597) "Which Side Are You On?" Florence Reece

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary,

and 

To the Chair, Ombudsman Services:.

For Clarity - Attempt 597.

597) "Which Side Are You On?" Florence Reece.

Jeremy Corbyn For Prime Minister.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

Each day around 200 consumers have their complaint "investigated" by Ombudsman Services. 

No-one knows if those complainants are very satisfied or very dissatisfied with the outcome of the investigation because Ombudsman Services no longer ask them.

On 31st May 2013 we wrote to The Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Employment Relations and Consumer Affairs:

"Dear Jo Swinson,

Apparently, The RICS is,

"Governed by a Royal Charter approved by Parliament which requires it to act in the public interest."

We have already attempted to bring our complaint our complaint about the RICS and the company it set up, (to supposedly "investigate" complaints brought by British taxpayers and consumers against its Members or Regulated Firms)  The Surveyors Ombudsman Service, to the attention of the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

We complained that along with us, the majority of consumers usine this dispute resolution service got an illogical Final Decision from the Ombudsman, Gillian Fleming. (DJS Research: Customer Satisfaction Reports - 2009/10/11)

Independent research carried out for The SOS - or as it is now known: Ombudsman Services:Property - by DJS Research catalogues what a disaster this company is for the consumer. We first complained to Gillian Fleming but without success. Then to the Chair, Dame Janet Finch who passed our complaint to the CO, The Rev Lewis Shand Smith. He in turn passed it back to the Ombudsman, Gillian Fleming, who said she'd already answered our complaint

Only she hadn't.

 Which is why we took our complaint to the Chair of OS:P, Dame Janet Finch.

In short, that is how The SOS/OS:P set about handling complaints about their service. They simply ignore them. And then contemptuously tell complainants to go away and stop troubling them.

It is extremely effective.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, if these are your best efforts as you put it, then surly they aren't good enough. It is consumers who are complaining about your Members and not, as some might think, the other way 'round. Which side are you on?

In spite of the widespread consumer dissatisfaction with this service there is no formal way of registering a complaint with the company about its abysmal service and abysmal decisions.

This is a dispute resolution service that does very little to actively resolve disputes. (DJS Research: Customer Satisfaction Reports - 2009/10/11)

Having failed to get any answers from the executives at the company, we then wrote to The Rt Hon Vince Cable MP. Norman Lamb MP and Mark Prisk MP. But didn't get a reply from any of them either. Instead the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills set our complaint to the OFT without bothering to tell us because, apparently, it isn't BIS policy to do so.

Why isn't it? This is supposed to be a democracy after all.

In effect, the BIS told us to go away and stop troubling them. It would appear that the department's civil servants are far too busy doing far more important things, like responding to demands made by important people at the RICS. 

Although the BIS don't have the time to listen to the average taxpayer they do seem to listen intently to The RICS eg,

"RICS demands government boost for housebuilders"

and,

"Written evidence submitted by RICS (LOCO 105)

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, doesn't this exactly mirror what happens at Ombudsman Services - you listen intently to The RICS but complain publicly about complainants? 

For an organisation with a Royal Charter granted by Parliament it si remarkably impervious to public scrutiny and seems remarkably masonic in its operations. At the same time, however, it expects that its demands be heard and acted upon. I you research engine articles (academic or otherwise) critical of the RICS, you won't find many:

- Building co.uk:2004 issue 13: Morrell issues RICS Ultimatum. Morrell criticised 

the RICS for its Byzantine structure and lack of accountability.

- www.crplus.co.uk 7th July 2005 rebel resigns after apologising - a senior figure in RICS who attacked his own chief executive for 'creating an empire' at the organisation has resigned. Morgan, Chair of RICS Construction Faculty said last week the empire building of Louis Armstrong (?!) and other senior figures at the group, 'was plunging the institution into chaos.' Mr Morgan also criticised the spending policies of the RICS and its general governance.

Was RICS setting up of the SOS in 2007 to handle complaints about its Members and (Un)Regulated Firms, part of creating that empire?

The above criticisms levelled at the RICS back in 2004'5 are remarkably similar to the ones that we tried to make to The RICS Mk 2 - The SOS/OS:P -  ie, its lack of accountability, its empire building and its general governance.

If BIS ministers do indeed have a brief for 'Regulation' and 'Better Regulation' why are they refusing to scrutinise what is happening at the RICS?

If the Queen's ministers aren't up to the job what chance does the consumer have when confronting an organisation like The RICS? (and its "appointed" scheme, OS:Property)

How is it in the public interest for Parliament to ignore the fact that The RICS can't or won't regulate its own Members or (Un)Regulated Firms but is permitted by Parliament to set up a compan to investigate complaints made by the public against its Members or (Un)Regulated Firms and is then given carte blanche by Parliament to regulate said company?

