To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary,
For Clarity - Attempt 565
565) Theresa Mayism.
Dear Mr Clark,
One of the key defining moments of Mrs May's premiership will be the time she failed to come out of hiding when Mr Harmsworth and Mr Murdoch's hirelings savaged those three unfortunate judges.
As a result of her failure to step up - a civic duty she had been instructing everyone else to do - and challenge Mr Harmsworth and Mr Murdoch's vested interests, one of the three pillars of our unwritten constitution - the independence of the judiciary - was yet further undermined by the hard right.
In her speech given yesterday she did however recognise that,
"the everyday injustices are too often overlooked" because "decisions made in faraway places didn't always seem to be the right decisions for them."
How perfectly true.
Take the Ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions at faraway Warrington or the Anonymous Desk Top Reviewer's beyond all know logic decisions at faraway Livewell Southwest Ltd.
Everyday decisions that aren't right but are unjust.
If we're all now to expected to upsticks and decamp from The Big Society to The Shared Society isn't it now beholden on the RICS and the NHS to start sharing information and become transparent and accountable about their decision making processes?
Q. Mr Clark, when are you going to step up, challenge the vested interests of the RICS and the NHS and right the wrongs of the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and The Anonymous Desk Top Reviewer's unexplained decisions at Livewell Southwest Ltd?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Tuesday, 10 January 2017
Sunday, 8 January 2017
OS:Property: The Civil Service. Neutral? Or A Crumbling Cornerstone Of UK Democracy? (564)
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary.
For Clarity - Attempt 564.
564) The Civil Service. Neutral? Or A Crumbling Cornerstone Of UK Democracy?
Dear Mr Clark,
In our previous blog we saw the remarkable ease with which the RICS Parliamentary Affairs Team drove home their need to control the lettings market to civil servants, MPs and Ministers.
The RICS were outraged,
"currently there is a clear potential for rogue lettings agents to cash in on the current rental boom due to a combination of consumers' low expectations and a total lack of effective regulation."
Rogue agents? A total lack of effective regulation?
Q. Mr Clark, wasn't it the RICS' very own total lack of effective regulation which led Consumer Focus to warn government about RICS' rogue Members and rogue (Un)Regulated Firms developing practices which did not work in their client's interests?
Peter Bolton King, RICS Global Residential Director, carried on driving home to civil servants, MPs and Ministers his no-nonsense message for change,
"...there are too many corrupt agents that do not belong to any professional body who are taking advantage of the current gap in regulation, putting consumers at risk,"
whilst conveniently overlooking the corrupt Members and corrupt (Un)Regulated Firms belonging to his professional body who gleefully take advantage of RICS' corrupt and scandalous failure to adequately regulate them thereby saddling their clients with massive bills to put right their incompetence.
That's some title to have on your business card.
It's, "Global Campaigning Director Of The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign" from now on. Only we can't afford business cards.
The RICS Global Residential Director wasn't finished,
"...choosing the wrong agent can result in tenants encountering all sorts of problems such as lost deposits, broken agreements and excessive charges. What we would like to see is the government taking direct action on this and introducing a single regulatory and redress system for both sales and lettings agents to make sure they are fully accountable."
(www.arla.co.uk./news/november-2012/rics-issue-press-release-on-regulation-of-lettings-agents)
What the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign would like to see is the government taking direct action and ordering a public inquiry into how it came to be that an entire market in surveying developed practices that did not work in their client's interests, why the RICS fail to adequately regulate their Members, how it is that their appointed ombudsman arrives at decisions in an illogical manner, and why their appointed company's executives maladminister consumers' complaints.
Q. Mr Clark, why have the neutral civil servants who monitor this government approved redress scheme permitted taxpayers to take their complaints to an ombudsman who arrives at decisions in an illogical manner and to executives who maladminister those self-same complaints?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 564.
564) The Civil Service. Neutral? Or A Crumbling Cornerstone Of UK Democracy?
Dear Mr Clark,
In our previous blog we saw the remarkable ease with which the RICS Parliamentary Affairs Team drove home their need to control the lettings market to civil servants, MPs and Ministers.
The RICS were outraged,
"currently there is a clear potential for rogue lettings agents to cash in on the current rental boom due to a combination of consumers' low expectations and a total lack of effective regulation."
