Yes, the regular summaries issued in first few days of the following month will mostly quote readings from automated sites. So it's the fact that (I assume) Faversham is a non-automated climat. station that explains the difference. I think also that the maps produced in the regular monthly summaries are updated with the additional data when it becomes available / QC'd?

We know from 2003 that faversham is quite a sheltered site and the general area is on a north-facing slope, but IIRC it's quite high up on the slope, albeit the area around the observing site is flat. So I wonder if a lower min would have been recorded some way down the slope?

Julian Molesey Surrey