To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 480.
480) Hector Pickaxe And The Floating Crowbars - "Friends in Low Places."
Dear Mr Javid,
The song goes,
"Just give me an hour and then,
Well, I'll be as high,
As that ivory tower you're livin' in."
The mushrooming of ivory towers further inflating the London property market - owned by who knows who and who gives a shite anyway - is hugely symbolic of David Cameron's, "Big Society" and just how deeply he believes that, "we're all in this together." It's simply being aspirational to live in one. A latter day version of, "keeping up with the Joneses." The glue that binds us together.
Occupying one of London's prime locations in Parliament Square and dictating Government policy - behind the scenes, with a little bit of, "engagement work" and "political influencing" - is the RICS.
The Gold Standard of "Wankererism." (Again, acknowledgements to Mr Johnson)
They are one of the principal exponents of, "light-touch" regulation and have the cowboy surveyors and dodgy ombudsman to prove it.
Why is there a need for RICS' "appointed" private redress - with its attendant job creation for loafers? Why don't they do the job they're supposed to do and get on with regulating their cowboys in the first place? Then there wouldn't be any cowboys in the first place - they'd be given the bum's rush and the world would be a happier place. for it. Simple really.
At www.adamfellows.com we read,
"Methods: The commission decided that transparency was key in their work, so all papers and minutes were published."
And,
"Some members thought that enshrining the right to a form of administrative justice should also be enshrined in the Bill if this was ever drafted."
The Bill being - the British Bill of Rights - and not the Old Bill although we believe they should have been drafted onto this long ago. (Please see our "Consumers' Charter" where we said administrators - those who helped capture capitalism and rig it - should be financially accountable for their misdemeanours.)
The Chair of this Commission was Sir Leigh Lewis who also sits on the Board of Ombudsman Services.
Q. Mr Javid, if transparency is good enough for Sir Leigh Lewis' Commission, why isn't it also good enough for Ombudsman Services where the company's minutes - once published - have now vanished from its website and where Ombudsman Services:Property's Annual Report is but a pale imitation of what went before?
Q. Mr Javid, what are they attempting to hide - rigged redress and maladministration?
Yours sincerely
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Saturday, 21 May 2016
Tuesday, 17 May 2016
Ombudsman Services. Conspiracy Theories. The UK Government. (477)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 477.
477. Ombudsman Services. Conspiracy Theories. The UK Government.
Dear Mr Javid,
Conspiracy theories thrive because transparency and accountability doesn't.
As we write, many are at this very moment to conspiring to evict David Cameron from No 10 others, to rob consumers who've taken their complaints to Ombudsman Services of a, "fair" and "independent" investigation of their complaint. This is private self-styled "civil justice" in action and according to its chief exponent, The Rev Smith, it's the future.
The Rev Smith no longer asks consumers for their views on, "the customer journey." This is probably because in the past the overwhelming majority said it was a nightmare. We now have private redress without transparency and accountability and without the basic courtesy of asking those victimised for a second time for their views on how they've been treated. This is all happening in the present.
"In" or "out" it'll still be maladministration as usual at Ombudsman Services.
Yesterday the Telegraph wrote;
"Today has been another war of words on the EU referendum campaign trail, with George Osborne attacking his Tory rivals for creating conspiracy theories about the people who back the British membership of the EU.."
It went on,
"The Chancellor accused the Leave camp of responding by treating economic warnings about Brexit as a, "massive conspiracy."
Mr Osborne said,
" That's everyone from Mark Carney to Christine Lagarde to Barack Obama to the entire editorial team of the ITV to the staff at the IMF and OECD, to hundreds of economists, to a majority of small, middle and big firms - they think they are all part of some global stitch-up to give misinformation to the British people.
The next thing we know, the Leave camp will be accusing us of faking the moon landings, kidnapping Shergar and covering up the existence of the Loch Ness Monster."
Dear Mr Javid, hasn't the Chancellor omitted to mention the conspiracy to miss-sell to the British people maladministered private "civil justice" from his list?
That it was a stitch-up between government ministers, civil servants, the RICS and RICS' stooges at Ombudsman Services:Property.
Or that the OFT, when approving this scheme, had misinformed the public when it stated that it would be, "fair," "speedy" and "independent."
And that instead of monitoring OS:P as promised they'd been searching for the Beast of Bodmin, Lord Lucan and if Elvis Had Really Left The Building?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 477.
477. Ombudsman Services. Conspiracy Theories. The UK Government.
Dear Mr Javid,
Conspiracy theories thrive because transparency and accountability doesn't.
As we write, many are at this very moment to conspiring to evict David Cameron from No 10 others, to rob consumers who've taken their complaints to Ombudsman Services of a, "fair" and "independent" investigation of their complaint. This is private self-styled "civil justice" in action and according to its chief exponent, The Rev Smith, it's the future.
The Rev Smith no longer asks consumers for their views on, "the customer journey." This is probably because in the past the overwhelming majority said it was a nightmare. We now have private redress without transparency and accountability and without the basic courtesy of asking those victimised for a second time for their views on how they've been treated. This is all happening in the present.
"In" or "out" it'll still be maladministration as usual at Ombudsman Services.
Yesterday the Telegraph wrote;
"Today has been another war of words on the EU referendum campaign trail, with George Osborne attacking his Tory rivals for creating conspiracy theories about the people who back the British membership of the EU.."
