Ombudsman Services, Bell Pottinger and Regulation (655)

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

For Clarity - Attempt 655.

655. Ombudsman Services, Bell Pottinger and Regulation.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

We see that Bell Pottinger has been expelled from a PR trade body because it was unethical and brought the industry into disrepute.

The Public Relations and Communications Association director Francis Ingham said, "Bell Pottinger did worst work I've ever seen." He went on to say, "Bell Pottinger has brought The PR and Communications Industry into disrepute with its actions and has received the harshest possible sanctions....The PRCA has never before passed down such a damning indictment of an agency's behaviour."

(www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/04/bell-pottingeer-expelled-from-pr-trade-body-after-south-africa-racism-row)

The Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) is a regulator which clearly regulates.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of The Ombudsman Association (OA) - formerly, The British and Irish Ombudsman Association or BIOA.

We contacted the secretary of the Ombudsman Association to ask him that if being a member of this august association required members to have a whistleblowing policy in place, why was it that one of his members - Ombudsman Services - did not have such a policy. And that the Ombudsman Association's CEO and Chief Ombudsman was also a board member of the Ombudsman Association but that his company didn't have such a policy..

How was it possible for a board member of the Ombudsman Association - which required its participating companies to have a whistleblowing policy in order to become members of the association - have a board member, The Rev Shand Smith, who was CEO and Chief Ombudsman of a company which didn't? Wasn't this somewhat unethical?

Apparently not. We were told by the secretary that he was in the course of reconfirming the membership of ALL his members.

We now see that The Rev Shand Smith is the Chair of the Ombudsman Association.

An alternative dispute resolution scheme without a whistleblowing policy is like a car without seat-belts, a ferry without lifeboats or a member of parliament without an expenses account.

Q. Mr Clark, why has the government approved a redress scheme - one which handles complex and costly property disputes - when it doesn't even have a whistleblowing policy?

Q. Mr Clark, what might such a redress scheme wish to keep from public scrutiny?

We also wrote to the Ombudsman Association's secretary about maladministration at Ombudsman Services.

We asked the secretary, if the Ombudsman Association state in their present day rules that;

"The Association will only give recognition to Ombudsman's Offices whose primary role is to handle complaints by individuals about; maladministration, unfair treatment, poor service or other inequitable conduct by those subject to investigation."

(www.ombudsmanassociation.org/docs/OA-Rules-Schedule1)

wouldn't he be both shocked and prompted to take action about the following revelation made by the Ombudsman Services Independent Assessor in her First and Last Report;

"I was concerned by the scale and significance of the failings I identified in certain cases.

I was surprised to find such instances of maladministration in an ombudsman organisation."

(For The Good - annual report and accounts 2014-15)

The Ombudsman Association's secretary didn't reply. (please see Ombudsmans61percent Campaign blog: 467)

Q. Mr Clark, how was a situation whereby those supposedly, "investigating" maladministration, unfair treatment and poor service and other inequitable conduct, able themselves to engage in maladministration?

Q. Mr Clark, what were the government monitors of this government approved scheme monitoring at the time of this maladministration?

   Q. Mr Clark, the monitors were in receipt of this company's surveys and annual 
   reports, what actions did they take to protect the consumer on discovering that     the  company was engaging in the maladministration of consumers' complaints?

Q. Mr Clark, Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament of the Council at 31) states,

"The Member State should ensure that ADR entities resolve disputes in a manner that is fair, practical and proportionate to both the consumer and the trader on the basis of an objective assessment of the circumstances in which the complaint is made and with due regard for the rights of parties."

How does Ombudsman Services' significant maladministration of consumers' complaints satisfy this requirement?

The CEO and Chief Ombudsman of a private ADR scheme which maladministers consumers' complaints and which doesn't have a whistleblowing policy also sits as Chair of the association that has rules to regulate such behaviour, but doesn't.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, does this not go some way in explaining why some consumers - you don't say just exactly how many - have the temerity to say your best efforts are simply not good enough?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, if James Henderson had also been Chair of The Public Relations and Communications Association, do you believe that the outcome in the Bell Pottinger scandal would have been the same?

The consumer must be left wondering just how much maladministration, unfair treatment, poor service and other inequitable treatment it takes before the Political Establishment grinds into some sort of action.

How much unethical behaviour is needed before the private redress industry is brought into disrepute?

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458.

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