Rogue agents? A total lack of effective regulation?
Q. Mr Clark, wasn't it the RICS' very own total lack of effective regulation which led Consumer Focus to warn government about RICS' rogue Members and rogue (Un)Regulated Firms developing practices which did not work in their client's interests?
Peter Bolton King, RICS Global Residential Director, carried on driving home to civil servants, MPs and Ministers his no-nonsense message for change,
"...there are too many corrupt agents that do not belong to any professional body who are taking advantage of the current gap in regulation, putting consumers at risk,"
whilst conveniently overlooking the corrupt Members and corrupt (Un)Regulated Firms belonging to his professional body who gleefully take advantage of RICS' corrupt and scandalous failure to adequately regulate them thereby saddling their clients with massive bills to put right their incompetence.
That's some title to have on your business card.
It's, "Global Campaigning Director Of The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign" from now on. Only we can't afford business cards.
The RICS Global Residential Director wasn't finished,
"...choosing the wrong agent can result in tenants encountering all sorts of problems such as lost deposits, broken agreements and excessive charges. What we would like to see is the government taking direct action on this and introducing a single regulatory and redress system for both sales and lettings agents to make sure they are fully accountable."
(www.arla.co.uk./news/november-2012/rics-issue-press-release-on-regulation-of-lettings-agents)
What the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign would like to see is the government taking direct action and ordering a public inquiry into how it came to be that an entire market in surveying developed practices that did not work in their client's interests, why the RICS fail to adequately regulate their Members, how it is that their appointed ombudsman arrives at decisions in an illogical manner, and why their appointed company's executives maladminister consumers' complaints.
Q. Mr Clark, why have the neutral civil servants who monitor this government approved redress scheme permitted taxpayers to take their complaints to an ombudsman who arrives at decisions in an illogical manner and to executives who maladminister those self-same complaints?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Friday, 6 January 2017
Brexit, Neutral Civil Servants And The RICS (563).
To the Business, Energy and industrial Strategy Secretary,
For Clarity - Attempt 563.
563) Brexit, Neutral Civil Servants And The RICS.
Dear Mr Clark and Sir Leigh Lewis,
Mr Farage, UK Ambassador Without Portfolio, tells us that
"No organisation (apart from UKIP) has done more to give away our democratic rights than the Foreign Office. They've been doing it for decades and I very much hope Sir Ivan is the first of many to go." As Mr Farage is an expert on these matters it must be untrue.
Mr Farage is not criticising civil servants for not being neutral but for being - in his humble opinion - pro European. He doesn't demand that civil servants be neutral but pro Brexit and in so doing undermines our civil service and our democracy.
According to George Eaton writing in the New Statesman, a neutral civil service along with an independent judiciary and a sovereign parliament are the cornerstones of the UK's unwritten constitution. However, these are being systematically and deliberately undermined by those on the right of the Leave Campaign and the establishment press barons supporting and financing it. He says, "it's ideological purity rather than expertise" that those afflicted with Brexitosis require from our civil service.
(www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/01/how-brexit-breaking-british-constitution)
According to Paul Goodman at conservativehome, "it's an illusion to believe that the civil service is, or has ever been, a fount of the purest neutrality."
(www.conservativehome.com/the torydiary,2017/01/why-top-civil-servants-must-back-brexit)
We agree. It seems for decades the civil service has been undermining their very own cornerstone of our unwritten constitution.
According to the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign one of the biggest culprits in undermining the neutrality of our civil service is the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors or RICS. Instead of doing the job they received their Royal Charter for and effectively regulating their cowboy Members and (Un)Regulated Firms they've been busily undermining the neutrality of our civil servants.
When nobbling Vince Cable to fix the letting industry they boasted that;
"Over the past 18 months, RICS has undertaken a great deal of influencing work (lobbying to the rest of us) - both publically and behind the scenes - to drive home the need for change to Government and policy makers. This work has included events in Parliament, briefing of MPs, Ministers and Civil Servants...contact the RICS Parliamentary Affairs team at mthorogood@rics.org."
They were indeed successful in their political influencing and engagement work and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act was amended accordingly.
Their Ombudsman at their appointed company, Ombudsman Services:Property, now handles the business of investigating complaints about letting agents.