It went on,
"The Chancellor accused the Leave camp of responding by treating economic warnings about Brexit as a, "massive conspiracy."
Mr Osborne said,
" That's everyone from Mark Carney to Christine Lagarde to Barack Obama to the entire editorial team of the ITV to the staff at the IMF and OECD, to hundreds of economists, to a majority of small, middle and big firms - they think they are all part of some global stitch-up to give misinformation to the British people.
The next thing we know, the Leave camp will be accusing us of faking the moon landings, kidnapping Shergar and covering up the existence of the Loch Ness Monster."
Dear Mr Javid, hasn't the Chancellor omitted to mention the conspiracy to miss-sell to the British people maladministered private "civil justice" from his list?
That it was a stitch-up between government ministers, civil servants, the RICS and RICS' stooges at Ombudsman Services:Property.
Or that the OFT, when approving this scheme, had misinformed the public when it stated that it would be, "fair," "speedy" and "independent."
And that instead of monitoring OS:P as promised they'd been searching for the Beast of Bodmin, Lord Lucan and if Elvis Had Really Left The Building?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Monday, 16 May 2016
Ombudsman Services: "Of course our City fat cats love the EU .... (476)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 476..
476) Fat Cat Salaries, Illogical Decisions and Maladministration.
"Of course our City fat cats love the EU - its why they earn so much."
(Boris Johnson. The Telegraph. 15.052016)
Dear Mr Javid,
We think this is a bit rich coming from someone who earns stonking great fees from the tax avoiding Barclay Brothers (and whose interference in the editorial independence of the paper they own is quite shameful) for writing this crap, oops, sorry - cacare.
Perhaps all Mr Johnson's ramblings should be written and printed in Latin then at least we might learn something if we could be arsed to translate back into meaningful English.
Pugnare in nos.
As we've said before shameless people don't give a damn. They regard their shamelessness as a badge of (dis)honour. It's one reason why there needs to be, "strong BBC-like" regulation of the press and ,"strong BBC-like" regulation of maladministrating ombudsmen.
To return to the former London mayor, isn't Boris "Fat Cat" Johnson wrong yet again?
The true reason for City fat cats earning so much is down to the fact that they captured capitalism, rig it to their own advantage and take steps to ensure that their chums at Westminster don't take steps to regulate them too strongly - if at all.
Print that, Barclay Brothers.
Q. Mr Javid, shouldn't the Fat Cat salaries of those executives and ombudsmen at Ombudsman Services maladministering, "civil justice" be made known to the public - those of us who suffer at the hands of their maladministration?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 476..
476) Fat Cat Salaries, Illogical Decisions and Maladministration.
"Of course our City fat cats love the EU - its why they earn so much."
(Boris Johnson. The Telegraph. 15.052016)
Dear Mr Javid,
We think this is a bit rich coming from someone who earns stonking great fees from the tax avoiding Barclay Brothers (and whose interference in the editorial independence of the paper they own is quite shameful) for writing this crap, oops, sorry - cacare.
Perhaps all Mr Johnson's ramblings should be written and printed in Latin then at least we might learn something if we could be arsed to translate back into meaningful English.
Pugnare in nos.
As we've said before shameless people don't give a damn. They regard their shamelessness as a badge of (dis)honour. It's one reason why there needs to be, "strong BBC-like" regulation of the press and ,"strong BBC-like" regulation of maladministrating ombudsmen.
To return to the former London mayor, isn't Boris "Fat Cat" Johnson wrong yet again?
The true reason for City fat cats earning so much is down to the fact that they captured capitalism, rig it to their own advantage and take steps to ensure that their chums at Westminster don't take steps to regulate them too strongly - if at all.
Print that, Barclay Brothers.
Q. Mr Javid, shouldn't the Fat Cat salaries of those executives and ombudsmen at Ombudsman Services maladministering, "civil justice" be made known to the public - those of us who suffer at the hands of their maladministration?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Friday, 13 May 2016
Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association: If The BBC Why Not The RICS? (475)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 475.
475) If The BBC Why Not The RICS?
Dear Mr Javid,
We now know the appalling abuse that took place at the BBC because something was eventually done to expose it.
The BBC is now to have an external regulator, Ofcom. The National Audit Office will be pouring over its books and 6 shiny new government stooges will be telling it how to be independent.
Job creation for important people who live to sit on committees. Someone has to do it we suppose.
Q. Mr Javid, if the BBC is to be independent in the sense that we take independent to mean why does it need 6 government stooges to involve themselves in the organisation's independence in the first place?
Quite clearly this is an administration that is determined to dominate the new political landscape. Parents are now told that academies are what is good for their children. Parents might be invited onto governing bodies if they are "business-like" about it. Doctors are having their pay and conditions imposed upon them. Sunday is to be treated like any other working day and you will be paid accordingly. Tenants in rented accommodation are being told to move just after they've moved in and the meaning of key words in the English language are being conservatized.
Q. Mr Javid, as the BBC need to be more transparent, accountable and properly regulated why not simply publish in full the minutes of meetings and put them online for all to see?
The RICS only have/had 2 stooges sitting on the Ombudsman Services board to ensure that it was/is, "entirely independent."
Q. Mr Javid, why didn't Ofcom (a strong regulator according Mr Whittingdale) intervene strongly when the maladministration of consumers' complaints was uncovered at the company?
