Ombudsman Services:Property And The Ricsification Of Consumer Redress. (662)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary / Chair, Ombudsman Services.

For Clarity - Attempt 622.

662. Ombudsman Services:Property And The Ricsification Of Consumer Redress.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

By the time those few unfortunate property complainants get their derisory financial award from the RICS's Property Ombudsman they will have completed the ricsification process.

Apparently, the Ombudsman's decision is sacrosanct and final. There is no right of appeal.

We were told to go elsewhere and find a solution that suits us better. It would have suited us to have had a better solution from the Ombudsman. It would have suited hundreds of others to have got a better solution too if DJS Research's findings are anything to go by.

We suggest that, "what an exemplary model of alternative dispute resolution" will not be the first thought to enter their mind at that time.

In our last attempt at clarity - 621 - we saw that although Ombudsman Services:Property must display the range of awards they can potentially make and their justification for making them, they don't.

In the company's 2009 Annual Report it states;

"Our Terms of Reference preclude any Ombudsman from being a surveyor, decisions are taken by a lay person whose expertise is in dispute resolution, not in the profession or service about which complaints are. It is for the Ombudsman to decide when third party expertise would be helpful in reaching fair and appropriate resolution."

That's pretty clear. An Ombudsman can't be a surveyor. Their expertise is in dispute resolution.

DJS Research's Customer Satisfaction Report states;

"6.19 Dissatisfaction with the overall level of service is perhaps informed by the great level of dissatisfaction with the perceived extent to which the Ombudsman attempted to solve a complaint through mediation and negotiation. Less than a third (32%) were satisfied with this aspect ... and almost a half (48%) were very dissatisfied."

This is almost unbelievable.

Q. Mr Clark, your department has a close and continuing relationship with this private redress scheme, why didn't it - along with the OFT monitors of this government approved scheme - intervene to protect the consumer from this Ombudsman's failure to mediate or negotiate on behalf of complainants?

Q. Mr Clark, didn't this failure on the part of the Ombudsman to mediate or negotiate directly benefit those to whom the complaint was brought - surveyors?

Q. Mr Clark, how did this satisfy the requirement for the Ombudsman to be independent and shouldn't those complainants who suffered accordingly not have their cases independently reviewed?

Although, apparently unable to mediate and negotiate on behalf of consumers, the ombudsman did significantly reduce the level of financial awards from £1.511.75p to £900 even though DJS Research had suggested they be increased to be more in line with the financial losses suffered by property complainants.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, DJS Research's Customer Satisfaction Reports suggested that disputes had not been resolved on the basis of an objective assessment of the evidence why have they been removed from the company's website and why don't the new researchers ask the same questions?

Ombudsman Services:Property's Terms of Reference preclude an Ombudsman from being a surveyor or being in the profession about which the complaints are made and yet the new Ombudsman, John Baguley (MRICS) is a surveyor who tells us that,

"not only have I worked in the field as a surveyor, but I am employed by the surveying arm of a large financial institution to manage complaint investigations."

(Ombudsman Services - Property Annual Report 2009/10)

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, if the company's Terms of Reference preclude an Ombudsman from being a surveyor or in the profession about which complaints are made, why is the new Ombudsman a surveyor and member of RICS? 

Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament of the Council 21 May 2013 at 32) states that ;

"The natural person or collegial body in charge of ADR should be independent of all those who might have an interest in the outcome and should have no conflict of interest which could impede him or it from reaching a decision in a fair, impartial and independent manner."

That's pretty clear too.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, how does having a RICS surveyor as Ombudsman satisfy the EU Directive's requirement for independence and the avoidance of any conflicts of interest when reaching fair and impartial decisions?

This company has ignored its own Terms of Reference and plays fast and loose with the rules.

Q. Mr Clark, the government approved and monitors this scheme, why haven't you intervened to protect the consumer from this private redress scheme - a scheme which pays such scant regard to the rules?

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogspot.com and www.facebook.com - Ombudsmans Sixtyone-percent.