We asked the Civil Service for a Parliamentary Pass for our Parliamentary Affairs Team but never heard from them. So no neutrality there. There's a thing.
Q. Mr Clark, can you explain why the RICS Parliamentary Affairs Team received a pass to lobby MPs, Ministers and Civil Servants, but the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign didn't?
Q. Mr Clark, when are you going to step up, challenge the vested interests of the RICS and its appointed company Ombudsman Services:Prioperty and right the wrongs of its Ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and its executives' maladministration?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 563.
563) Brexit, Neutral Civil Servants And The RICS.
Dear Mr Clark and Sir Leigh Lewis,
Mr Farage, UK Ambassador Without Portfolio, tells us that
"No organisation (apart from UKIP) has done more to give away our democratic rights than the Foreign Office. They've been doing it for decades and I very much hope Sir Ivan is the first of many to go." As Mr Farage is an expert on these matters it must be untrue.
Mr Farage is not criticising civil servants for not being neutral but for being - in his humble opinion - pro European. He doesn't demand that civil servants be neutral but pro Brexit and in so doing undermines our civil service and our democracy.
According to George Eaton writing in the New Statesman, a neutral civil service along with an independent judiciary and a sovereign parliament are the cornerstones of the UK's unwritten constitution. However, these are being systematically and deliberately undermined by those on the right of the Leave Campaign and the establishment press barons supporting and financing it. He says, "it's ideological purity rather than expertise" that those afflicted with Brexitosis require from our civil service.
(www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/01/how-brexit-breaking-british-constitution)
According to Paul Goodman at conservativehome, "it's an illusion to believe that the civil service is, or has ever been, a fount of the purest neutrality."
(www.conservativehome.com/the torydiary,2017/01/why-top-civil-servants-must-back-brexit)
We agree. It seems for decades the civil service has been undermining their very own cornerstone of our unwritten constitution.
According to the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign one of the biggest culprits in undermining the neutrality of our civil service is the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors or RICS. Instead of doing the job they received their Royal Charter for and effectively regulating their cowboy Members and (Un)Regulated Firms they've been busily undermining the neutrality of our civil servants.
When nobbling Vince Cable to fix the letting industry they boasted that;
"Over the past 18 months, RICS has undertaken a great deal of influencing work (lobbying to the rest of us) - both publically and behind the scenes - to drive home the need for change to Government and policy makers. This work has included events in Parliament, briefing of MPs, Ministers and Civil Servants...contact the RICS Parliamentary Affairs team at mthorogood@rics.org."
They were indeed successful in their political influencing and engagement work and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act was amended accordingly.
Their Ombudsman at their appointed company, Ombudsman Services:Property, now handles the business of investigating complaints about letting agents.
We asked the Civil Service for a Parliamentary Pass for our Parliamentary Affairs Team but never heard from them. So no neutrality there. There's a thing.
Q. Mr Clark, can you explain why the RICS Parliamentary Affairs Team received a pass to lobby MPs, Ministers and Civil Servants, but the Ombudsmans61percent Campaign didn't?
Q. Mr Clark, when are you going to step up, challenge the vested interests of the RICS and its appointed company Ombudsman Services:Prioperty and right the wrongs of its Ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and its executives' maladministration?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Tuesday, 3 January 2017
The Ombudsman Services' Term of Reference - A Pirates' Charter (562).
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary.
For Clarity - Attempt 562.
562) The Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference - A Pirates' Charter.
Dear Mr Clark,
I tried asking Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman to comment on 7.3 of her company's Terms of Reference:
"7.3 Information passed to the Ombudsman will be disclosed to the other party unless reasons are given setting out circumstances for non-disclosure."
I also tried asking the Ombudsman:
"- Why wasn't Monk and Partners File made available to me from the outset?
- Why did I have to make a request for this information under the data Protection Act?
- Why haven't you answered my questions regarding Monk and Partners File?
- Why have I not received the photographs taken by Monk and Partners on one of their unannounced visits?"
I did eventually receive the photographs along with the somewhat amazing statement that the Ombudsman, "had not sought them out."
"Had not sought them out," is Ombudspeak for, "didn't bother to look at them."
Apparently, been had, "been unable to seek them out" because her computer didn't work. I was able to seek them out because there was nothing wrong with mine.
The Ombudsman didn't answer my questions save to say she didn't routinely ask her fee-paying RICS Members questions.