Q. Mr Javid, if the 2 RICS stooges at OS aren't there to interfere with the independence of the ombudsman and ensure that disputes are sorted in the way that they want them to be, what do they actually do - sit there and look pretty?
In ridiculing, "Left wing luvvies" for seeking to protect the independence of the BBC, hasn't the Culture Secretary - who according to Wikipedia appears to never have actually ever had a proper job in his life and whose experience of culture somewhat coloured by jiggly-boobie bars - over-reacted when announcing he is to appoint those 6 "Right wing haties" of his?
Q. Mr Javid, why is there such a glaring discrepancy between the treatment of the BBC (with its Royal Charter) and the RICS (and its)?
Q. Mr Javid, is a jiggly-boobie specialist who appears to operate in dark and dimly lit spaces the right man to be making decisions about, transparency, accountability, regulation and standards at the BBC?
We hasten to add that jiggly-boobie bars and girlfriends with predilections are all fine and part of life's rich tapestry but isn't there a transparency, accountability and fit and proper person issue here?
Just as is, are maladministrators fit and proper people to handle consumers' complaints?
Mr Whittingdale stated on the floor of the House of Commons that the BBC's governance was to be;
"In the public interest."
That,
"Ofcom will become the BBC regulator."
And,
"Ofcom would operate with the power to investigate any aspect of BBC services."
Importantly, there would be,
"A strong regulator alongside a strong BBC."
Q. Mr Javid, if it is in the public interest for there to be a strong regulator for a strong BBC why isn't RICS a strong regulator for surveyors and why is it not acting in the public interest?
After all its Royal Charter says it should. It is expected to act professionally and to be there for the public advantage.
At a time when the government is saying on the one hand that de-regulation and cutting red-tape is essential for economic growth - your Arthur Daley Charter where;
"You make contact with the customer. Understand their needs. And then flog them something they could well do without" eg PPI, Academy Chains, a marketised NHS, the sick, elderly and dying forced into paying for their care, Private Redress Schemes - the list goes on - it's saying on the other that a strong regulator is needed for the BBC.
Q. Mr Javid, is this not part of a concerted Toy attack upon freedom and democracy that private civil justice is part of that attack and that this is you devotedly finishing Mrs Thatcher's Master Plan - The Privatisation of Everything?
Anyone with a love for their country and for fairness, freedom, justice and democracy will be as alarmed as we are at how this administration with its obsessive, compulsive, disorderly ideological drive to deregulate markets and hand over the reins to "business-like" tax avoiding managers who captured and rigged the economy for their own benefit, must despair at just how easily you get away with it.
The scheming and underhanded way this administration is systematically redefining and replacing the public interest to further advantage those with private undisclosed interests, whilst studiously ignoring the evidence as to how destructive this is to the lives of those outside of this self selecting elite, is abhorrent and shameful.
Sadly, shameless people don't care. It allows them to maladminster consumers' complaints without a care in the world or force others to work on Sundays for Monday's pay.
The blatant attempt by the Education Secretary to rig the governing bodies of academies, what will be taught in them and how is not "business-like" it is corrupting, corrosive and to borrow from David Cameron, cancerous.
It leads to:
- An unqualified teacher and daughter of a Tory party donating Lord who just happens to run a chain of academies rewriting a history curriculum - and history - after refusing to sully herself by completing a PGCE and thereby coming into contact with Mr Gove's "blob." She thus side-stepped the attendant risk of having her Oxbridge worldview challenged but as an unpaid and unqualified teacher gets to determine who does and who doesn't teach at daddy's academy - and no doubt for how much or little. No doubt she will inherit 4 schools one day.
Q. Mr Javid, what qualifications do ombudsmen have that permit them to maladminister consumers' complaints?
- An academy trust lauded by David Cameron falling apart because its Thought Leader got too "business-like" and decided to award himself two salaries.. The fact that this scandal only came to light because a whistleblower had the courage to speak out paints a bleak picture of corruption, greed, dismal governance and inadequate regulation or regulators.
Around the same time as David Cameron was fronting a conference on anti-corruption the public was discovering:
- That South Yorkshire Police are to be investigated for attempting to rig the news reporting of the Hillsborough Inquest. The whistleblower in this instance had a superior police officer make complaints about her and she suffered as a consequence.
- The Conservative Party was facing prosecution over rigging election expenses and last year' General Election.
- Jeremy Hunt had done a hand-brake turn and decide not drive off his particular cliff. yet.
Meanwhile Mr Whittingdale was being stentorian and emphatic:
"The BBC needs to become much more accountable to those it serves."
And,
"The BBC needs to be fair, accountable and sustainable."
Q. Mr Javid, why aren't exactly the same standards being applied to the RICS?
Q. Mr Javid, why when the RICS has been described as being Byzantine in its structure and lacking accountability for finances hasn't the National Audit Office marched in there years ago?
Q. Mr Javid, why when we sent you copies of what an Ombudsman Services whistleblower sent to us, have you done nothing about it?
When it comes to handing out gongs shouldn't there also be special awards for those courageous individuals with real jobs who risk everything when the make the momentous decision to whistleblow?
Why hasn't Ombudsman Services:Property which is regulated by the RICS got a whistleblowing policy?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 475.
475) If The BBC Why Not The RICS?
