The Firm's Goodwill Gestures (558)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 556.

558) The Ombudsman's Investigations Need Investigating (4).

Dear Mr Clark,

Naomi Creutzfeldt's and Chris Gill's research strongly suggests that not only was there a tendency for for ombudsman schemes suchas Os:property to be both procedurally and substantively biased in favour of the body being investigated but that they were also under pressure from those self-same bodies to act as the "gate-keeper" of their resources.

In short, the bodies being investigated had rigged the schemes to their own financial advantage.

The managers of capitalism have managed to capture the redress of their mismanaged capitalism.

We wrote to Gillian Fleming the OS:Property Ombudsman on 3rd September 2010:

"Dear Gillian Fleming,

I am writing in response  to your letter dated 24th August 2010. Yet again you have chosen not to answer the questions I sought to raise about Monk and Partners. Furthermore, the contradictions in the written responses I have received also do not appear to warrant a reply from you either.

I should like to take issue with you when you state:
'I would reiterate that the question whether The Firm has acted in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct is a matter for the professional body concerned, which in this case would be the RICS.'

The questions I tried to raise were;
a) Was it reasonable for an Ombudsman to accept evidence gathered from a RICS member that involved unsolicited visits to a complainant's home when that member had made it abundantly clear they had no intention coming to the property when, 'rainwater was cascading down the interior walls?'

- Your response was that you hadn't been able to look at the photographs.

b) I asked you to explain what you meant when you said that they, 'weren't strictly relevant to the Building Survey.'

- You chose not to answer the question.

c) Why were The Firm making, 'goodwill gestures' in the first place if there was indeed nothing wrong with the original survey? 

- You chose not to answer that question either.

According to your fair and independent judgement this is all perfectly reasonable otherwise why would you arrive at your conclusion?

This is what I mean by bias and collusion."

Q. Mr Clark, this Ombudsman does not look at the evidence or answer complainants' questions so where is the systematic or formal inquiry to discover and examine the facts or inquiries as to the character, activities and background of her fee-paying member?

Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.