From Rigged Rdress To Rigged Elections - Executives Subvert Democracy. (552)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 552.

552) From Rigged Redress To Rigged Elections - How Executives Subvert Democracy.

Dear Mr Clark,

Naomi Creutzfeldt and Chris Gill go on to say,
"In addition to the perception that there was a tendency for ombudsman schemes to be both procedurally and substantively biased in favour of the body being investigated, some participants felt that ombudsman schemes were under pressure to 'gate keep' their resources."

For example, in the Ombudsman Services Annual Report - Statutory Report and Accounts 2010, we read,
"We ensure that the Members know we are spending their money wisely and they have a well run, efficient scheme which adds real quality to their own business practices."

So, what "redress" is really all about comes down to mangers showing just how eager they are to spend their Members' money wisely.

And we thought this was supposed to be a redress scheme where complainants had their grievances thoroughly and independently investigated. How wrong we were. Why isn't the complainant having real quality added to their processes?

In effect, complainants are being robbed of their money and of justice. No level playing field here.

Naomi Creutzfeldt and Chris Gill continue,
"This gives rise to the perception that staff were continually looking for ways to close cases down and that the process ended up being a series of hurdles for complainants to fight their way through." 

In short, ombudsman schemes such as OS:Property are obstacle courses where there's only one winner - The Member.

Q. Mr Clark, when are you going to step up, challenge the vested interests of the RICS and its appointed company, Ombudsman Services:Property, and right the wrong of its ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and its executives' maladministration?

Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.