Your tutorial of staff answering enquires

Diana Smith made this Freedom of Information request to Land Registry

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Waiting for an internal review by Land Registry of their handling of this request.

Dear Land Registry,
I am struggling after watching Land Registry's tutorial on staff dealing by phone with the public, and want to request statistics of previous satisfactory dealing's with the UK Public contacting their local Land Registry Offices for the period of time when it was stated on your website that there was no need to request information under The Freedom of Information Act, as anyone requesting information could be sure this information act would be applied to all requests for information ( circa- 2003 until 2008).
Please provide under The Freedom of Information Act the statistics of a year by year record of the numbers of requests for information and their various outcomes.
I request the level of competence of the persons replying to these information requests , by the
naming of years of service accrued and what area's they have been trained in

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

The information timeline l refer to in my FOI Act request, reflects the coming in of the LRA2002 ( being October 13 th 2003 and the stating officially of The Land Registry (Rules) Committee in 2008 that they were " satisfied the LRA2002 complied with the HRA and section six of that Act."
I am sure the state of play on the Land Registry website advising the public that the FOIA applied to all requests for information, negating the need to cite the Act , was still in play after 2008, but have kept my timeline to the materially proven facts.

Land Registry

Our email addresses changed on 30 January 2016.

To contact Land Registry by email, you must remove .gsi from the email address.

The email addresses have changed from to

Please update your Land Registry email addresses. Your message has been redirected.

show quoted sections

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

presently no acknowledgement for my FOIA request, just information saying the e-mail addresses for Land Registry changed on 30th January 2016

Sondh, Gurmale, Land Registry

Dear Ms Smith,

Thank you for your email dated 9 February 2016 requesting the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA):-

the statistics of a year by year record of the numbers of requests for information and their various outcomes. I request the level of competence of the persons replying to these information requests , by the naming of years of service accrued and what area's they have been trained in.

I am writing to advise you that following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that Land Registry does not hold the information within the scope of your request.

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

Dear Sondh, Gurmale,
I request copy of the log of these requests , as l am sure you are aware said log is kept to refer further requests to

Yours sincerely,

Diana Smith

Dear Sondh, Gurmale,
could it be that "access to the data ( presumberly filed on electronic data?)", has been mislaid?.
Recently you yourself have offered up the published ( on WDTK) figures of over 6,500 incidences of referred cases to the judiciary , minus the information for court processes of the adjudication against Land Registry by The Advertising Standards Authority of 25 th July 2007.
This information ( had it been provided to me) , would have been crucial for the claims made to properties / lands ( 50 acres in one related incident), that formed my registered title that the whole acreage encompassed according to written confirmation l received from a manager at Inland Revenue.
I affirm that only having ONE DAY ( my neighbours claim lodged next day to this published adjudication), in which to notify me of the adjudication , perhaps left little space to indoctorate me into developments.
However records of the involvement and decision of The Information Commissioners Office in August 2011 , to Land Registry having BREACHED the DATA PROTECTION ACT ( decision records my valid DPA subject access request as 21 st January 2011, effectively moving the goalposts of the ensuing two years of court processes / hearings , that happened after my accepted to be valid DPA subject access request of March 2009, notified in writing to both my MP and The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman for the same date and involving the intervention of the HEAD OF CIVIL BILLS at Legal Services Commisson, who previously headed up the Land Charges Division of LSC).
Records you personally sent to me at the insistence of the ICO,and dated 28th September 2011, were after the fact , of LAND REGISTRY , giving my 50 acres away on 7 th September 2011, actually committing more agenda's challengable by me in relation to the statement by Marco Pierleoni in his letter to me of 13 th April 2010, where he set out the fact l owned a registered title and that l " could not be deprived of land from that title as a result of a wrongly lodged postcode".
The issues of the "errors / mistakes" by Land Registry , not correcting the information they held about me and my title , throughout the many communications l exchanged and telephone calls, that are amptly logged and recorded, form the basis of my challenging your reply to my request of statistics of staff at Land Registry answering the UK Publics enquiries.
Please ensure you refer this matter to the most senior level for correctly identifying the location of the information l seek

Yours sincerely,

Diana Smith

Dear Land Registry,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Land Registry's handling of my FOI request 'Your tutorial of staff answering enquires'.

