Report comment

Not to be a party -pooper or to put to put too finer point on matters, but my own experience of Land Registry's breaching of the DPA and the published involvement of the MOJ being just a dumping ground of my much lodged complaints; I got record from the ICO of Land Registry's breach which was set to deny me copy of my own conveyance document that Land Registry was heavily involved with the theft of the original document that the Independent Complaints Review ordained Land Registry return the document to me and to give me £250-00p for the inconvenience of my not having had the document for use at the nineteen court hearings l was needlessly subjected to.
Looking at the statistics of the backlog here for the MOJ, l had over twelve months of a backlog fielded at me by the ICO themselves from July 2009 until mild support in November 2010.
So a case of the pot calling the kettle black me thinks? I have admittance from the Information Officer at Land Registry that over 6,500 cases were referred by Land Registry for judicial involvement since the Adjudication of The Advertising Standards Authority, that none of these cases were informed of the misdemeanour's of Land Registry targeting 50 % of owners of property and land in England & Wales with misleading information regarding the registration process / adverse land possession and over-riding interests. And this is only the number of cases Land Registry admits mistakes with. I will watch the ICO 's handling of the breaches of the MOJ with interest, although l have myself communicated with Elizabeth Denham and cannot report any confidence of her handling of complaints made to the ICO.