Investigations in the public interestEvidence. Enquiry. Accountability.

The supporting record

Documents & source notes.

Mark John Mayo v Miss E / L00BP152

Read the reporting. Understand its sources.

Seventeen distinct PDFs support the reviewed Pole BH68 reporting, including the formal notices and referral request. Each entry opens a substantive source note. Original PDFs will be added as publication copies become available.

TP01–TP16 · Planning & heritage

The Torridge planning source record

A dated index of the shed advice, design and heritage objections, photograph provenance and Council roles, planning-history replies, access-warning and forestry correspondence, later decisions, family accounts and sale-related photograph.

Source T · Version and response review

Annex E, Seldons’ replies and later outcomes

The document versions, October notice and acknowledgement, express denial, SRA decision and July trial order.

R

Court costs · Signed correspondence · 2 pages

Final notice to Judge Paul Mitchell

29 April 2026: the request for the N260, filing and service records, and reasons.

Read source note ↗

Copies reviewed · 12–13 September 2026

We reviewed 17 distinct PDFs, 129 pages. Duplicate copies are indexed once. Five additional documents were reviewed on 13 September; the resupplied attributed exchange was re-examined and is identical to Document F already indexed. Each entry identifies its review date.

A

Agreement & accompanying letters 6 pages in supplied PDF

The signed wayleave agreement

The 2024 contractual documents relied upon by Miss E, including a signed plan identifying Pole BH68.

Read source note
B

Email correspondence 12 pages in supplied PDF

The questions and the replies

The exchanges about the plan, payment records and wayleaves, including substantive replies and two later requests for clarification.

Read source note
C

Plan & accompanying correspondence 3 pages in supplied PDF

The April 2025 plan and email

The map and reproduced 28 April 2025 email containing the phrase ‘showing the apparatus on your title’.

Read source note
D

Letter before action 6 pages in supplied PDF

The 6 May 2026 letter before action addressed to Nick Shackson

The family’s 6 May 2026 account of its concerns and its requests for explanations and supporting records.

Read source note
E

Email correspondence 4 pages in supplied PDF

The covering email and representation reply

The family’s covering email and a reproduced response confirming that National Grid Electricity Distribution (South West) plc had instructed Geldards LLP; the email also refers to correspondence with Mark Hacking of Geldards.

Read source note
F

Annotated correspondence printout 2 pages in supplied PDF

The April 2024 correspondence attributed to Amelia Skea and Mr Mayo

A disputed printed exchange referring to BH67 and BH68, a payment-record update, and supporting attachments that are not included in this copy.

Read source note
G

Email correspondence export 5 pages in supplied PDF

The verification requests and the March 2025 referral

Miss E’s authentication and payment-record questions, a follow-up copying Amelia Skea, and a recorded referral to Nigel Merrifield.

Read source note
H

Letter before action 4 pages in supplied PDF

The 7 May 2026 letter before action addressed to Amelia Skea

The family’s allegations and renewed requests for authentication, records and an explanation of the apparent BH68 position.

Read source note
I

Covering email export 1 pages in supplied PDF

The email transmitting the Skea letter and supporting documents

The 7 May 2026 covering email lists the letter, agreement and disputed correspondence as attachments and names corporate copied recipients.

Read source note
J

Email correspondence export 4 pages in supplied PDF

Geldards’ April and May 2026 replies

Mark Hacking’s replies about NGED’s position, the disputed status of earlier requests, receipt of the Skea letter and routing of further correspondence.

Read source note
K

Party submission supplied as court-filed 19 pages in supplied PDF

October 2025: the defendant’s rebuttal to the claimant’s reply

The defendant’s written challenge to the National Grid correspondence, including allegations of editing and a retrospective redaction explanation.

Read source note
L

Party submission supplied as court-filed 26 pages in supplied PDF

October 2025: the summary of oral argument for the strike-out hearing

The written oral-argument summary for the 14 October 2025 hearing at Barnstaple County Court, including the defendant’s editing and redaction allegations.

Read source note
M

Signed party allegation and request for referral 24 pages in supplied PDF

Annex E: the particularised allegation of email insertion and evidential manipulation

The expanded Annex E alleges insertion of BH68 into correspondence originally about BH67, reliance on that material and omission of Miss E’s executed documents from expert instructions.

Read source note
N

Outgoing formal-notice email 2 pages in supplied PDF

27 October 2025: notice to Luke Cornwell and Seldons, with a demand to preserve originals

An email addressed to Luke Cornwell and Seldons expressly raises personal and firm-level allegations and asks for preservation of originals, metadata and related records.

Read source note
O

Formal warning addressed to Luke Cornwell 5 pages in supplied PDF

26 October 2025: Annex J-2 challenges the email, disclosure history and claimed transfer

Mr J’s warning challenges the alleged email alterations, newly listed historic agreements and the basis on which the claimed wayleave transfer was being advanced.

Read source note
P

Formal notice addressed to Luke Cornwell 3 pages in supplied PDF

25–26 October 2025: Annex J-1 demands the underlying wayleave documents

The family’s notice alleges that BH68 was inserted into fabricated correspondence and demands authentic supporting documents rather than disclosure lists alone.

Read source note
Q

Outgoing request for criminal assessment 3 pages in supplied PDF

29 October 2025: the family’s referral request addressed to the CPS

An outgoing email to CPS mailboxes alleges insertion of BH68 into National Grid correspondence and requests assessment and coordination with the SRA.

Read source note

Publication copies

These notes describe the source material. They are not reproductions of the original documents. No original source PDF has been uploaded to this draft.

S · Public policy sources

National Grid’s leadership, ethics and service standards

The official sources behind the six proposed executive-review questions, with the wayleave-complaint distinction and policy dates explained.