I didn't get any reasons from the Ombudsman for her decision not to set out the circumstances justifying her non-disclosure of Monk and Partners' File.
Q. Mr Clark, how did the Ombudsman meet her duty as an Ombudsman as set out in 7.3 of her company's Terms of Reference?
Q. Mr Clark, how can an Ombudsman conduct a fair, thorough and independent investigation of a consumer's complaint when she doesn't routinely ask her fee-paying RICS Members questions?
Q. Mr Clark, how can an Ombudsman conduct a fair, thorough and independent investigation of a consumer's complaint when her computer doesn't work?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsams61percent Campaign
For Clarity - Attempt 562.
562) The Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference - A Pirates' Charter.
Dear Mr Clark,
I tried asking Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman to comment on 7.3 of her company's Terms of Reference:
"7.3 Information passed to the Ombudsman will be disclosed to the other party unless reasons are given setting out circumstances for non-disclosure."
I also tried asking the Ombudsman:
"- Why wasn't Monk and Partners File made available to me from the outset?
- Why did I have to make a request for this information under the data Protection Act?
- Why haven't you answered my questions regarding Monk and Partners File?
- Why have I not received the photographs taken by Monk and Partners on one of their unannounced visits?"
I did eventually receive the photographs along with the somewhat amazing statement that the Ombudsman, "had not sought them out."
"Had not sought them out," is Ombudspeak for, "didn't bother to look at them."
Apparently, been had, "been unable to seek them out" because her computer didn't work. I was able to seek them out because there was nothing wrong with mine.
The Ombudsman didn't answer my questions save to say she didn't routinely ask her fee-paying RICS Members questions.
I didn't get any reasons from the Ombudsman for her decision not to set out the circumstances justifying her non-disclosure of Monk and Partners' File.
Q. Mr Clark, how did the Ombudsman meet her duty as an Ombudsman as set out in 7.3 of her company's Terms of Reference?
Q. Mr Clark, how can an Ombudsman conduct a fair, thorough and independent investigation of a consumer's complaint when she doesn't routinely ask her fee-paying RICS Members questions?
Q. Mr Clark, how can an Ombudsman conduct a fair, thorough and independent investigation of a consumer's complaint when her computer doesn't work?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsams61percent Campaign
The Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference - A Pirate Code? (561)
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 561.
561) The Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference - a Pirate Code?
Dear Mr Clark,
We've already seen in previous blogs that the Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference are treated by those maladministrating consumers' complaints as more like a Pirate Code. Sadly, the maladministrators seem to have far less respect for their Terms than pirates did for their Code. There's progress for you.
If you go to www.ombudsman-services.org click on, "our company" then, "governance" and then, "Terms of reference" you will see that 4 Disqualification appears to have disappeared from their, "Terms of reference pre October 2015."
Q. Mr Clark, why has how to disqualify and ombudsman from being an Ombudsman apparently disappeared from this company's Terms of Reference?
Q. Mr Clark, now that this country has apparently taken back control how do we control Ombudsmen who have run amok?
We tried asking Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman;
"5 Ombudsman's Principle Aim:
The Ombudsman's Principle Aim is to receive complaints made by complainants in accordance with these Terms of reference and where appropriate, investigate such complaints in order to encourage and/or facilitate the terms of their resolution, settlement and/or withdrawal.
- At no time have you sought to do this. I see that The Firm, after visiting our home for the xth time, regretted no longer being able to come with an independent surveyor. At no time prior to this was this course of action ever countenanced. Why not?"
Needless to say we didn't get an answer.
Q. Mr Clark, The Firm say they regretted not being able to have a surveyor independently re-survey our home. Why didn't they suggest this to us as part of the resolution of our complaint with them?
Q. Mr Clark, if The Firm had offered this to us as part of a resolution to our dispute when we were in their, "Complaints Handling Procedure" there would have been no need to have gone to their Ombudsman. If they were suggesting this to their Ombudsman why weren't they suggesting this to us?
Q. Mr Clark, why didn't Gillian Fleming suggest an independent re-survey of our home as part of the resolution of our complaint about The Firm?
Q. Mr Clark, we asked Gillian Fleming for an independent re-survey of our home and she refused. Why?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 561.
561) The Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference - a Pirate Code?
