To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 429.
429) "Dangerous people are allowed to play by a different set of rules."
(President Obama)
Dear Mr Javid,
Barack Obama summed up in one sentence what's taken us 429 Attempts At Being Clearer And More Specific (and which has still got us nowhere - apparently) when he said,
"We've created a system in which dangerous people are allowed to play by a different set of rules."
The President of the United States of America (USA) could have been describing the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and the way it cavalierly makes up Rules and Regulations which it doesn't enforce and who then use a supposedly independent ombudsman whose salary is paid for by the very members RICS can't or won't regulate to sort out the resulting carnage. Its own Independent Assessor then exposes maladministration at this RICS "appointed" private redress scheme for who she no longer works.
It really is a different set of rules when an Independent Assessor who exposes maladministration has no job but those who are responsible for that maladministration carry on regardless.
That's dangerous.
What's even more dangerous is that those responsible for the maladministration are left totally free to make up the rules.
When no-one in government - on behalf of the UK taxpayer - regulates the regulators those "regulators" are then left totally free to decide what the rules are, they're also free to decide what is and isn't, "fair" and "reasonable" and they're free to decide what compensation their "independent" ombudsman might hand out - a bit like distributing Maundy money on Maundy Thursday.
For example;
"Yet there are 70 million potential complaints which are never made...each one a risk to the trust and confidence on which our economy and society depends."
(Dame Janet Finch: Forward From The Chairman - Annual Report 2014/15, page 3)
Q. Mr Javid, is not maladministration of consumer complaints by private ombudsmen not the ultimate risk to the trust and confidence on which our economy and society depends?
Q. Mr Javid, this is dangerous so why haven't you done anything about it?
Another example;
"Thousands of companies place their trust in Alternative Dispute Resolution providers to make fair and reasoned decisions. ADR is an important part of the civil justice system."
(Dame Janet Finch - page 3)
Q. Mr Javid, when DJS Research say two thirds of complainants - and importantly not companies - felt the report was completely against them then isn't there clearly a massive issue of consumer trust in private ADR providers to make, "fair" and "reasoned" decisions?
Q. Mr Javid, when combined with maladministration isn't this also dangerous?
Q. Mr Javid, when the foundations of "civil justice" are built on an ombudsman's appalling decisions, derisory "financial awards," maladministration and OS executives' propaganda isn't this extremely dangerous for our economy and society?
Or,
"By considering the particular needs of the vulnerable in society, by considering wider issues of consumer detriment and by defining what is fair and reasonable, ombudsmen promote justice."
(Dame Janet Finch - page 3)
Q. Mr Javid, how does handing a vulnerable person a report that is completely against them and maladministrating it just for good measure - alleviating consumer detriment?
Q. Mr Javid, in a fair and just society isn't it insanely dangerous to allow ombudsmen who maladminister consumers' complaints to define what is, "fair" and "reasonable?"
Q. Mr javid, how do ombudsmen who engage in maladministration and then hand two thirds of complainants reports that are completely against them - promoting justice?
Barack Obama believes that;
"All of us need a Congress brave enough to stand up to the gun lobby's lies."
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign believes that,;
"All of us need a Parliament brave enough to stand up to the RICS/OS:Property lobby's lies."
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment