Ombudsman Services: A Vision? Should Have Gone To Specsavers. (39)

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

Ombudsman Services Part 4: The Full English Cover-Up Attempt 39.

39 Ombudsman Services: A Vision? Should have Gone To Specsavers.

Dear Mrs Leadsom, Mr Clark, Mr Javid and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

In 2016 Ombudsman Services was welcoming the consumer to a new, "vision" and "mission."

It was to be collaborative approach and would lead to the eradication of , "consumer detriment."

The Vision:

Welcome

A new look

During 2016 we changed our vision, mission

and values statements as well as renewing

our three year strategic plan. In a world

where the dispute resolution landscape is

becoming more competitive we decided that

our resources are best placed in offering the

ombudsman model which not only provides

complaint handling, but works in collaboration

with other bodies to understand what is going

wrong and what could go wrong. A model in

which data and insights drive improvement,

where consumer detriment is reduced by

the ombudsman working with suppliers and

sectors to put things right, to stop problems

arising in the first place and to make a real

difference to the whole consumer journey.

Complaint Handling - Data - and Insights:

In the 2016 Annual Property Report we're told that 1166 were, "resolved." 

However, an analysis of those 1166 cases is virtually non-existent. Compare this report to the one from 2009/10 and you'll see a world of data difference. That one extended to 8 pages and had a breakdown of the range of awards doled out by the then Property Ombudsman.

Providing the consumer with data on the range of awards and an explanation of their breakdown was a criterion for this scheme's approval by the OFT.

By 2016 all the consumer gets is single line at the bottom of the page informing them that the average award was £50.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why haven't you complied with the OFT requirement to produce a range and breakdown of financial awards in your Annual Report?

The consumer is told that this is, "a model in which data and insights drive improvement." This would seem to be a model which very successfully hides data on its performance in handling complex property complaints. Otherwise things would be very different but they aren't.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, the one page of data scraped together for the 2016 Annual Property report doesn't actually ask consumers what they thought about their, "customer journey." Why aren't consumers also being consulted on their "detriment?"

DJS Research provided an awful lot of data. Their Customer Satisfaction Reports ran into pages and their last report in 2010/11 stated that 64% of property complainants thought their customer journey was a nightmare and that their detriment was enormous.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, this "vision" doesn't even get your organisation back to where it was in 2010/11. Why has there been a total failure by the Board and executives to gather data on the handling of property complaints since the departure of DJS Research in 2011?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why didn't the executives and Board of Ombudsman Services act on the data provided by DJS Research and stop problems from arising in the first place?

According to MoneySavingExperts' SharperTeeth: The Consumer Need For Ombudsman Reform, nearly 90% of property complainants now believe their customer journey to be a nightmare.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why was it down to MoneySavingExperts to provide this data and why were Ombudsman Services incapable of doing the job themselves?

90% of 1166 property complainants is 1049 complainants.

If each of those property complainants had received the £25K maximum award it would have cost RICS surveyors £26.225.000. An eyewatering sum of money.

Ombudsman Services Terms of Reference state that a Property Ombudsman cannot be a member of the organisation he is investigating and yet the present incumbent is a member of RICS.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, can you explain this anomaly to the 1049 property complainants who were dissatisfied with his handling of their complaints?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, if the CEO and Chief Ombudsman is now to stand down because of this broken solution, then shouldn't the Property Ombudsman be joining him?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, not only did you sanction this vision of heading back to the future, you criticised some - you didn't say just exactly how many - complainants for complaining that your best efforts would never be good enough. Shouldn't you now follow your CEO and Chief Ombudsman and Property Ombudsman and also step down?

Clearly, the Government monitors of this Government approved scheme appear to have seen nothing remotely wrong with nearly 90% of property complainants feeling disgruntled with their respective customer journeys.

Q. Mrs Leadsom, Mr Clark and Mr Javid, can you explain to consumers why your monitors should find such a figure of complainant dissatisfaction - acceptable?

By failing to produce an Annual Report for 2017, Ombudsman Services - its Board and executives - have attempted to silence the many for sake of the careers of the few. Otherwise things would be different. But they aren't.

Its how the system works.

The Full English Cover-Up has been oiled, fuelled, polished, finely tuned and rolled out once again.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert - Workstock Number - 510458.

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