To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 426.
426) How Dame Janet And Lewis Met The Challenge.
Dear Mr Javid,
In our previous email/blog we asked you and our readers to become part-time Chairmen with unimpeachable integrity and to manage the challenge of;
a) a majority of complainants complaining that their complaints had been handled unfairly.
And,
b) the widespread dissatisfaction with the derisory financial "awards" being handed to disgruntled complainants by the Lead Ombudsman.
We should like to thank all those who took the time to respond - unfortunately, Mr Javid, you chose not to.
So, how was the challenge met?
The CEO and Chief Ombudsman, the Rev Lewis Shand Smith wrote in the Ombudsman Services:Property Annual Report 2010/11 about how,
"Firm foundations support increasing complaints." (page 1) And how,
"We successfully managed a significant increase in property complaints and have looked at how we can deal with complaints about a range of property professionals, in the UK and abroad." (page 3)
How successful are they at resolving consumers' complaints?
As part-time Chairmen you will need to read the independent survey carried out by DJS Research Ltd. This is hidden away from the light of day and you will need to type, "DJS Research" into the box at the top right had side of the of the Ombudsman Services webpage - www.ombudsman-services.org - then go to: DJS Research Ltd., James Hinde, Property Ombudsman - Customer Satisfaction Report 2011.
The Report is 134 pages. As Chairmen with unimpeachable integrity you might find that it makes for a depressing and disturbing read.
The Executives at Ombudsman Services:Property, The Rev Lewis Shand Smith and Dame Maggie Jones reduced it all to a few paragraphs on page 7 of their Annual Report. They say,
"Customer Satisfaction Survey: Executives Summary - ' The results will be used by OS:Property to measure customer service levels and prioritise improvements in the future.'"
But didn't they say the same thing the year before?
Then, the priorities for improvement were the ones as set out at the top of this page - to tackle the lack of reasonableness of the Lead Ombudsman's findings and do something about the derisory levels of the Lead Ombudsman's financial awards.
The Property Lead Ombudsman, Gillian Fleming stated,
"'Property cases are usually more time consuming than the other complaints we handle (energy and communications) because they tend to involve complicated issues and a lot of information needs to be considered against the relevant guidance and legal background.' Gillian continues, 'When complaint numbers increase, even slightly, this can have a significant impact on our business. We have therefore trained more staff so we have the flexibility to cope with more cases ...the complexity of property complaints has continued to be a challenge.'"
So as a business just how well did they cope with the challenge of resolving complex property complaints?
"Successfully," says The Rev. Lewis Shand Smith.
DJS Research beg to differ. They report,
"Many (around two thirds) felt the report was completely, or on balance against them, in line with previous years. This did not change even after further representations were made... many were complaining about poor information/advice which could potentially have led to a costly purchasing mistake far in excess of a few hundred or thousand pounds."
Q. As Chairmen with unimpeachable integrity, would you regard that as a successful resolution of a consumers' disputes with RICS chartered surveyors?
Q. Is the reason why a majority of consumers were forced - unsuccessfully - to resort to further representations due to the Chief Ombudsman's and Lead Ombudsman's failure to understand the complexity of property complaints?
Q. What sort of business is the Chair, Chief Ombudsman and Lead Ombudsman engaged in?
The second challenge the Labour Peer looked forward to meeting with The Rev. Lewis Shand Smith and his team was that of complainants' widespread dissatisfaction with the low level of financial awards. How did they meet that one?
DJS Research state,
"OS:Property is different to OS:Energy and OS:Communications in that the financial implications of complaints are much larger as they relate to expensive purchasing decisions. There remains a key issue with regards to complainants' perceptions of of what recompense to expect (ie the scale of financial award they can expect from the complaint and what can actually be achieved) This should be looked at and either expectations be managed more tightly from the beginning of the claim, or the scale of financial award be increased to be more in line with the financial losses incurred by the complainant as a result of the problem."
(page 7 OS:Property Annual Report 2010/11)
So what did the team and Chair do?
Under, "OUTCOMES" on page 5 of the Annual Report, we're told,
"In reviewing the last year, even though the average financial award is significantly less, the range of awards has not changed.... the majority of awards are up to £250. Those awards together with any recommendations, demonstrate how our service makes a difference." (Gillian Fleming, Lead Ombudsman OS:Property)
Q. If the independent advice is to prioritise the level of financial award and increase them to be more in line with the financial losses incurred by complainants, why as Chairman, have you allowed Gillian Fleming to decrease them - significantly?
Q. Complex property complaints have continued to be misunderstood by the OS:Property team and their so-called financial "awards" have been reduced significantly, as Chairman how has this service - for which you are responsible - made a difference to your disgruntled
complainants?
Just how unimpeachable is your integrity? It's the start of a New Year so why not put yourself to the test and manage a private redress scheme for an hour or so? Could you do better for consumers?
If you do take the time and the trouble to find James Hinde's final Customer Satisfaction report at: www.ombudsman-services.org and go to the final page - 134 - you will see a set of final statistics: if you combine Fairly dissatisfied 17% with Very dissatisfied 44% you will hopefully arrive at 61% - which is why we are the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
We are seeking:
- answers from Vince Cable.
- answers from Francis Maude.
- 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 (a company formerly trading as the Surveyors ombudsman Service until undergoing rebranding) and the role of the RICS.
- compensation for the victims of the Lead Ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions.
- compensation for the victims of the Executive's maladministration.
- the setting up of a truly, "fair" and "independent" redress scheme free from RICS influence.
Happy New Year. Please comment and if you find the time to manage this private redress scheme please let us know how you get on.
Thanks. Steve Gilbert
No comments:
Post a Comment