Dear Mr Javid,
We now know the appalling abuse that took place at the BBC because something was eventually done to expose it.
The BBC is now to have an external regulator, Ofcom. The National Audit Office will be pouring over its books and 6 shiny new government stooges will be telling it how to be independent.
Job creation for important people who live to sit on committees. Someone has to do it we suppose.
Q. Mr Javid, if the BBC is to be independent in the sense that we take independent to mean why does it need 6 government stooges to involve themselves in the organisation's independence in the first place?
Quite clearly this is an administration that is determined to dominate the new political landscape. Parents are now told that academies are what is good for their children. Parents might be invited onto governing bodies if they are "business-like" about it. Doctors are having their pay and conditions imposed upon them. Sunday is to be treated like any other working day and you will be paid accordingly. Tenants in rented accommodation are being told to move just after they've moved in and the meaning of key words in the English language are being conservatized.
Q. Mr Javid, as the BBC need to be more transparent, accountable and properly regulated why not simply publish in full the minutes of meetings and put them online for all to see?
The RICS only have/had 2 stooges sitting on the Ombudsman Services board to ensure that it was/is, "entirely independent."
Q. Mr Javid, why didn't Ofcom (a strong regulator according Mr Whittingdale) intervene strongly when the maladministration of consumers' complaints was uncovered at the company?
Q. Mr Javid, if the 2 RICS stooges at OS aren't there to interfere with the independence of the ombudsman and ensure that disputes are sorted in the way that they want them to be, what do they actually do - sit there and look pretty?
In ridiculing, "Left wing luvvies" for seeking to protect the independence of the BBC, hasn't the Culture Secretary - who according to Wikipedia appears to never have actually ever had a proper job in his life and whose experience of culture somewhat coloured by jiggly-boobie bars - over-reacted when announcing he is to appoint those 6 "Right wing haties" of his?
Q. Mr Javid, why is there such a glaring discrepancy between the treatment of the BBC (with its Royal Charter) and the RICS (and its)?
Q. Mr Javid, is a jiggly-boobie specialist who appears to operate in dark and dimly lit spaces the right man to be making decisions about, transparency, accountability, regulation and standards at the BBC?
We hasten to add that jiggly-boobie bars and girlfriends with predilections are all fine and part of life's rich tapestry but isn't there a transparency, accountability and fit and proper person issue here?
Just as is, are maladministrators fit and proper people to handle consumers' complaints?
Mr Whittingdale stated on the floor of the House of Commons that the BBC's governance was to be;
"In the public interest."
That,
"Ofcom will become the BBC regulator."
And,
"Ofcom would operate with the power to investigate any aspect of BBC services."
Importantly, there would be,
"A strong regulator alongside a strong BBC."
Q. Mr Javid, if it is in the public interest for there to be a strong regulator for a strong BBC why isn't RICS a strong regulator for surveyors and why is it not acting in the public interest?
After all its Royal Charter says it should. It is expected to act professionally and to be there for the public advantage.
At a time when the government is saying on the one hand that de-regulation and cutting red-tape is essential for economic growth - your Arthur Daley Charter where;
"You make contact with the customer. Understand their needs. And then flog them something they could well do without" eg PPI, Academy Chains, a marketised NHS, the sick, elderly and dying forced into paying for their care, Private Redress Schemes - the list goes on - it's saying on the other that a strong regulator is needed for the BBC.
Q. Mr Javid, is this not part of a concerted Toy attack upon freedom and democracy that private civil justice is part of that attack and that this is you devotedly finishing Mrs Thatcher's Master Plan - The Privatisation of Everything?
Anyone with a love for their country and for fairness, freedom, justice and democracy will be as alarmed as we are at how this administration with its obsessive, compulsive, disorderly ideological drive to deregulate markets and hand over the reins to "business-like" tax avoiding managers who captured and rigged the economy for their own benefit, must despair at just how easily you get away with it.
The scheming and underhanded way this administration is systematically redefining and replacing the public interest to further advantage those with private undisclosed interests, whilst studiously ignoring the evidence as to how destructive this is to the lives of those outside of this self selecting elite, is abhorrent and shameful.
Sadly, shameless people don't care. It allows them to maladminster consumers' complaints without a care in the world or force others to work on Sundays for Monday's pay.
The blatant attempt by the Education Secretary to rig the governing bodies of academies, what will be taught in them and how is not "business-like" it is corrupting, corrosive and to borrow from David Cameron, cancerous.
It leads to:
- An unqualified teacher and daughter of a Tory party donating Lord who just happens to run a chain of academies rewriting a history curriculum - and history - after refusing to sully herself by completing a PGCE and thereby coming into contact with Mr Gove's "blob." She thus side-stepped the attendant risk of having her Oxbridge worldview challenged but as an unpaid and unqualified teacher gets to determine who does and who doesn't teach at daddy's academy - and no doubt for how much or little. No doubt she will inherit 4 schools one day.
Q. Mr Javid, what qualifications do ombudsmen have that permit them to maladminister consumers' complaints?
- An academy trust lauded by David Cameron falling apart because its Thought Leader got too "business-like" and decided to award himself two salaries.. The fact that this scandal only came to light because a whistleblower had the courage to speak out paints a bleak picture of corruption, greed, dismal governance and inadequate regulation or regulators.
