GGAT
Forensic assessment · v0.2.0 · updated 1 November 2026
Translation pending: the assessment text below is in English, the authoritative record.
- Response status
- No contact on file
- Last contact
- None on file
- Next date on file
- None on file
- Earlier version
- v0.1.1, published 18 October 2026 on the Legal Wiki
Since last assessment
18 October 2026 to 1 November 2026
Our reading: No new correspondence is on file since the last assessment. The earlier finding stands unchanged.
The assessment as last published
Carried over unchanged from v0.1.1 (18 October 2026). Links point inside this site.
Chronology and catalogue links — assessed 10-10-2026: Use the Institutional Involvement Roadmap (1877–2026) for the date-ordered institution/people/evidence sequence. The reported 1988 Cadw-to-Minister spot-listing letter has its own catalogue placeholder at GHF-E152; the original has not been attached to that page as at 10-10-2026. A placeholder records an evidence gap; it does not establish the letter’s contents or misconduct.
ASSESSMENT ISOLATION CONTROL — GGAT
Scope: This page assesses only GGAT. Other institutions, companies, courts, professional firms or individuals may appear solely as counterparties, sources, witnesses, recipients, predecessors/successors or matters of chronology. Their own conduct, duties, decisions and potential responsibility are not assessed here; they belong on their separate actor-specific review.
Accountability test: identify the precise legal/entity identity; the named individual(s) or responsible role(s) where the evidence permits; the specific act, omission, order, instruction or representation; the source of legal or administrative authority and any delegation; who requested or authorised the action; what checks, objections, notice, appeal or review safeguards existed; what record shows the reasons; what happened afterwards; and what evidence links the conduct to the asserted consequence.
Evidence discipline: documented involvement is not itself proof of wrongdoing. Potential responsibility must be separated from established fact, inference and assertions. A missing record is not proof of its contents. Where the responsible individual, authorising person or source of authority is presently unknown, that uncertainty is recorded as an explicit identification/recovery task rather than guessed. 🕒10-10-2026
GGAT — chronological evidence map
This map separates Great House Farm records from contextual material concerning the separate Llandough Roman villa/Church Farm site. Each source title links directly to the Wiki evidence page or transcription; placeholders and missing items are labelled.
| Date / period | GGAT appearance or related record | Direct source and evidential limitation |
|---|---|---|
| 17 April 1980 (press publication; separate Llandough Roman-villa context) | Neath Guardian reported a talk by GGAT’s assistant director about Trust work, including excavations at Llandough near Cardiff. The Wiki’s source page identifies this as the Roman villa site south of St Dochdwy’s church, not Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr. | GHF-E090-N05 transcription · dedicated evidence page. Context only; do not merge the two sites. |
| 18 March 1983 (press publication; separate Roman-villa context) | South Wales Echo reported GGAT’s Swansea warehouse fire and said material from the Llandough Roman villa excavations was among the losses. The source page expressly states this concerns the Roman villa material and does not mention Great House Farm. | GHF-E090-N06 transcription · dedicated evidence page. Context only; not evidence of lost Great House Farm material. 🕒10-10-2026 |
| 1 October 1982 | GGAT warning letter concerning Great House Farm’s archaeological sensitivity. The page describes the original as not yet attached and states the recipient and any reply are unknown. 🕒10-10-2026 | GHF-E139 — warning letter. Primary document not yet attached to the page; the source/custody trail remains incomplete. |
| 1989 (exact GGAT response date not established from the surviving record) 🕒10-10-2026 | Vale’s planning officer’s report for 89/01396/OUT refers to missing appendices B–E. The Wiki’s missing-record schedule identifies Appendix B as further GGAT comments; the missing appendix itself is not available to verify the content. | GHF-E146 — planning report and missing appendices. Do not assign Appendix B’s content or exact date beyond what the surviving references say. |
| August 1990 | GGAT authored “Land at Great House Farm, Llandough: An Archaeological Assessment.” The transcription states GGAT discussed redevelopment with Debenham Tewson after the December 1988 demolition, advised the Vale planning authority, maintained contact with Llandough Community Council, and was commissioned by BP Properties for the assessment. The report itself disclosed GGAT’s dual advisory roles to the authority and applicant. | GHF-E029-01 — canonical catalogue record · full transcription. Original scanned PDF is not currently attached to the catalogue page; transcription is available. |
