<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>The Unanswered Record - Monthly Editions</title><link>https://theunansweredrecord.org/editions/</link><description>Numbered, dated editions of The Unanswered Record.</description><language>en-gb</language><atom:link href="https://theunansweredrecord.org/editions/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Issue 001 - The case so far</title><link>https://theunansweredrecord.org/editions/issue-001-september-2026/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://theunansweredrecord.org/editions/issue-001-september-2026/</guid><pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>A disputed email. A competing claim to BH68. A costs order made at the same hearing, according to Mr J. Miss E and Mr J allege that the underlying costs records remain missing from disclosure and are being deliberately withheld. Identify the agreement. Authenticate the email. Explain the costs. This is the case so far, not the end of the story.</description><enclosure url="https://theunansweredrecord.org/editions/issue-001-september-2026/the-unanswered-record-issue-001-2026-09-15-v1.1.pdf" length="361980" type="application/pdf"/></item></channel></rss>