Dear Mr Clark,
We've already seen in previous blogs that the Ombudsman Services' Terms of Reference are treated by those maladministrating consumers' complaints as more like a Pirate Code. Sadly, the maladministrators seem to have far less respect for their Terms than pirates did for their Code. There's progress for you.
If you go to www.ombudsman-services.org click on, "our company" then, "governance" and then, "Terms of reference" you will see that 4 Disqualification appears to have disappeared from their, "Terms of reference pre October 2015."
Q. Mr Clark, why has how to disqualify and ombudsman from being an Ombudsman apparently disappeared from this company's Terms of Reference?
Q. Mr Clark, now that this country has apparently taken back control how do we control Ombudsmen who have run amok?
We tried asking Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman;
"5 Ombudsman's Principle Aim:
The Ombudsman's Principle Aim is to receive complaints made by complainants in accordance with these Terms of reference and where appropriate, investigate such complaints in order to encourage and/or facilitate the terms of their resolution, settlement and/or withdrawal.
- At no time have you sought to do this. I see that The Firm, after visiting our home for the xth time, regretted no longer being able to come with an independent surveyor. At no time prior to this was this course of action ever countenanced. Why not?"
Needless to say we didn't get an answer.
Q. Mr Clark, The Firm say they regretted not being able to have a surveyor independently re-survey our home. Why didn't they suggest this to us as part of the resolution of our complaint with them?
Q. Mr Clark, if The Firm had offered this to us as part of a resolution to our dispute when we were in their, "Complaints Handling Procedure" there would have been no need to have gone to their Ombudsman. If they were suggesting this to their Ombudsman why weren't they suggesting this to us?
Q. Mr Clark, why didn't Gillian Fleming suggest an independent re-survey of our home as part of the resolution of our complaint about The Firm?
Q. Mr Clark, we asked Gillian Fleming for an independent re-survey of our home and she refused. Why?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Monday, 2 January 2017
Ombudsman Services:Property. The RICS Member Firm. The Disqualification of an Ombudsman (560)
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 560.
560) The Disqualification of an Ombudsman.
Dear Mr Clark,
It doesn't seem that so far in this country an ombudsman has ever been disqualified.
However, there hasn't been an awful lot of a critical nature that's been written about them and as they're more secretive than The Masons such matters are likely to go unreported.
Our letter to Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Ombudsman continued;
"I have read the Terms of Reference and would like to raise this point:
4. Disqualification (b) does any act or finds himself/herself in any position which, in the reasonable opinion of the Surveyors Ombudsman Service Member Board, conflicts or is likely to conflict with his/her position and/or the exercise of his/her powers and/or duties as Surveyors Ombudsman Service board member, or the effective operation of the Surveyors Ombudsman Service, the Ombudsman or these terms of Reference ...."
Q. Does it not bring the Service into disrepute when you accept evidence gathered in this way? Surely, the proper thing to have done in this situation would have been to have written to The Firm saying that evidence gathered in such a fashion, is not acceptable?
Q. Why didn't this trigger a reappraisal of all of The Firm's so-called "evidence?" Or does this service set one standard for its members and another for complainants?"
It is not that you have not answered some of the questions posed by a complainant. It is that you have not answered any of my questions or that some of the responses you have made have, in themselves, raised further questions."
Needless to say the ombudsman didn't answer my questions.
Q. Mr Clark, how is it conceivably possible for an ombudsman to investigate a consumer's complainant fairly and independently when they will not answer a consumer's questions? Isn't it time that this wholly unacceptable state of affairs was in itself investigated?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
For Clarity - Attempt 560.
560) The Disqualification of an Ombudsman.
Dear Mr Clark,
It doesn't seem that so far in this country an ombudsman has ever been disqualified.
However, there hasn't been an awful lot of a critical nature that's been written about them and as they're more secretive than The Masons such matters are likely to go unreported.
Our letter to Gillian Fleming, the Ombudsman Services:Ombudsman continued;
"I have read the Terms of Reference and would like to raise this point:
4. Disqualification (b) does any act or finds himself/herself in any position which, in the reasonable opinion of the Surveyors Ombudsman Service Member Board, conflicts or is likely to conflict with his/her position and/or the exercise of his/her powers and/or duties as Surveyors Ombudsman Service board member, or the effective operation of the Surveyors Ombudsman Service, the Ombudsman or these terms of Reference ...."
