Ombudsman Services: Porton Down's, "Speedy," "Fair" And "Independent" Investigation Of A Complaint. (Attempt 33)

Dear Reader,

   Thank you for taking the time to read about our campaign for a public inquiry

   into the RICS and its, "appointed company: Ombudsman Services:Property 

   and that redress schemes, "Broken Solution." We sent the following email

   to the Government and its approved and abysmally monitored ADR scheme:

 

To: The Leader of The House of Commons / The Business Secretary / The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the CEO and Chief Ombudsman of Ombudsman Services.

Ombudsman Services Part 4: The Full English Cover-Up. (Attempt 33)

33) Ombudsman Services: Porton Down's, "Speedy," "Fair" And "Independent" Investigation Of A Complaint.

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

According to a Guardian report, investigators at Porton Down quickly came to the conclusion that they, "were able to verify it as novichok, to identify it was a military-grade nerve agent. We have not verified the precise source, but we have provided the scientific information to government, who have then used a number of sources to piece together the conclusions that they have come to." (Porton Down experts unable to verify precise source of novichok - Steven Morris and Pippa Crerar Tues 3 Ap 19.52 BST)

The Government is now also able to question Yulia Skripal a key witness whose account of what happened would seem to be crucial in coming to an understanding of what unfolded in Salisbury a month ago.

The Russians have come to their own conclusions. They appear to believe that the British Government instructed its agents to manufacture and administer the nerve agent, botched the job and then at considerable danger to those who cleaned up the mess - and cost to the NHS - blamed them - The Russians - all because Mrs May needed an excuse to increase military spending due to Russia's re-emergence as a Great Power.

The Russians don't explain why the Government having gone to the all that trouble to source novichok and then poison the Skripals with it should then work so hard to save their lives. Perhaps Yulia Skripal has the answers.

A key witness in our case - 510458 - was the RICS surveyor who conducted the full structural survey on what was to become our home.

When we got the Final Decision from Ombudsman Services:Property it was so eyewateringly ludicrous we challenged it. It made both our eyes water it was that ludicrous and so we made a Data Protection Act request in order to attempt to come to an understanding of what happened.

When the pack arrived it had, "Fast Track" stamped on the front page.

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, we asked the Property Ombudsman how she came to that decision - was our complaint weighed? dismissed out of hand because it wasn't typed? She didn't answer. How DO you come to the decision to Fast Track a consumer's complaint Mr Shand Smith?

We discovered that our surveyor had been sending messages and prompts to the Property Ombudsman - he is after all a fee-paying member of the club - one of which said that in hindsight he should have put things in writing to us after each visit to our home.

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, we asked the Property Ombudsman: in light of our surveyor's admission that he should have put things in writing to us why it was that none of his messages to her hadn't also been sent to us. She didn't reply. Why wasn't this information disclosed by the Property Ombudsman and why didn't we get an explanation for her decision not to  disclosure such important information?

We couldn't even agree with the Property Ombudsman as to when the senior partner first came to our home even though it was clear from our correspondence with the Firm that it wasn't when he said it was. The evidence was there in black and white. He had also told her how in hindsight such visits should have been responded to in writing. And there he was - at it again - not keeping us in the loop.

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, is this not an example of one of your broken solutions and one that could so easily have been put right?

Attempting to communicate with someone who routinely doesn't ask or answer questions is deeply frustrating. We asked the Firm for the contact details of our RICS surveyor as he'd, "parted company" with them. We believed he'd be able to clarify a great many of the issues. The Firm didn't respond. We asked the Property Ombudsman to intervene as he was a key witness in what had transpired. She didn't reply.

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, when a Property Ombudsman declines to seek out the evidence a key witness is able to provide isn't there something deeply unjust about the solution you are able to provide British consumers?  

Q. The Rev Shand Smith, how is it conceivably possible to conduct a fair and independent investigation of a complex and costly property complaint if the person who carried out the survey is bound and gagged?

Another day goes by.

Hopefully the Skripals are both improving and make a full recovery.

Still no Annual Report from Ombudsman Services detailing their performance in breaking solutions in 2017.

Q. Mrs Leadsom, Mr  Clark and Mr Javid, how long is this farcical situation going to continue before there's a public inquiry into the RICS' failure to adequately regulate its Members and (Un)Regulated Firms and its, "appointed" company: Ombudsman Services:Property's "broken solution?"

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com