Around the same time as David Cameron was fronting a conference on anti-corruption the public was discovering:
- That South Yorkshire Police are to be investigated for attempting to rig the news reporting of the Hillsborough Inquest. The whistleblower in this instance had a superior police officer make complaints about her and she suffered as a consequence.
- The Conservative Party was facing prosecution over rigging election expenses and last year' General Election.
- Jeremy Hunt had done a hand-brake turn and decide not drive off his particular cliff. yet.
Meanwhile Mr Whittingdale was being stentorian and emphatic:
"The BBC needs to become much more accountable to those it serves."
And,
"The BBC needs to be fair, accountable and sustainable."
Q. Mr Javid, why aren't exactly the same standards being applied to the RICS?
Q. Mr Javid, why when the RICS has been described as being Byzantine in its structure and lacking accountability for finances hasn't the National Audit Office marched in there years ago?
Q. Mr Javid, why when we sent you copies of what an Ombudsman Services whistleblower sent to us, have you done nothing about it?
When it comes to handing out gongs shouldn't there also be special awards for those courageous individuals with real jobs who risk everything when the make the momentous decision to whistleblow?
Why hasn't Ombudsman Services:Property which is regulated by the RICS got a whistleblowing policy?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Thursday, 12 May 2016
Barbara Ellen - The Amazing Journalist... (474)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 474.
474) Barbara Ellen - The Amazing Journalist.
Dear Mr Javid,
Barbara Ellen, single parent, fellow squatter - different place different time - and campaigner wrote a devastatingly penetrating and courageous piece in last Sunday's Observer stating that the housing market was rigged.
Since 2010 we've been trying to tell Oliver Colvile our MP, the Coalition Government and now this, "anti-corruption" administration that the housing market is rigged from its RICS sandy foundations to its RICS leaking roof. From its RICS (un)regulated surveyors with their cowboy practices via the London Property Market swamped as it is with rivers of immigrant money to its RICS, "approved" and regulated redress scheme - Ombudsman Services:Property - with its illogical Final Decisions, non-existent Customer Satisfaction Reports and executives who with, "unimpeachable integrity" corruptly oversee the maladministration of consumers' complaints.
But without success.
At a time when journalists like Barbara Ellen are taking a stand against the inequities of rigged markets the Prime Minister has yet again shown no courage, no leadership and yet again ducked an opportunity to take part in a live democratic debate.
A modern-day Flashman but without the charm of his fictional hero.
Dear Mr Javid,
You would appear to see maladministration as essentially not corrupt just the sharper end of good business practice which merely seeks to steal an inch in a globalised dog-eat-dog rush
to make dirty money and launder it through the RICS regulated London Property Market - "if you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin.'" The world-wide aspiration to but a property in Belgravia and put in several basements.
To be all in this together in a big basement in Belgravia.
Otherwise, things would have been different and you would have replied to us by now. But you haven't.
Q. Mr Javid, surely it's the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) that is in need of root, branch and stem modernisation and reform and not the BBC. Why, "fix" something that is working unless it is this, "anti-corruption" administration's unstated intention to rig it, make money out of it, pay no tax on it and then launder those ill-gotten gains through the rigged London Property Market via unregulated British off-shore tax havens?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 474.
474) Barbara Ellen - The Amazing Journalist.
Dear Mr Javid,
Barbara Ellen, single parent, fellow squatter - different place different time - and campaigner wrote a devastatingly penetrating and courageous piece in last Sunday's Observer stating that the housing market was rigged.
Since 2010 we've been trying to tell Oliver Colvile our MP, the Coalition Government and now this, "anti-corruption" administration that the housing market is rigged from its RICS sandy foundations to its RICS leaking roof. From its RICS (un)regulated surveyors with their cowboy practices via the London Property Market swamped as it is with rivers of immigrant money to its RICS, "approved" and regulated redress scheme - Ombudsman Services:Property - with its illogical Final Decisions, non-existent Customer Satisfaction Reports and executives who with, "unimpeachable integrity" corruptly oversee the maladministration of consumers' complaints.
But without success.
At a time when journalists like Barbara Ellen are taking a stand against the inequities of rigged markets the Prime Minister has yet again shown no courage, no leadership and yet again ducked an opportunity to take part in a live democratic debate.
A modern-day Flashman but without the charm of his fictional hero.
Dear Mr Javid,
You would appear to see maladministration as essentially not corrupt just the sharper end of good business practice which merely seeks to steal an inch in a globalised dog-eat-dog rush
to make dirty money and launder it through the RICS regulated London Property Market - "if you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin.'" The world-wide aspiration to but a property in Belgravia and put in several basements.
To be all in this together in a big basement in Belgravia.
Otherwise, things would have been different and you would have replied to us by now. But you haven't.
Q. Mr Javid, surely it's the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) that is in need of root, branch and stem modernisation and reform and not the BBC. Why, "fix" something that is working unless it is this, "anti-corruption" administration's unstated intention to rig it, make money out of it, pay no tax on it and then launder those ill-gotten gains through the rigged London Property Market via unregulated British off-shore tax havens?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Wednesday, 11 May 2016
Ombudsman Services. Corruption. The Ombudsman Association. (473)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 473.
473) David Cameron And Fantastically Corrupt Countries. Companies. Cops. Conservative Election Expenses....