A company whose Ombudsman, apparently, 'arrives at decisions in an illogical manner?' (DJS Research: Customer Satisfaction Reports - 2009/10/11)

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, if The RICS effectively regulated their Members and (Un)Regulated firms in the first place, surly there would be no need for Ombudsman Services:Property and then you wouldn't have to complain about complainants?

By apparently choosing to ignore the fact that consumers are being handed illogical Final Decisions by the company's Ombudsman aren't government ministers actually condoning and colluding with what must seem to any fair minded person to be a gross injustice?

Otherwise, wouldn't Ministers have already stepped in and done something about it?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why do you no longer ask complainants if they thought their complaint had received an illogical Final Decision and why do you no longer publish this in your annual property report?

This arrangement certainly seems to be in the interests of RICS Members and (UN)Regulated Firms but how can it possibly be in the consumer's interests to be on the receiving end of an illogical Final Decision?

Isn't handing out hundreds (thousands now) of illogical Final Decisions to consumers not far worse than handing your former wife your speeding penalty points? And if not why not?

DJS Research have lost the contract to conduct Customer satisfaction reports. The new company has yet to publish any data on OS:P and yet the executives have informed OFT monitors of the scheme that they would. The company's minutes have also vanished from the face of the earth.

As Under Secretary of State, what are your views on what seems to be a cynical attempt by the company's Chair, Dame Janet Finch and CEO The Rev Lewis Shand Smith, to hide information from the British taxpayer and consumer?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, your predecessor introduced Mutually Acceptable Settlements (MAS) because Provisional Conclusions were a total disaster. In 2016 1% of complainants accepted them - 99% didn't. Does this not go a long way to explain why for some consumers your best efforts will never be good enough?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Clement Jones, with a 1% success rate shouldn't you consider your position and resign?

How is Parliament safeguarding the public interest by allowing this organisation to continue operating in this way?

Is there an Unofficial Secrets Act, whereby in return for politicians not asking questions of the organisation - awkward or otherwise - the organisation in return won't cattle-truck their careers?

Isn't what we are witnessing the gradual privatisation of democracy? Organisations such as The RICS lobby Parliament demanding a government boost for homebuilding whilst individuals who will buy those homes and who then make complaints, will simply be ignored by government departments like the BIS - because it isn't BIS policy to to answer complaints about regulation when it comes to The RICS or its creation - Ombudsman Services:Property?

In turn, how can the OFT's Executive Director, Clive Maxwell, be satisfied with the, 'monitoring' of the SOS/OS:P Scheme approved by his predecessor, Jonathan may, when the scheme's Ombudsman, Gillian Fleming, appears , 'to arrive at decisions in an illogical manner?

Why are government departments allowing consumers to continue taking their complaints to a company whose Ombudsman - according to independent research - arrives at decisions in an illogical manner - surely they've read and understood DJS Research's findings?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, illogical final decisions are certainly Good For Business but how are they Good For Consumers?

Consumer Focus have attempted to alert government to the rigging of the property market. They have said,

'Sometimes an entire market has developed practices that are not working in the customer's interests. The market in regulating surveyors and estate agents is a case in point. We believe this problem has its origins in the RICS' apparent inability to adequately regulate its Members or Regulated Firms.

WE have asked Jonathan May, former Executive Director of the OFT, and now Board member of Consumer Focus, for his views on the matter, but so far we have not received a reply.

As Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Employment relations and Consumer Affairs, how can you justify turning an organisation that asks important questions about The RICS' failure to properly regulate its Members or Regulated Firms into one that offers tips on loft insulation?

Isn't your Party having rings run around it by those Tories who thought Mrs Thatcher didn't go far enough in de-regulating markets? Isn't The RICS a nightmarish vision of the future? And what future does Consumer Focus offer the consumer?

Haven't you actually made it far easier for The RICS empire builders to future develop practices that will not benefit customers because their surveyors will know there's a permanent green light for them to do as they please?

If their very own professional body can't - or won't - regulate what have they possibly to fear from an Ombudsman who seems to arrive at decisions in an illogical manner?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, you have a Memorandum of Understanding with RICS  who monitor your decision making to ensure that it is in their words - effective - is handing a consumer an illogical final decision not part of a market which isn't working in the consumer's interests?

Why has the OFT, year after year, continued to approve a scheme on behalf of the British taxpayer which allows those taxpayers to end up on the recieing end of an illogical final decision?

One of the OFT's criterion (Criterion 9) is for the Ombudsman to be mindful of Human Rights legislation when considering a case. If, according to DJS Research, an Ombudsman is arriving at decisions in an illogical manner don't hose decisions not also violate the Human Rights of the complainant?

