Traditional Owners who have been working for years to build a native title claim in Western Australia are concerned a new claim which partially overlaps their own claim area could undermine their rights and is symptomatic of a broader problem in native title.

This week Traditional Owners working with Native Title Services Goldfields will meet to authorise their claim, around Agnew and Lawlers.

A meeting was held on Monday, associated with the consultancy firm Umanity Group, regarding the other claim which covers a much larger area, spanning from Menzies to south of Sandstone.

Traditional Owner Verna Vos told National Indigenous Times said she believed the proponents of the new claim - and their agents - had not carried out due diligence.

"They just go ahead and put the overlap... that's that claim that they have just put in," she said.

"Quite frankly, it's disgusting. They should not have even put in a claim without doing proper due diligence, widely consulting with people, and in fact, the first thing that they should have done was speak with Native Title Services who have a responsibility in the Goldfields, and that did not happen."

Ms Vos alleged the people party to the overlapping claim do not have any connection to that area of land.

She said the 'rival' claim involves "people I know for a fact don't come from that area".

Ms Vos noted the land overlapped is her mother's Country, to which she has a spiritual connection.

She said there are mining interests on the land, which is, in her view, motivating the other claim.

Ms Vos suggested this is not an isolated case.

"They need to be exposed, and they're not alone. It's making a mockery of the true sense of our culture, but also of the true intent of assisting in getting native title, by allowing people to put in a claim in areas that they don't have connection to," she said.

"The court judge can only make a decision on the information presented before them. If it's incorrect ... the judge is not going to know. It is the job of the lawyers to do the right thing - and the anthropologists - but I've also learnt a long time ago the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

"I've talked to other friends who are senior anthropologists who are very disillusioned about some of the things that are happening as well. It's like every man and the dog can go on a claim.

"They're not doing the right process and ensuring that the right people are on those claims, and it's just adding more and more trauma. I've been traumatised by this."

Ms Vos said she had spoken with the Umanity Group CEO John Cecchi to "let him know my thoughts, and that they're doing the wrong thing".

"The only reason they're putting that in... is because of the mining interests there. That is the reason, and because it's not currently determined. They know that's not their Country. This is the danger. This is my pain. They go and do surveys, clear the Country (for works) purely to get paid, not caring that it's just going through the motions, not caring that it's not their Country," she told National Indigenous Times.

"They don't know the sites or all of that, they also know the non-Aboriginal people don't know whether what they're saying is correct or not."

National Indigenous Times understands the Traditional Owners working with Native Title Services Goldfields have been told by Umanity Group the claim overlap was unintentional.

This publication contacted Umanity Group and asked the firm to confirm the overlap was unintentional and to advise what would be done to remedy it.

National Indigenous Times also asked: What research and consultation has Umanity Group done to prepare the application, and who conducted it; who is Umanity Group's client; and does Umanity Group have an agreement with the client with regards to heritage surveys in the application area?

Mr Cecchi responded: "Thank you for reaching out and giving us the opportunity to respond. Umanity Group is a multidisciplinary firm bringing together lawyers, archaeologists, anthropologists and environmental scientists. We are honoured to play a small part in supporting Aboriginal people as they seek recognition of their native title rights and interests."

Ms Vos said she was also concerned allegedly under-prepared and erroneous native title claims in general would cause uncertainty for industry and undermine heritage protection.

"I am very committed to ensuring that County is protected, but also that the companies are protected by having the correct information to do the activities without risk of impacting negatively on our sites and damaging heritage," she said.

"They can't get that (protection) unless you've got the right information, and not only that, they need to make sure the actual consultants who perform the surveys with the Traditional Owners can have a high standard and can do the proper reports.

"And from the reports we've seen from many of the freelancers or people who aren't there for the right reasons, they're not adequately protecting mining companies either."

Traditional Owner Colleen Berry told National Indigenous Times the people listed on the 'rival' claim have no connection to the area their claim overlaps, in her view.

"The people that's on there, they're on a claim already, right? And that's their rightful area where they come from - over that side, but they have no rights and interest over this side because this side is our people," she said.

"We are the descendants and custodians of this area, and they don't know the storyline and songlines for this area."

She also said she believed the other claimants were motivated by plans for mining on the Country involved.

"There are mines, and it's about money, my dear," Ms Berry alleged.

"They don't know this place. We know this place because we were taught that from when we were little.

"And we know this area is significant with sites, and this is why we are here already protecting it. When you are handed down knowledge you become the caretakers, the knowledge holders, the custodians, and we are the custodians of this Country."