Dear Mr Javid,
President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria has said,
"What would I do with an apology? I need some thing tangible. I am not going to demand an apology from anyone. What I am demanding is a return of assets."
And President Buhari is of course quite right. What use is an apology?
Q. Mr Javid, the victims of Ombudsman Services maladministration don't even merit an apology. To do so would require the company's executives to acknowledge the maladministration for which they are responsible, They haven't. Isn't this corrupt and why haven't you or David Cameron done anything about it?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 473.
473) David Cameron And Fantastically Corrupt Countries. Companies. Cops. Conservative Election Expenses....
Dear Mr Javid,
President Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria has said,
"What would I do with an apology? I need some thing tangible. I am not going to demand an apology from anyone. What I am demanding is a return of assets."
And President Buhari is of course quite right. What use is an apology?
Q. Mr Javid, the victims of Ombudsman Services maladministration don't even merit an apology. To do so would require the company's executives to acknowledge the maladministration for which they are responsible, They haven't. Isn't this corrupt and why haven't you or David Cameron done anything about it?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association. (472)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 472.
472) Putting The Con Into Consumer.
Dear Mr Javid,
We saw in the previous Attempt at Clarity (471) how the key to conning the consumer was the fanciful claim made by executive ombudsmen that ombudsmen were in some way, "independent."
Independent from reality perhaps?
Ombudsmen like The Rev Smith (CEO and Chief Ombudsman and Chair of The Ombudsman Association) are clearly very busy men and yet he still finds the time to tell us that we live, "in the Age of the Ombudsman."
They even have their very own organisation to prove it - The Ombudsman Association - where they conference and network and can be important independent people.
I'd like to be, The Pasty Ombudsman. Do you think they'd admit me to their hallowed ranks?
We find it somewhat unsettling that these independent-minded individuals never seen to confront head on the strange anomaly that the RICS need to place their operatives on the Board of Ombudsman Services to ensure that The Rev Smith is indeed, independent.
We tried asking The Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 5: Wouldn't have been more accurate - for OS - to have told the consumer that, apart from the two RICS representatives sitting on the Board, they were entirely independent?
But we didn't get an answer to that one either.
Q. Mr Javid, with RICS' placemen sitting on the Board of Ombudsman Services, how can ombudsmen claim to be independent?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 472.
472) Putting The Con Into Consumer.
Dear Mr Javid,
We saw in the previous Attempt at Clarity (471) how the key to conning the consumer was the fanciful claim made by executive ombudsmen that ombudsmen were in some way, "independent."
Independent from reality perhaps?
Ombudsmen like The Rev Smith (CEO and Chief Ombudsman and Chair of The Ombudsman Association) are clearly very busy men and yet he still finds the time to tell us that we live, "in the Age of the Ombudsman."
They even have their very own organisation to prove it - The Ombudsman Association - where they conference and network and can be important independent people.
I'd like to be, The Pasty Ombudsman. Do you think they'd admit me to their hallowed ranks?
We find it somewhat unsettling that these independent-minded individuals never seen to confront head on the strange anomaly that the RICS need to place their operatives on the Board of Ombudsman Services to ensure that The Rev Smith is indeed, independent.
We tried asking The Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 5: Wouldn't have been more accurate - for OS - to have told the consumer that, apart from the two RICS representatives sitting on the Board, they were entirely independent?
But we didn't get an answer to that one either.
Q. Mr Javid, with RICS' placemen sitting on the Board of Ombudsman Services, how can ombudsmen claim to be independent?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Friday, 6 May 2016
Ombudsman Services:Property. The Rev Smith. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association. (472)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 472.
472) Great Myths of the Early 21st Century - the Independence of the Ombudsman.
Dear Mr Javid,
Redress schemes such as the one operated by Ombudsman Services:Property (OS:P) are at pains to emphasis just how independent their ombudsmen are.
It's the key to the con.
If consumers didn't fall for it, weren't taken in by it, were able to see through it or had it exposed for what it is - a con - by Parliament, the press or media, these schemes (for that's what they are - schemes) would collapse and could then be replaced by something that was transparent, accountable, fair and just.
For an example of the con in practice one need look no further than OS:P - here 2 senior executives of the RICS sit on the Board to help ensure that their ombudsman is entirely independent from the RICS insistence that their ombudsman handles disputes, "effectively."
Rigged to perfection.
It's the rigged market in redress in action.
We tried asking the Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 4: How can it be correct for the company to say it is, "entirely independent" when at least 2 representatives of the organisation that, "approved" this company - the RICS - sit on the Board?
But we didn't get an answer.
Q. Mr Javid, if this Government approved and monitored scheme were truly independent shouldn't there be no RICS representatives sitting on the Board?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 472.
472) Great Myths of the Early 21st Century - the Independence of the Ombudsman.
Dear Mr Javid,
Redress schemes such as the one operated by Ombudsman Services:Property (OS:P) are at pains to emphasis just how independent their ombudsmen are.
It's the key to the con.
If consumers didn't fall for it, weren't taken in by it, were able to see through it or had it exposed for what it is - a con - by Parliament, the press or media, these schemes (for that's what they are - schemes) would collapse and could then be replaced by something that was transparent, accountable, fair and just.
For an example of the con in practice one need look no further than OS:P - here 2 senior executives of the RICS sit on the Board to help ensure that their ombudsman is entirely independent from the RICS insistence that their ombudsman handles disputes, "effectively."