Q. Does it not bring the Service into disrepute when you accept evidence gathered in this way? Surely, the proper thing to have done in this situation would have been to have written to The Firm saying that evidence gathered in such a fashion, is not acceptable?
Q. Why didn't this trigger a reappraisal of all of The Firm's so-called "evidence?" Or does this service set one standard for its members and another for complainants?"
It is not that you have not answered some of the questions posed by a complainant. It is that you have not answered any of my questions or that some of the responses you have made have, in themselves, raised further questions."
Needless to say the ombudsman didn't answer my questions.
Q. Mr Clark, how is it conceivably possible for an ombudsman to investigate a consumer's complainant fairly and independently when they will not answer a consumer's questions? Isn't it time that this wholly unacceptable state of affairs was in itself investigated?
Yours sincerely,
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
Sunday, 1 January 2017
"U-Huh" Sinkane. (559)
To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 559.
559) Sinkane -"U'Huh."
Dear Mr Clark,
In Post-Brexit, Brexit Means Brexit Britain, 2017 is the time to wake up to the fact that we - that's us and not you - haven't actually taken back control of anything.
For example:
- The RICS still send their criminally, incompetently (Un)Regulated Members and (Un)Regulated Firms to their appointed ombudsman in order to get them off the hook.
- Their appointed ombudsman and team of so-called investigators not only accomplishes this with great gusto but no longer bother to collect and publish meaningful data on their collusive performance.
- The Privy Council claims to be at the heart of what the RICS do but routinely fail to account for the fact that this organisation inadequately regulates its (Un)Regulated Members and (Un)Regulated Firms in the first place and that if they had only done the job they received their Royal Charter for there would absolutely have been no need for them to have appointed an ombudsman or team of highly paid maladminstrating executives.
- The NHS National Framework for Continuing Healthcare is in reality The NHS National Framework for a Continuing Extortion Racket, conning thousands of sick, elderly and dying taxpayers out of all they've ever worked for.
- And at a time of austerity for many The Government simply fails to collect the taxes of the rich and powerful who continue free to stash their wealth in British off-shore tax havens.
However, it is New Years day an as Ahmed Gallab says;
"times are tough, struggles have always existed in our lives, but hope, love and the power of positivity help us to stay alive."
"We're gonna be alright..."
Q. Mr Clark, is it true that we're all gonna be alright when you step up to the mark challenge the vested interests of the RICS and right the wrongs of their ombudsman's illogical Final decisions and their executives' maladministration?
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign would like to wish everyone 365 days of hope, love and positivity in 2017.
For Clarity - Attempt 559.
559) Sinkane -"U'Huh."
Dear Mr Clark,
In Post-Brexit, Brexit Means Brexit Britain, 2017 is the time to wake up to the fact that we - that's us and not you - haven't actually taken back control of anything.
For example:
- The RICS still send their criminally, incompetently (Un)Regulated Members and (Un)Regulated Firms to their appointed ombudsman in order to get them off the hook.
- Their appointed ombudsman and team of so-called investigators not only accomplishes this with great gusto but no longer bother to collect and publish meaningful data on their collusive performance.
- The Privy Council claims to be at the heart of what the RICS do but routinely fail to account for the fact that this organisation inadequately regulates its (Un)Regulated Members and (Un)Regulated Firms in the first place and that if they had only done the job they received their Royal Charter for there would absolutely have been no need for them to have appointed an ombudsman or team of highly paid maladminstrating executives.
- The NHS National Framework for Continuing Healthcare is in reality The NHS National Framework for a Continuing Extortion Racket, conning thousands of sick, elderly and dying taxpayers out of all they've ever worked for.
- And at a time of austerity for many The Government simply fails to collect the taxes of the rich and powerful who continue free to stash their wealth in British off-shore tax havens.
However, it is New Years day an as Ahmed Gallab says;
"times are tough, struggles have always existed in our lives, but hope, love and the power of positivity help us to stay alive."
"We're gonna be alright..."
Q. Mr Clark, is it true that we're all gonna be alright when you step up to the mark challenge the vested interests of the RICS and right the wrongs of their ombudsman's illogical Final decisions and their executives' maladministration?
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign would like to wish everyone 365 days of hope, love and positivity in 2017.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)