Ombudsman Services - From DJS Research to BMG Research. (654)

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

For Clarity - Attempt 654.

654. Ombudsman Services - From DJS Research to BMG Research.

Dear Mr Clark and lord Tim Clement Jones,

The government approved the Ombudsman Services:Property scheme and apparently monitors it.

We were told by the Head of ERCE OFT,

"I have investigated this matter and understand that OS:P (Ombudsman Services:Property) has confirmed that the new company will ask the same questions as those used on previous surveys, with the addition of some new questions about the OS:P website......

I can assure you, however, that the OFT receives copies of the surveys in question and will take into account their findings as part of our ongoing monitoring of OSP's redress scheme."

(Our ref EPIC/ENQ/E/138617)

We would ask you, and anyone else who kindly takes the time to read this email, to act as independent, impartial, fair and just ombudsmen and evaluate the following for yourselves:

DJS Research 2008/9:

7.1 ....the state of the financial goodwill did not live up to expectations   ...complainants need to understand the limitations of the SOS (now rebranded as OS:P) and what can be delivered.

7.16 When asked about the outcome of the case most felt the outcome was not in their favour...it was the scale of the financial goodwill that went against them ... we suggest that dissatisfaction with the level of financial award is high and influences many other responses to SOS (OS:P).

7.17 Overall satisfaction levels were low with a high number very dissatisfied ... we suggest this reflects dissatisfaction with the level of financial award.

Average Financial Property Award - Not Known  Data Removed From Website.

 

DJS Research 2009/10:

1.13 There was some (strong) levels of strong dissatisfaction with the accuracy of content and the reports recommendations and aspects surrounding it with nearly a half dissatisfied.

1.14 When asked about the outcome of the case most (61%) felt it was not in their favour.

1.15 Satisfaction levels were low with just over a half dissatisfied with accepting complaints when appropriate, training / guidance on compiling a case file and length of time it takes, efficiency of handling a case and speed of case resolution.

6.6 However the majority disagreed that the Ombudsman had helped sort out their problem.

6.7 6 out of 7 very dissatisfied with the Ombudsman's handling of their complaint

6.9 Likewise almost a half of the enquirers stated that their confidence in the SOS (now rebranded as the OS:P) had greatly decreased following their experience.

6.18 Views were also mixed on the speed, efficiency and overall level of the service. A third were very dissatisfied with the overall level of the service.

6.19 Dissatisfaction with the overall level of service is perhaps informed by the great lack of satisfaction with the perceived extent to which the Ombudsman attempted to resolve s complaint through mediation and negotiation. 48% very dissatisfied.

6.22. Accuracy Content 31% very dissatisfied Report recommendations 48% very Dissatisfied. 61% felt the outcome was against them 43% felt it was completely against them. 64% went to the further representation process. 83% had submitted further representations. 47% felt there were errors in the report.

8.24 To be effective the SOS must be seen as an impartial arbitrator between parties - currently this does not seem to be the general consensus of opinion.

9.14 Cases often took longer to reach a conclusion than complainants had expected. 71% cases lasted 3 - 6 months.

9.15 The majority had disagreed that the Ombudsman had helped sort out the problem.

9.21 About a half were very dissatisfied with Ombudsman's attempts to resolve complaints through mediation/negotiation.

9.23 Some strong levels of strong dissatisfaction with the reports recommendations and aspects surrounding it with nearly a half very dissatisfied.

9.25 61% felt the outcome was not in their favour. We suggest that dissatisfaction with the level of financial award is high and influences many other responses to the SOS.

9.27 There is substantial dissatisfaction with the SOS.

- Average Financial Award For Property: £1.511.75p

DJS Research 2010/11:

The CEO and Chief Ombudsman, The Rev Shand Smith, has described what follows as, "An exemplary model for alternative dispute resolution."

As impartial, objective, independent, just and sensate part-time ombudsmen, what do you think?

"Satisfaction levels have dropped across all of the attributes we measured.