Rigged to perfection.
It's the rigged market in redress in action.
We tried asking the Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 4: How can it be correct for the company to say it is, "entirely independent" when at least 2 representatives of the organisation that, "approved" this company - the RICS - sit on the Board?
But we didn't get an answer.
Q. Mr Javid, if this Government approved and monitored scheme were truly independent shouldn't there be no RICS representatives sitting on the Board?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Wednesday, 4 May 2016
Ombudsman Services:Property. The Rev Smith. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association. (471)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 471.
471). One Monitor For Complaints About Estate Agents ....
Dear Mr Javid,
Once upon a time the OFT, apparently, monitored the scheme they had approved on behalf of the taxpayer - Ombudsman Services:Property (OS:P). The consumer could in theory complain to them should they feel short-changed by the OS:P ombudsman who (mis)handled their complaint.
Whether the consumer would get anywhere should they choose to do so is highly unlikely.
The same ombudsman "investigates" consumer complaints about surveyors but thanks to the RICS' indomitable control of the scheme consumers cannot complain to the OFT when they get short-changed and their complaint goes terribly wrong.
We asked the Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 3: If the ombudsman did apply different criterion to the two categories of complaint wouldn't that go against the principles of natural justice?
We didn't get an answer to that one either.
Q. Mr Javid, the RICS, apparently unable to adequately regulate their surveyors, "approved" the OS:P to investigate complaints about surveyors they apparently don't regulate and closely the monitor the OS:P for the, "effective" resolution of disputes that result from their inability to adequately regulate their surveyors in the first place. Is this fair and just - or just the ultimate example of how to rig markets for their own financial gain?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 471.
471). One Monitor For Complaints About Estate Agents ....
Dear Mr Javid,
Once upon a time the OFT, apparently, monitored the scheme they had approved on behalf of the taxpayer - Ombudsman Services:Property (OS:P). The consumer could in theory complain to them should they feel short-changed by the OS:P ombudsman who (mis)handled their complaint.
Whether the consumer would get anywhere should they choose to do so is highly unlikely.
The same ombudsman "investigates" consumer complaints about surveyors but thanks to the RICS' indomitable control of the scheme consumers cannot complain to the OFT when they get short-changed and their complaint goes terribly wrong.
We asked the Ombudsman Association's Secretary:
Q. 3: If the ombudsman did apply different criterion to the two categories of complaint wouldn't that go against the principles of natural justice?
We didn't get an answer to that one either.
Q. Mr Javid, the RICS, apparently unable to adequately regulate their surveyors, "approved" the OS:P to investigate complaints about surveyors they apparently don't regulate and closely the monitor the OS:P for the, "effective" resolution of disputes that result from their inability to adequately regulate their surveyors in the first place. Is this fair and just - or just the ultimate example of how to rig markets for their own financial gain?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association. (470)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 470.
470) "If it wasn't for double standards there'd be no standards at all."
(Sayings of The O61% Campaign: Vol 1)
Dear Mr Javid,
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) - which has now ceased trading - "approved" and "monitored" the estate agent bit of Ombudsman Services:Property on behalf of the UK taxpayer.
Apparently.
The larger and potentially more financially damaging piece (for surveyors) was left to the monitoring of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) an organisation which, again apparently, is unable to adequately regulate its surveyors adequately in the first place.
How convenient - one might conclude - for inadequately regulated RICS surveyors.
It's how the market in private redress is has been very effectively rigged in favour of shite RICS surveyors thus saving them thousands and thousands of ££s.
We asked the Secretary of the Ombudsman Association:
Q. 2: Does that mean the Omudsman Services:Property ombudsman could possibly view complaints brought by consumers about estate agents differently from those brought by consumers against surveyors?
Sadly, there was no answer from the Secretary.
Q. Mr Javid, in the interests of democracy and One Nation England, shouldn't political parties and the press and media be focusing their attention on how vested business interests are rigging the market in private justice in favour of their very own business interests at the expense of the rest of us?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 470.
470) "If it wasn't for double standards there'd be no standards at all."
(Sayings of The O61% Campaign: Vol 1)
Dear Mr Javid,
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) - which has now ceased trading - "approved" and "monitored" the estate agent bit of Ombudsman Services:Property on behalf of the UK taxpayer.
Apparently.
The larger and potentially more financially damaging piece (for surveyors) was left to the monitoring of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) an organisation which, again apparently, is unable to adequately regulate its surveyors adequately in the first place.
How convenient - one might conclude - for inadequately regulated RICS surveyors.
It's how the market in private redress is has been very effectively rigged in favour of shite RICS surveyors thus saving them thousands and thousands of ££s.
We asked the Secretary of the Ombudsman Association:
Q. 2: Does that mean the Omudsman Services:Property ombudsman could possibly view complaints brought by consumers about estate agents differently from those brought by consumers against surveyors?
Sadly, there was no answer from the Secretary.
Q. Mr Javid, in the interests of democracy and One Nation England, shouldn't political parties and the press and media be focusing their attention on how vested business interests are rigging the market in private justice in favour of their very own business interests at the expense of the rest of us?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Tuesday, 3 May 2016
Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladmanistration. The Ombudsman Association. (469)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 469.
469) Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association.
