Ombudsman Services:Property - Ch. 2: For Clarity - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign (414)

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign - www.blogspot.com

To The Business Secretary.

For Clarity - Attempt 414.

414. For Clarity.

Dear Mr Javid,

In the same correspondence (11/09/2010) the ombudsman, in responding to the issue of professional and business integrity, (The RICS "gold standard" of "excellence" and "integrity") informed us that;
"For clarity, I do not agree that any failure (by me or any of my colleagues for that matter) to give an answer to a question means that we have refused to answer that question."

Whichever way you cut it, an ombudsman's failure to answer a complainant's question remains just that - a failure to answer a question.

It makes a mockery of the company's claims to investigate a consumer's complaint, fairly, independently and in a transparent manner. You cannot in any meaningful way "investigate" a complaint without asking and answering questions - unless, that is, you:
- maladminister them,
- misrepresent the nature of the complainant's complaint,
- fail to mediate,
- do not understand the complexity of property complaints,
- withhold information from complainants,
- arrive at decisions in an illogical manner,
- deny complainants their Human Right to a face to face meeting,
and,
- have a pre-set agenda to effectively rubbish complainants' complaints thereby saving your members money.

All of which appear to occur on a regular basis at Ombudsman Services:Property according to DJS Research's Customer Satisfaction Reports.

The RICS Director of Professional Regulation, who sits on the company's Board, must see all of the above as meeting The RICS criterion for the, "effective resolution of complaints" otherwise he would have intervened to put a stop to it, only he didn't.

We asked the Chair of Maladministration at Ombudsman Services, Prof Dame Janet Finch,
Q. 93: If this is a working definition of clarity is it any wonder that the majority of complainants are so dissatisfied with the outcome of their case"

The Chair of Maladministration didn't reply. She didn't give an answer to our question either. Not answering questions has been allowed to become standard practice at this private redress scheme.

Q. Mr Javid, a private redress scheme that fails to answer complainants' questions is a failure and not fir for purpose. It came off any "gold standard" the minute it maladministered complaints and thereby eviscerated its "integrity" and authority to dispense "civil justice." Do you as Business Secretary still assure consumers that when they take their complaints to Ombudsman Services they will be investigated, "fairly" and "independently?"

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is seeking:
- answers from Vince Cable,
- answers from Nick Clegg,
- answers from Mark Prisk,
- answers from Jo Swinson,
- answers from Sajid Javid,
- a public inquiry into the workings of Ombudsman Services:Property (accompany which formerly traded as the Surveyors Ombudsman Service before undergoing rebranding) and the role of The RICS.
- compensation for the victims of the ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions.
- compensation for the victims of maladministration.
- the setting up of a truly, "fair" and "independent" redress scheme free from RICS malign influence. 
Please comment or share your story or information. 
Thanks,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.