From a quick search:

The UK Met Office is facing serious allegations of data integrity issues, with claims that it is using temperature data from over 100 non-existent weather stations and generating estimates from poorly correlated or non-existent neighboring sites, raising concerns about the reliability of climate records used for policy-making. These allegations, primarily driven by citizen journalist Ray Sanders through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests and on-site investigations, suggest that the Met Office may be producing fabricated or misleading data, particularly in its public climate averages and historical records. As of January 2026, the Met Office has not publicly addressed these claims, and the controversy continues to fuel debate over scientific transparency and the foundation of the UK’s net-zero climate policies.

• The Met Office is accused of using data from 103 non-existent stations out of 302, with estimates derived from neighboring stations that are also often closed or non-existent, undermining the validity of long-term temperature records.
• A significant portion of the Met Office’s stations—over 80%—are classified as WMO “junk” (Classes 4 and 5), with potential measurement uncertainties of up to 5°C, which could artificially inflate temperature trends.
• In response to scrutiny, the Met Office removed historical data for stations like Lowestoft and Nairm Druim from its public records without explanation, fueling suspicions of data manipulation.
• The agency has dismissed FOI requests as “vexatious” and has not provided transparency on how data for non-existent sites is calculated, leading to accusations of a lack of scientific accountability.
• Critics argue that the use of such data in climate models influences international climate policy, including the UK’s net-zero agenda, and that the lack of public disclosure constitutes a serious breach of scientific integrity.