Notes on Misconduct in Public Office

·         HI Diana-I to Remain disappointed with Land Registry – their total lack of Positive Responses to my Request for a Review of my Complaints of criminal misconduct by Officials in Public Office , particularly after Ms. Derringtons recommendations that I should be awarded the £300. 00 for mistakes made by Land Registry, Durham Office,(this sum of money I have rejected and returned to Land Registry as unacceptable ) for their disgraceful criminal Conduct and attempts by the assistant Land Registrar of Durham-Alan H Smith-   to Deprive me by Fraud- Malicious criminal  deception & Misconduct in Public Office-   of part of the freehold of Land and Property which we Legally Purchased in all good faith- from Hartlepool Borough Council, on the 1^st February 1984 under the right buy law -introduced by Margaret Thatcher as the Housing Act 1980- in consideration of £5,750.00-Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Pounds- Transferred-Recorded and Registered with Land Registry by J Anthony Jones- Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council on the 29.3.1984.

·          Consequently, I was left with no alternative but to report this serious matter of criminal deception & Fraud in Public Office to a higher authority, Cleveland Police- & the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-Peter Devlin to request a Criminal investigation into my allegations-unfortunately I am still awaiting an acknowledgement of my complaint of Financial Fraud and Misconduct n Public Office  from both Cleveland Police -& the Chief Solicitor of Hartlepool Borough Council-Peter Devlin.

 I have also implemented my Right to complain to the Commissioner under Section 50. Of the Code of Practice, issued by the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, who have also failed to answer my concerns- - their silence might be a clear indication to me that they are ALL involved in misconduct in Public Office!

Land Registry have previously stated that Schedule 4 of the Land Registry Act 2002 makes provision for alteration of the Register of Title to correct a mistake, having searched the Office of Public Sector Information and the Land Registry Act 2002 Schedule 4, on the Internet.

This section I believe requires an explanation or a comment from Land Registry. What in these circumstances constitutes a mistake - is it a failure by Land Registry to Record and Register something recorded on some other Title Deeds?

It is also- my Understanding that H.M. Land Registry, pays out Indemnity ONLY where there has been a mistake on the Register and a Registered Proprietor has suffered loss due to the mistake (Schedule 8. Land Registry Act 2002.)

Alan H Smith- the assistant Land Registrar Durham- categorically stated in his letter to me signed & dated 3rd December 2008-that a previous conveyance/Purchase of the property in dispute had been made between the MAYOR =ALDERMEN & BURGESSES of the Borough of HARTLEPOOL in NOVEMBER 1974! Which contradicts ALL the Irrefutable Documentary evidence of Purchase available and therefore can only be a  

A BLATANT LIE- unsupported by ANY credible evidence- to CONFIRM such an OUTRAGEOUS STATEMEN- My previous requests to my Last Local Labour Member of Parliament Iain Wright- to request a “Copy” of this fraudulent purchase document was also kicked into the long Grass?