39 of 59

Forensic Assessments

Northern Ireland Office

Forensic assessment · v1.0.0 · updated 1 November 2026

Response status
Not held / refused
Last contact
29 October 2026
Next date on file
None on file
Earlier version
Not yet assessed

Correspondence on file

since 1 September 2026

Our reading: Since September 2026, 7 emails are on file: 2 sent, 5 received (3 with content, 2 automatic acknowledgements). Most material: 22 September 2026, received, not held (ref 26FOI 103): States the Wales Office does not hold the requested records and suggests contacting the Welsh Government for transferred files.

  1. Receivednot heldref 26FOI 103

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

  2. Receivedcorrespondence (no disclosure)

    The institution states the preservation notice is not a request for recorded information and invites a specific information request.

  3. Sentchaseref 26FOI 103; IR/26/16

    The requester follows up on IR/26/16.

  4. Receivednot heldref IR/26/16

    Internal review IR/26/16 of 26FOI 103 completed: the original "not held" answer is upheld. Searches were digital only, with the terms "Great House Farm, House of Williams/Buckler, Llandough"; pre-1999 Welsh Office paper files went to the National Assembly for Wales (Transfer of Records Order 2004) and later the Welsh Government. Next step offered: ICO complaint.

  5. Sentotherref 26FOI 103; IR/26/16

    Reply on internal review IR/26/16 noting that the covering email carries no named signatory.

2 automatic acknowledgements
  1. 26FOI 103

    The institution acknowledges receipt of the request and states a response is due by 28/09/26.

  2. IR/26/16

    The institution acknowledges an internal review request and states an outcome will be provided by 26/10/26.

Not yet assessed

No forensic assessment has been written for this body yet. This page logs the correspondence on file so the first assessment can start from the record.

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

5 dated interactions, oldest first; 2 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
DateDirectionReferenceTypeVerbatim
22 September 2026received26FOI 103not heldPlease see the attached response in respect of your FOI request to the Wales Office, reference 26FOI 103.
29 September 2026received—correspondence (no disclosure)Please note that as your correspondence asks to preserve records and does not request recorded information, under section 8(1) of the FOI Act 2000 it is not being processed as a request for information.
21 October 2026sent26FOI 103; IR/26/16chaseSubject: Re: IR/26/16 - Buckler - Acknowledgement
26 October 2026receivedIR/26/16not heldPlease see the attached response in respect of your internal review request to the Wales Office, reference IR/26/16.
29 October 2026sent26FOI 103; IR/26/16otherSubject: Re: IR/26/16 - Buckler - Response

(b) Inconsistencies and gaps

“Not held” answers set against the duty below

Contradictions between replies, or between institutions

(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): some

Duty
Freedom of Information Act 2000 s.1 and s.10 (confirm or deny, and supply held information within 20 working days); Environmental Information Regulations 2004 for land and environmental records; records management under the s.46 Code of Practice; Public Records Act 1958 selection and transfer for central government records.
Indicators the duty was not met
redirections that end in “not held”; “not held” answers.
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
An ICO decision notice or a records-management finding; any reparations claim would also need a link between a records failure and the loss.

(e) Evidence still needed

Versions

1.0.02026-11-01First page: correspondence log.

Small print: dotted links explain a word (see the glossary); amber-shaded links list every name the records use for the same thing.