Natural England do not own any common lands,

The Parasites NE, do not own any common lands, their occupation is gained by coercing/bribing others to register as owners of the common lands,normally the council because the commons commissioner ruled that any common lands where no owners could be traced, were "Vested" into the councils care, but he did not bestow any jurisdiction.

The council (who are strongly supported by the courts and police do not fear prosecution for false representation and are willing to apply as owners to carryout works fencing etc.

The fencing is paid for from funding from NE claiming they are not committing any offence because the owners have given consent to make the common, a site SSSI and into a nature reserve siting the SSSI as flora and fauna, "trees and herbage" commoners livestock fodder, for public enjoyment, natural habitat.

The common land registration act should be registered, section 4 (1) and open for inspection by the public section 3 (2) of the act to show evidence of the registration act, commoners rights and common owner registration with a copy of the pre registration and conveyance documents.

It is stated on 17th Feb 1983, that no one claimed ownership of this common land, under the 1965 CRA, the particular section is 4 (1), conclusion may be claimed that as there was no title deeds to pre-date 1189 no one was legally entitled to do so without committing fraud by false representation.

However, two bodies did make claims to ownership without disclosure and would be perfectly entitled to do so, but for reference purposes only, but without locus Stan-di, not able to grant easement,deeds of grant or conveyance, would not be entitled to take advantage of the product of the common,NO rights at all, but as is able to apply to the minister to carryout works on the common, include any lawful documents ( to prove what you claim).

Natural England nor the council are able to comply with this section (4-1), MR. D.B.P. Bradley (regional land agent) appeared for N.C Council and Taylor, claimants and were accordingly became registered.

In the CC directions both were registered with ownership rights.

As is declared on this document, no person was able to comply with, section 4(1) of the 65 CRA, contradiction is in evidence under section 8(2) of the 65 CRA that the two name claimants could be registered as owners: sub section 2 of section 8 of the 65 CRA states,....After the registration authority has given such notices as may be prescribed, the common commissioner shall inquire into the matter and shall, if satisfied that any person is the owner of the land, direct the registration authority to register that person accordingly; and the registration authority shall comply with that direction

Section 8(1) supports section 4(1) thus, where the registration under section 4 of this act of any land as common land or as a town or village green has become final but no person is registered under that section as the owner of the land, then, unless the land is registered under the lands registration acts 1925 and 1936,, the registration authority shall refer the question of the ownership of the land to a commons commissioner, local authorities are only entitled to register itself as owners of town or village greens, such ownerles registered common lands are registered under Section 9 of the 65 CRA, as being vested into the care of the council, but the vesting give no jurisdiction.

This was to prevent no ones land, from becoming every ones land.

It shows in the commons commissioners final summing up that he did not understand the CRA legislation, or as we now understand that his decision was a bias one in favor of the local authority, he used regulation 30 (1) of the the commons commissioners regulation 1971 regulation.

Section 30 sub 1, is where commoners have not exercised rights for 30 years, which, he thinks gives him the power to come to his decision.

Commoners have registered rights by Parliamentary bill and royal Assent, there is no evidence that any commoner on CL 376 have abandoned their rights which are affixed to the property or application lands, slight misunderstanding by the commissioner, similar to the passengers on the Titanic not understanding "abandon ship" those that survived didn't like music.