridden and chose to ignore my lodged request to appeal and the fact it was based on the new evidence of the existence of the accepted to be legal owner of the land, who had previously been assumed to have died.
Neither Land Registry or this Deputy Adjudicator would respond to me, to if there had been consideration given to the existence of the accepted owner of the land, or would either respond to the person l had signed the paperwork to put the same question to Land Registry and this Deputy Adjudicator on my behalf.
I could be forgiven for believing that behind the back of Edward Cousins , Land Registry and this deputy adjudicator , were conducting matters outside of their remits , by ignoring facts being presented to them?
Your own involvement in sending a letter to the ICO to do with my case , that was passed by the ICO with no hiding of my sensitive information and details of my case to other victims, is also further breaching of information acts that are acts of Parliament and further suggests a familiarity existing between Land Registry and their perceived by me co-conspirators , being the staff at the ICO?
Please refer my information request immediately to a honest and unbiased person as an internal review request,

Yours sincerely,

Diana Smith

Allen, Jane, Land Registry

I shall be out of the office until lunchtime Tuesday 26 February and my
emails won't be monitored in my absence. If the matter is urgent, please
would you contact Debs on

0300 00633 85


HM Land Registry’s ambition is to become the world’s leading land registry for speed, simplicity and an open approach to data. Our mission is: “Your land and property rights: guaranteed and protected”.

We check all mail and attachments for known viruses. However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk. If you have received this email and it was not intended for you, please let us know, then delete it.

We welcome correspondence in English and Welsh.

Dear Land Registry,
the response to my request is long overdue. By Law , under all circumstances , Land Registry should have responded by now.
I refute any attempt to "blanket ban" me , from making what are valid information requests and point out there is now underway , investigation conducted by Action Fraud of which l have copied Land Registry into the reference number for that investigation.
By ignoring me and failing to comply with my validly made information requests , it will be perceived Land Registry is conducting themselves outside of what are deemed to be lawful remits.
I have brought up the providing of the Land Registry Memorandum marked URGENT for correction of my address that was dated October 2002, with no correction being made and no one contacting me , although it was marked URGENT someone contact me.
This is for address issues previously flagged up with official Land Charges Documents to the Land Charges Division of Legal Services Commission in March 2000, and there being shared privacy statements between Land Registry and LSC at that time , with referrals for held complaints for a period of SIX YEARS.
The address issues still cause problems even now, so by refusing to address matters Land Registry continues to cause problems relating to the wrong address(s) TWENTY-THREE YEARS after my purchase of a registered title and my repeatedly requiring rectification of wrongly held data.
I make PUBLIC RECORD here that the invoice and cheque sent to me in December 2017 , by Land Registry , that was due to be paid to me in March 2012, contained issues of a wrong address again, being the wrong title number .
Land Registry seem to think they can continue causing utter mayhem , ignoring the persons being caused the problems that arise from their maladministration , and unlawfully blocking validly made information requests.
And l point to the fact of my asking for information by way of an acknowledged and excepted to be DPA(SAR) in March 2009 that only received a reply on the 28 th September 2011 , because of the lengthy involvement since July 2009 of The Information Commissioners Office.
Also for PUBLIC RECORD and to assist other VICTIMS of the maladministration of Land Registry , the apology l received for the wrong title number accompanying a cheque l have waited six years for , came from a registrar who previously worked from 2006- 2014 as a solicitor to do with property / land matters and for the very firm of solicitors who set the fraud up of the wrong address being lodged at Kington upon Hull Land Registry and went on to act and advise two parties for the AHMLR involvement in 2008/2009, eventually advising these clients to pull out. Both these clients given the climate and unsavoury conduct of the party seeking to break the law to claim land already registered to me, lost out somewhat considerably when then selling their homes / businesses, for far less than market value.
Readers of "whatdotheyknow", might also like to know that in October 2002 , in full knowledge of the "error" address(s) / details for me, KUH Land Registry had the nerve to write to my mortgage providers that same month, telling them l had a legal charge to be put against my title that did not involve the covented land.
Not only did Land Registry together with LSC steal my own lawful conveyance document, here is record they also knew my covenant document had also been stolen.
I have record (s) of continuance of someone else's legal charge and their paperwork being lodged in the caution register ( 1999-2007 /2011 ) that KUH Land Registry hid even from the involvement of DS Ian Jarman head of the Economic Crime Unit.
There was a ruling by a Judge sitting on the 6 th June 2002 , that l did not owe for a legal charge and the catching of a certain solicitor trying to present forged documents to hide the charge for someone else .
At a pre-booked appointment at Peterborough Land Registry on the 3 rd June 2011 to view the file for my registered title was evidence of KUH Land Registry being copied into issues of this Judges involvement and this would have been as well as my own copying Land Registry into the issues in 2001-2003 of the problems of someone else's charge.
The information then provided to me on the 28 th September 2011 was missing anything to do with the fifty acres and the property built on it.
Now there is moves afoot to separate the two THEDDLETHORPE VILLAGES , to attach one to LOUTH and one to MABLETHORPE in a further attempt to cover-up .
The maps at Lincoln Archives that depict the two THEDDLETHORPE VILLAGES for 1851 ( before the existence of Land Registry) , that if the "Enclosure Awards" were not "MISSING", these Enclosure Awards would support the evidence in my deeds and on these maps ( my estate for my title is split over the two maps and two villages), are the living proof that Land Registry not only think they can ignore Acts of Parliament , but rewrite history too.

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site . Find out more .