To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 519.
519) "Get Right With God" by Lucinda Williams.
Dear Mr Clark,
"If I could learn and be complete
If I could walk righteously again."
(Lucinda Williams)
It's becoming ever clearer from the growing body of evidence that is being painstakingly amassed by the gallant few, that a staggering a number of ombudsmen have still not learnt how to walk righteously. Many have yet to reach the toddler stage.
Getting right with God is one thing but ombudsman schemers need to get right with the People. That's something of an entirely different magnitude.
Q. Where are our gold medal Parliamentarians when we need them?
There is one we can think of, Peter Heaton-Jones, an MP who did stand up to be counted over the issue of the regulation of care homes and the rotten-to-the-core system of extorting money from the sick, the elderly and the dying in order that they pay for the full cost of their care and not the State - this is the NHS at its very worst.
Q. Where is the Parliamentary and Health Service Secretary, Dame Julie Mellor, on this hugely important issue?
No doubt busily threatening some poor, hapless complainant with prosecution if the way she treated us is anything to go by.
Naomi Creutzfeldt and Chris Gill conclude the first part of the ombudsman watchers' criticism of the lack of accountability of ombudsman schemes with;
"one participant accepted that demands for greater accountability by ombudsman schemes needed to be balanced against the need for their independence, and that a key issue in the relation to the effectiveness of ombudsman schemes was getting the balance right between accountability and independence."
(www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/critics-of-the -ombudsman-system-understanding-and-engaging-online-citizen-activists)
Like the other participants we fundamentally disagree with this strange notion of, "balance."
Why attempt to walk over Niagara Falls on a tightrope when you can go around it?
The promise of, "independence" is being cynically exploited by ombudsman to miss-sell the idea that civil justice automatically awaits complainants. They would have us believe that because they say they are independent they are automatically, "fair" and "efficient."
"Believe me - I'm an ombudsman."
Ombudsmen like The Rev Smith have taken it upon themselves to define what is meant by being, "independent" and so, hey presto and as if by magic, they appear to be really independent.
It's the key to the con.
And because ombudsman schemers abhor accountability like vampires abhor sunlight the complainant will never know if in reality they are actually independent or not. Ombudsmen like The Rev Smith also define what is meant by, "civil justice." They have appropriated both of these terms for their own purposes whilst at the same time surreptitiously removing, "accountability" from the equation. They imply that if they were made to be accountable that that would somehow undermine their independence and ability to be both fair and effective.
There is no balancing act between independence and accountability.
They are not independent and they are most certainly not accountable.
Indeed, they have become a law unto themselves stealthily inveigling themselves onto the legal landscape. It has been carefully rigged that way. An act of colonisation. Otherwise ombudsman schemes would be very, very different.
The time has now come when ombudsman schemers must be firmly and consistently regulated by Parliament in order that at all times they can rigorously demonstrate their, "accountability" and "transparency" (something which their highly paid executives stubbornly and deliberately refuse to do so as to cover their arses). Then - and only then - might the British public begin to have some confidence in the schemers' much vaunted "independence."
To date their self-proclaimed, "independence" is entirely spurious. A carefully constructed fiction. A key part in their miss-selling of what they call, "civil justice."
Our evasive ombudsmen quickly need to learn to walk righteously and to step out from the comfort of the shadows they've been allowed to inhabit for so long by our complaisant, colluding and conniving civil servants and parliamentarians.
Q. Mr Clark, scheming maladministrating ombudsmen such as the ones found at Ombudsman Services:Property can no longer be trusted to run the show by themselves. Do you not agree that there is now an urgent need for a public inquiry into the RICS and its, "appointed" company Ombudsman Services:Property?
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is seeking:
- answers from Vince Cable, Mark Prisk, Norman Lamb, Francis Maude, Michael Fallon, Monk and Partners, Gillian Fleming, Jonathan May, The Rev Smith, Dame Janet Finch, Nick Clegg, Dame Julie Mellor, Jo Swinson, Sajid Javid, Peter Davy and yourself.
- a public inquiry into the workings of Ombudsman Services:Property (a company formerly trading as the SOS before undergoing re-branding) and the role of the RICS.
- compensation for the victims of its ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and its executives' maladministration.
- the setting up of a truly, "fair" and "independent" redress scheme free from RICS' malign influence.
Please comment, share your story or join the campaign either by contacting the blog or by emailing: shockingsurveys1@gmail.com. Thanks. Steve Gilbert.
No comments:
Post a Comment