I have concerns of information tampering , not only the ones I have flagged up with Kingston upon Hull Land Registry and The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry , but the involvement previously of forty-three members of staff at Legal Services Commission and it 's Land Charges Department. As Mr Sondh has previously been proved to have already assisted with breaches of the Data Protection Act , and also of failing to assist , with a requested internal review , of the information he provided; I can only assume the redactions I referred to the ICO involving my request for internal review , are ones that he must deem too incriminating to disclose.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

Petty, Roger, Land Registry

Dear Mrs Smith


I was asked to review our response to your Freedom of Information Act
request dated 9 February regarding tutorials given to staff dealing with
the public by phone.


I can confirm that the response is correct and under Section 1 (1)(a) of
the Freedom of Information Act, this information is not held. 


If you are dissatisfied with this response, you should contact the
Information Commissioner's office. I attach a link to his website.




Yours faithfully


Jane Allen

Lawyer - Corporate Legal and Assurance Services Land Registry- Head Office

Email: [2][email address]




Our email addresses have changed, the new format is [email address] which replaces [email address]

Land Registry is the definitive source of information for more than 24 million property titles in England and Wales. Since 1862 we have provided security and confidence in one of the most active property and mortgage markets in the world. We are working to support economic growth and data transparency as part of the Public Data Group. Find out more at

If you have received this e-mail 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.


Visible links
2. mailto:[email address]

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

Sent to the direct e-mail address of Jane Allen at Land Registry:-

Dear Jane Allen, firstly I requested information to be provided to me by someone responsible for FOIA requests. On record it is known you failed to respond to me in March 2009 for a valid information request that l left my contact details for reply to, on your answering service. I also contacted Susma Ayaria / Miriam Brown ( lawyers at Land Registry ) and Gill Miles ( Information Officer for Land Registry). Confirmation to my e-mail address from Gill Miles that my request was a valid one under the Data Protection Act, that would be complied with to meet the recognised timelines, did not happen. Gill Miles vacated her post and Miriam Brown did not perform her functionary role as my allocated solicitor under " the clerks to solicitors rules". Perhaps you would like to answer why when the postal address and postcode is correct on the certified land registry documents and forms for registered land with my title ,dated 3 rd November 1987 ( within the relevant time frame for the registration) , my repeatedly reporting matters of the error caution involving a wrong address and postcode , were always shelved and never corrected? I have already pointed out you are not a fit person to answer in matters of FOIA requests , now l take the opportunity to record / state and affirm, your deliberate compromising of my case. Timelines seem to be issues that you consider within your power and role at land registry to move,to bend and avoid lawful processes. I had sight together with a witness of my unpresented personal cheque within my title file on the 3 rd June 2011, when meeting with Mike Westcott-Rudd and catching him red handed with my stolen conveyance document, that you and other land registry employees were all deployed to prevent me from obtaining copy of said document under the DPA and your ignoral of my rights to be provided with office copy to use at the hearing on the 28 th & 29 th May 2009. This was for a case that should never have been referred to the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry as there was a known caution in play, that was also an " error " in the caution register, reported by me and that entitled me to immediate rectification of the register ( indemnity) , as the recorded proprietary owner , and affected by said error. Land Registry ( and please take this to mean you) lying to The Information Commissioners Office in August 2011, that the reason Land Registry did not comply with my DPA(SAR) of March 2009 was because no fee had been paid , and then changing section 66 of the LRA2002, while sending together with the ICO , unprotected personal details of me , my case and my title, to other poor souls targeted of theft of their property and land is nothing short of serious criminal gross misconduct, answerable to the courts. I can think of other documented manipulations , whereby misdirections introduced by the providing of wrong literature , have made front page media attention, supposedly as " lessons learned" , and not published to encourage others to take their lead from it, as is my perception of Land Registry. My response to your replying to my FOIA request is that l do not deem you to be a fit person or qualified to reply to me and therefore insist the role falls to someone with credentials of complete honesty, as without factoring in the ability to address all previous errors / mistakes, it would only prove to be another fruitless exercise and more waste of the courts time and expertise. I copy and paste below the link to the WDTK website for my lodged FOIA request. My only further comment at this stage is your obvious obliteration of the privacy statements of land registry and legal services commission ( land charges) , throwing caution to the wind , and allowing monetary gain to reign even in supposed public offices / agencies. It remains to be seen if like " MP's expenses" , what actions can be took against the dishonesty and corruption running amok , that it is my perception from the records l hold , you are personally involved in

Looking for an EU Authority?

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