The question · editorial wording
Which agreement or other instrument did “your wayleave” refer to, for BH67 and for BH68? Identify the land, apparatus and recipient linked to reference 2624773. What payment records were updated, by whom and on what documents? Produce the archived plan and completion letter referred to in the April 2024 request and explain whether the stated £25 annual amount concerned one pole, both poles or different apparatus. How does that position relate to Miss E’s June 2024 BH68 agreement, its signed plan, 14-year term and one-off £2,000 payment provision? PCC’s 1 July 2024 letter says it enclosed a £2,000 cheque. For each relevant ledger entry, identify the payee’s capacity, agreement and asset references, payment category and covered period. Who authorised any change, and how did you address overlapping apparatus or land rights, apportionment, cancellation or correction? Provide the reconciliation without private banking details. Identify the engineering classification of each asset and the tariff or negotiated valuation actually applied. Show any allocation between BH67, BH68, 35-2381-1, stays and other equipment, and identify any payment or contractual requirement attributable to voltage, equipment, access or safety obligations. The family raised the financial comparison in its October 2025 rebuttal, page 7, and oral summary, pages 8 and 11: where is that particular objection answered?
Why this matters Documentary basis
An assertion that payment records were changed should be traceable to the documents and apparatus it concerns. Integrity requires explaining whether the records describe the same pole and rights, rather than treating an administrative payment entry as proof of an agreement or of the disputed boundary.
Current question directed to: National Grid Electricity Distribution (South West) plc · concerning the payment-record update attributed to Amelia Skea (National Grid Wayleave Services; Bodmin, Cornwall, in the attributed April 2024 email signature) · South West Wayleave Records, Bodmin
- Recipient of the related request in the supplied record
- Amelia Skea
- Related request in record
- 7 May 2026
- Sending of a new request by this publication
- Not recorded; this is the draft reporting register.
The formal letter asks Amelia Skea for the basis of the record update, the supporting agreement and the verification undertaken. Its covering email lists corporate legal and wayleaves recipients; Howard Mark Hacking (professionally Mark Hacking; solicitor and partner, Geldards LLP, Nottingham; individual SRA 156301) acknowledges receipt of the forwarded letter and email. Receipt by the other listed mailboxes is unconfirmed. The expanded question adds the archived attachments, June agreement, printed reference and separate pole identification. Expanded wording not yet sent by this publication. Expanded on 19 September 2026 with PCC’s cheque letter and a request to reconcile the payment records; the added questions have not been sent by this publication.
What the record answers
The September correspondence was checked on 25 September 2026. On 8 September Mark Hacking denied that the earlier correspondence gave rise to a valid claim. Skea’s signed 9 September letter, sent by Geldards on 10 September, confirmed representation and service arrangements and requested no further direct contact. These replies do not authenticate the disputed April 2024 email or identify the underlying BH68 agreement.
The point still requiring clarification
The April 2024 printout predates the June agreement. Identify exactly what was updated, the documents supporting the change and how the later agreement relates to it. The supplied replies leave that comparison unresolved.
September responses checked 25 September 2026; no authentication or BH68-records answer in the replies reviewed.
Where this question comes from
Supporting source notes: F, pp. 1–2 · A, pp. 4–6 · G, pp. 3–5 · H, pp. 2–3 · I, p. 1 · J, p. 1 · K, p. 7, section 6 · L, pp. 8 and 11 · F, published annotated pages · T8, seven-page Owner Wayleave Consent copy, p. 7.
Other parties mentioned
Keep the record complete
Answer this question.
Any party with a response, correction or relevant document can contact theunansweredrecord@gmail.com. Quote BH68-06 and identify the point and evidence you are addressing. Material replies will be considered and reflected fairly alongside the question.
Respond to BH68-06 ↗