Dear Mr Javid,
We wrote to the Secretary of the Ombudsman Association:
"Dear Secretary,
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign wishes to bring to your attention our concerns about Ombudsman Serives:Property. OS:P is a member of your Ombudsman Association.
We would appreciate the Ombudsman Association's views on this company as we believe it fails to meet the requirements your organisation stipulate for member ship as set out in: 'Governance - principles of Good Governance: Independence, Openness and Transparency, Accountability, Integrity, Clarity of Purpose.'
Because these categories seem to us to overlap we've put our questions to the OA with that in mind.
You are no doubt already aware that OS:P (or The SOS as it was formerly known), was originally set up by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) to, 'investigate' complaints brought by consumers about its Members or Regulated Firms.
The RICS have at least 2 of their members - that we are aware of - sitting on the Board of Ombudsman Services and yet the literature this company sends to consumer s and potential complainants maintains that it is, 'entirely' independent.
Since the 1st October 2008 the OFT gave its approval to OS ltd., to run a redress scheme for estate agents but not surveyors.
It set out 16 criteria for the operation of the scheme run by an, 'independent' ombudsman. The same ombudsman adjudicates in complaints brought by consumers about both estate agents and surveyors. In the interests of natural justice one would expect the ombudsman to apply the same criterion to both estate agents and surveyors.
Q1. Why do you think the OFT approved a scheme for estate agents but not surveyors, is it because the company running it was set up by the RICS, the surveyors professional body?"
The Secretary of the Ombudsman Association didn't answer.
Q. Mr Javid, is it in the interests of natural justice for no-one involved with the RICS to answer questions about the RICS apparent inability to regulate its Members or Regulated Firms and the close relationship it has with the company it, "appointed" to resolve its disputes, "effectively?"
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 469.
469) Ombudsman Services:Property. Maladministration. The Ombudsman Association.
Dear Mr Javid,
We wrote to the Secretary of the Ombudsman Association:
"Dear Secretary,
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign wishes to bring to your attention our concerns about Ombudsman Serives:Property. OS:P is a member of your Ombudsman Association.
We would appreciate the Ombudsman Association's views on this company as we believe it fails to meet the requirements your organisation stipulate for member ship as set out in: 'Governance - principles of Good Governance: Independence, Openness and Transparency, Accountability, Integrity, Clarity of Purpose.'
Because these categories seem to us to overlap we've put our questions to the OA with that in mind.
You are no doubt already aware that OS:P (or The SOS as it was formerly known), was originally set up by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) to, 'investigate' complaints brought by consumers about its Members or Regulated Firms.
The RICS have at least 2 of their members - that we are aware of - sitting on the Board of Ombudsman Services and yet the literature this company sends to consumer s and potential complainants maintains that it is, 'entirely' independent.
Since the 1st October 2008 the OFT gave its approval to OS ltd., to run a redress scheme for estate agents but not surveyors.
It set out 16 criteria for the operation of the scheme run by an, 'independent' ombudsman. The same ombudsman adjudicates in complaints brought by consumers about both estate agents and surveyors. In the interests of natural justice one would expect the ombudsman to apply the same criterion to both estate agents and surveyors.
Q1. Why do you think the OFT approved a scheme for estate agents but not surveyors, is it because the company running it was set up by the RICS, the surveyors professional body?"
The Secretary of the Ombudsman Association didn't answer.
Q. Mr Javid, is it in the interests of natural justice for no-one involved with the RICS to answer questions about the RICS apparent inability to regulate its Members or Regulated Firms and the close relationship it has with the company it, "appointed" to resolve its disputes, "effectively?"
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Sunday, 1 May 2016
Ombudsman Services. The Rev. Smith. Maladministration. Civil Justice. (468)
To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 468.
468. "Is a Buy-to-let bubble the next scandal in housing?"
(The Telegraph: 1st May 2016)
Dear Mr Javid,
The Telegraph wants to know if the next scandal in housing is the buy-to-let bubble.
For years we've been trying to tell them otherwise and that its the RICS, "apparent inability to adequately regulate its Members and Regulated Firms" and its insistence that its "appointed" company - Ombudsman Services:Property - CEO and Chief Ombudsman, The Rev Smith, handles the subsequent complaints, "effectively."
We at the Ombudsmans61percent campaign take, "effectively" to mean getting RICS inadequately regulated members off the hook.
Q. Mr Javid, isn't the next scandal in housing RICS' apparent inability to adequately regulate their Members and Regulated Firms and the subsequent maladministration of complaints by the Rev Smith and his team of maladministrators?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 468.
468. "Is a Buy-to-let bubble the next scandal in housing?"
(The Telegraph: 1st May 2016)
Dear Mr Javid,
The Telegraph wants to know if the next scandal in housing is the buy-to-let bubble.
For years we've been trying to tell them otherwise and that its the RICS, "apparent inability to adequately regulate its Members and Regulated Firms" and its insistence that its "appointed" company - Ombudsman Services:Property - CEO and Chief Ombudsman, The Rev Smith, handles the subsequent complaints, "effectively."
We at the Ombudsmans61percent campaign take, "effectively" to mean getting RICS inadequately regulated members off the hook.
Q. Mr Javid, isn't the next scandal in housing RICS' apparent inability to adequately regulate their Members and Regulated Firms and the subsequent maladministration of complaints by the Rev Smith and his team of maladministrators?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)