Ombudsman Services: The, "Independence" Of The Ombudsman Services' Independent Assessor. Attempt 23.

To: The Leader of the House of Commons / The Business Secretary and the CEO and Chief Ombudsman of Ombudsman Services:

Ombudsman Services Part 4: The Full English Cover-Up. Attempt 23.

23) Ombudsman Services: The "Independence" Of The Ombudsman Services' Independent Assessor.

Dear Mrs Leadsom, Mr Clark and The Rev Shand Smith.

We sent the following email to the email to the Ombudsman Services' Independent Assessor on Sun 5 Sep 2010:

   "Dear Mr Jefferies,

    Thank you for your letter and the time you've taken to explain your role

    as the Independent Assessor.

    However, I do find it somewhat strange that after being told by Mr Brown

    that my case had been referred to you - without any prior warning,

    consultation, or indeed knowledge of your existence (there's no mention

    of you in the booklet, "Resolving complaints fairly") that you should

    conclude your letter by saying,

    "May I remind you that my terms of reference provide that their is no appeal

    against my decision. I regret that I am unable to enter into any further

    correspondence on the matter."

   

    I don't find that very fair and I wonder where the natural justice lies in all of

    this? As for your professed, "independence" I wonder at that too. Your to     letter heading is Ombudsman Services and the mail address is identical to  

    everything else I've received from Ombudsman Services:Property. Isn't it just  a bit   

    strange that some of your sentences are identical to Mr Browns? It is as if someone  

    on high has written a script for all of you to adhere to.

    I'm not sure what your role is. You say you are independent of the service

    and yet your terms of reference are laid out by Ombudsman Services. So

    I assume you are paid by them to work for them. Where's the

    independence there?

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, why didn't the Independent Assessor alert Government monitors and the consumer to the fact that you were offering, "a broken solution in a broken market?

    You tell me that you can't conduct the Ombudsman's investigation again

    or change the decision of the Ombudsman or answer questions about

    the Data Protection Act so as far as I can see there seems to be very

    little point in having an Independent Assessor."

Q. Mrs Leadsom and Mr Clark, wasn't the purpose of the Ombudsman Services' Independent Assessor to cover-up the all the company's broken solutions in this part of the broken market in redress?

The Ombudsman is indeed an institution endowed with enormous power.

Power, it would seem, without accountability or responsibility.

When challenging the unregulated power of Beaverbrook and Rothermere, Stanley Baldwin stated;

"The newspapers attacking me are not newspapers in the ordinary sense. They are engines of propaganda for the constantly changing policies, desires, personal vices, personal likes and dislikes of the two men. What are their methods? Their methods are direct falsehoods, misrepresentation, half-truths, the alteration of the speaker's meaning by publishing a sentence apart from the context - What the proprietorship of these papers is aiming at is power, and power without responsibility - the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages."

Stanley Baldwin. Speech March 17 1931)

 Whereas Stanley Baldwin was able - thanks to the print support of other sections of the press - to successfully challenge the power of those two press barons, today's consumers have no-one to advocate on their behalf when confronted by the all powerful Ombudsman.

There is no further appeal against their ludicrous decisions.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at www.blogger.com.