- friendliness of the call handler: Down

- helpfulness of staff: Down

- 48% satisfied call handler understood the problem in 2010, 35% in 2011: Down

At 7.25 the highest levels of dissatisfaction arose in relation to the efforts made by OS:P in relation to mediation (55%) the speed of the process (57%) and the overall level of service received.

In keeping with the trend throughout this complainants' section satisfaction levels dropped in all areas. 70% didn't think it was fair and reasonable.

At 6.21 DJS reported that - When asked about the provisional conclusion report, satisfaction levels were low. The majority were dissatisfied with the logic of its recommendations, accuracy of content, use of evidence and the extent to which they were fair and reasonable. Two thirds were dissatisfied with the report's recommendations, with more than half very dissatisfied.

- Arrived at in a logical manner 40% very dissatisfied 15% fairly dissatisfied

- Supported by the evidence 45% very dissatisfied 10% fairly dissatisfied

There was active dissatisfaction with the efficiency and speed of the process, with around half or more dissatisfied. The majority expected their cases to last for one or two months: around one in four lasted seven months or longer.

This suggests that it was the scale of the financial award that they felt was not in their favour as most received just £100 to £500.

Many were complaining about poor information advice which could potentially have led to a costly purchasing mistake far in excess of a few hundred or thousand pounds. (too bloody true)

Overall satisfaction levels remain low. Around two in tree were dissatisfied with OS:Property's handling of their complaint.

As a result, around two in three felt their confidence in dealing with property professionals had decreased.

The fact that most felt the report does not find in their favour impacts on these poor levels of satisfaction.

OS:Property is different to OS:Energy and OS:Communications in that the financial implications of complaints are often much larger as they relate to expensive purchasing decisions. There remains a key issue with regards to complainants' perceptions of what recompense to expect from the complaint and what can actually be delivered.

This should be looked at and either expectations could be managed more tightly from the beginning of the claim, or the scale of financial award be increased to be more in line with the financial losses incurred by the complainant as a result of the problem.

1.14 When asked about the outcome of the complaint most (64%) felt it was not in their favour. We believe this is because the scale of the financial goodwill did not live up to expectations.

9.24 When asked about the outcome of the case most (64%) felt the outcome was not in their favour ... it was the scale of the financial goodwill that went against them ... the nature of OS:P means that problems may have led to significant financial loss for complainants.

We've saved 7.30 for the end because we believe it speaks volumes about the CEO and Chief Ombudsman's claim that this scheme is in any way an, "exemplary model for dispute resolution." 7.30 Finally, the number believing the report's conclusion was fair and reasonable fell from 37% in 2010 to 23% in 20011.

- Average Financial Award For Property: £900 down £611.75p.

BMG Research 2011/12:

"Both quantitative data and associated verbatim comments showed largely positive findings, with strong levels of satisfaction with enquiry handling and high levels of advocacy of OS. Results were consistent by sector - Communications/Energy."

- We could not find any Property data.

- Average Financial Award For Property: There Appeared To Be No Average.

BMG Research 2012/13:

- We could not find any Property data.

- Average Financial Award For Property: There Appeared To Be No Average.

BMG Research 2013/14:

We could not find any Property data.

- Average Financial Award For Property: £100.

BMG Research 2014/15:

We could not find any Property data.

- Average Financial Award For Property: £100

BMG Research 2015 April - December:

We could not find any property data.

- Average Financial Award For Property: £50

BMG Research 2016:

We could not find any property data:

- Average Financial Award For Property: £50

Q. Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones, if, as The Rev Shand Smith would have us believe, his alternative redress scheme for Property disputes really is, "exemplary" why doesn't it provide exemplary evidence for the way in which it investigates consumers' disputes and exemplary feedback on the way in which complainants experienced their customer journey?

We feel confident that most people - apart from government monitors of the scheme - on looking at the above data could not fail but to arrive at a different conclusion to the one reached by the scheme's CEO and Chief Ombudsman.

Perhaps we should give the data to groups of; public school, grammar school, state school and special school children to see what conclusions they might arrive at.

After all, they will be the next generation of consumers of private redress - exemplary or otherwise.

 

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458

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