| 27 July 1992; reserved-matters approval 38 days later | GGAT letter concerning archaeology/building; page 2 is recorded missing. The associated reserved-matters approval followed without a new archaeological condition, on the current Wiki record. | GHF-E147 — GGAT letter and 92/00671/RES. Page 2 and the complete intervening decision trail remain outstanding. |
| 1993–1994 (post-excavation / condition-discharge period) | The Wiki’s GHF-E148 record states Condition 18 was treated as discharged on the developer’s counsel’s opinion over GGAT’s objection, which the Council described as a “difference of opinion.” This is a recorded contention about the archaeological-condition process, not by itself proof of wrongdoing. | GHF-E148 — 1994 report, Condition 18 and counsel’s opinion. Original report/opinion remains a priority missing item. |
| 29 September 2026 (records-access reply) | RCAHMW’s response refers to national-monuments records and the 1990 GGAT assessment in its explanation of archaeological archive holdings. This is a modern archive-search appearance, not a new GGAT act. | Reply register R01 — RCAHMW RC26-0375. |
| 29 September 2026 (successor-record complaint) | Heneb acknowledged a formal complaint concerning HER identifiers and the 1978–1995 record. This is a present-day records/HER handling matter involving the successor institution; it does not itself determine what GGAT did in 1982–1994. | Reply register R07 — Heneb complaint · Heneb forensic assessment. |
Forensic boundary: distinguish GGAT’s archaeological advice to the Council from work commissioned by BP Properties; both roles are recorded in the 1990 report transcription. Separately, the 1980 and 1983 press items concern the Roman villa at Llandough, not Great House Farm/Tŷ Mawr. Missing original documents and appendices remain missing; their contents must not be reconstructed as fact. 🕒10-10-2026
Records-access register appearances — direct row links
Rows below match GGAT or the full organisation name in the reply register. This shows appearances in the records-access trail, not necessarily direct conduct by GGAT.
| Date | Correspondence / register item (click to open) | Reading rule |
|---|---|---|
| 21 May 2026 | R42 — Cadw (Welsh Government), Listed Buildings casework. | Name/alias match in register; open the row to distinguish sender, recipient and incidental reference. |
| 29 Sep 2026 | R01 — Royal Commission (RCAHMW), National Monuments Record enquiries. RC26-0375 (covering RC26-0353, -0368, -0371). Reply in Welsh. | Name/alias match in register; open the row to distinguish sender, recipient and incidental reference. |
Related navigation: FOI & Public-Authority Reply Register · Records Access Chronology · Evidence Library
Page version & change log
Current version: 0.1.1
| Version | Date (UTC) | Editor (human or agent name) | Change | Source / evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1.1 | 2026-10-18T15:24Z | the editors | Footer standardised; earlier log rows carried into this table; no content change | Editing Protocol, 18 Oct 2026 |
| 0.1.0 | 2026-10-18T14:27:00+01:00 | OpenAI-assisted maintenance agent (GPT-6) | Installed footer log; version tracking begins at 0.1.0; this does not reconstruct earlier revisions. CURRENT VERSION: 0.1.0. | Saved through WordPress API; public rendering not individually checked. |
Agents and editors: follow the Editing Protocol.
Case file
This file is built for a future reparations claim. Facts are as the records show them; interpretation is labelled “our reading”. Items marked “not checked” have not been compared with the original record.
(a) Conduct timeline
0 dated interactions, oldest first; 0 automatic acknowledgements are left out. Quotations are verbatim from the institution’s email; where the reply’s substance was an attachment, the email subject is quoted instead.
Show the timeline
| Date | Direction | Reference | Type | Verbatim |
|---|
(b) Inconsistencies and gaps
None found in the correspondence on file.
(c) Quarantined-name links
Records on the quarantine register (Kissed Frogs) that sit in, or came from, this institution’s holdings. None is treated as settled.
No quarantined-name record on the register is linked to this institution’s holdings.
(d) Duty and liability — our reading
Liability indicators (our reading): none
- Duty
- Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2016 (the historic environment record; listing and scheduling); Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979; FOIA 2000 / EIR 2004 for the information held.
- Indicators the duty was not met
- none found in the correspondence on file.
- Evidence still needed to confirm
- the institution’s retention schedule and disposal record for the series in question; the catalogue or file list it searched; any internal review or complaint outcome.
- Likely extent of exposure if confirmed
- Limited to what the record holds and how it was compiled; exposure rises only if a record was omitted or misattributed in a way that affected a decision.
(e) Evidence still needed
- View the HER / NMR file and its source references at the search room. for paid visit list
Versions
| 0.2.0 | 2026-11-01 | Moved to the Forensic Assessments webapp; dated “Since last assessment” section added; response status re-read. |
| 0.1.1 | 2026-10-18 | As published on the Legal Wiki. |