If an Ombudsman is not capable of arriving at decisions in a logical manner, surely they're not capable of deciding on Human Rights issues either?

How is the continued governmental approval of a scheme that hands out unjust decisions to the British Taxpayer and consumer, in the public interest? 

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones,  complainants have a Human Right to request a face -to-face meeting with your Ombudsman, how many complainants know of this right and were granted it in 2016?

Jo Swinson did not reply to our letter.

Q. Mr Clark, do you as someone with a close and continuing relationship with this company unreservedly assure consumers that when they take their complaint to Ombudsman Services they will be meticulously investigated by a fair and independent Ombudsman?

Recommendation:

    That DJS Research-like Customer Satisfaction Reports be immediately re-introduced.

 

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is seeking:

- answers from Vince Cable, Mark Prisk, Norman Lamb, Francis Maude, Gillian Fleming, The Rev Smith, Dame Janet Finch, Jo Swinson, Jonathan May, Steven Gould, Walter Merricks, The Independent Assessor, Grant Schapps, Dame Julie Mellor, Sajid Javid, Clive Maxwell, Greg Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones.

- a public enquiry into the workings of Ombudsman Services:Property (a company formerly trading as the SOS before undergoing rebranding) and the role of the RICS.

- compensation for the victims of the ombudsman's illogical Final Decisions and the executive's maladministration.

- the setting up of a truly, "fair" and "independent" redress scheme free from RICS' influence.

Carry On Conservatism - The Trilogy: Carry On Coalition, Carry On Cameron And The Blockbuster Hit - Informay, Informay Everyone's Got It In For May. (596)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary,

and

To the Chair, Ombudsman Services.

For Clarity - Attempt 596.

596) Carry On Conservatism - The Trilogy: Carry On Coalition, Carry On Cameron And The Blockbuster Hit - Informay, Informay Everyones Got It In For May.

Jeremy Corbyn For Prime Minister.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

The myth, carefully constructed by newspapers owned by Rupert Murdock, Lord Rothermere and the Barclay Brothers, that a race of superhuman conservative leaders had somehow evolved separately from Homo Sapiens in a Rift Valley somewhere in The Chilterns, has been exploded once and for all by Theresa May's ludicrous decision to call a general election - after saying she wouldn't and then losing her overall majority.

However, the myth, carefully constructed by the maladministrators at Ombudsman Services, that the Property Ombudsman is both fair and independent, hasn't.

The carry on at Ombudsman Services:Property, carries on and on and on.

Lord Tim Clement Jones, your predecessor Professor Finch was rare amongst sociologists.

Whereas most sociologists begin with an hypothesis - that England is rigidly stratified along class lines or that the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman is both unfair and in the pocket of RICS, then set about amassing as much evidence and data as is possible and then painstakingly analyse and interpret it, publish their findings and offer it up for peer review,  Professor Finch didn't - or so it would seem.

   Otherwise things would surly be different at Ombudsman Services:Property..

One only has to look at Ombudsman Services:Property Annual Reports and DJS Research's Customer Satisfaction Surveys to see that the trend under her stewardship was - somewhat bizarrely - to collect less  and less evidence.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why, when so much is at stake for complainants like Julia, is less evidence being collected today than was the case in 2009-10?

It would seem than when unnamed individuals have the power to reduce financial awards from a high of £1,511.76p in 2009-10 to 50 quid in 2016, that a malign, corrupt and undue influence is being exerted upon a supposedly independent Ombudsman.

   That Gillian Fleming immediately reduced the levels of award - but not the range - which
   was small comfort to property complainants - when told to do so by "concerned" but
   unnamed individuals she exploded the myth that she was both, "fair" and "independent."

DJS Research found that complainants expected more by way of financial award. For some strange reason they weren't listened to.

The mythical independence of the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman would make a fascinating research project for sociologists as would the role of the Chair of Ombudsman Services as impartial mediator and person endowed with unimpeachable integrity.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, when you  criticise complainants for the shortcomings of your cheap and cheerless private redress scheme, how are you demonstrating unimpeachable integrity and impartiality as a mediator?

Q. Mr Clark, with your close and continuing relationship with the maladministrators at Ombudsman Services are you able to assure complainants - unreservedly - that each and every one of them will have their property complaints meticulously, independently and fairly investigated?

Recommendation 2: That Sociology and Social Studies are part of the core curriculum of schools so that future generations of pupils will graduate equipped with the knowledge and skills to know a dodgy newspaper and redress scheme when they see one.

Yours sincerely,

501458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com

595) Topseyturvey World" Natalie Merchant.

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary,

And,

To the Chair, Ombudsman Services.

For Clarity - Attempt 595.

Jeremy Corbyn For Prime Minister.

595) "Topsyturvey World" Natalie Merchant.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

In 2009 the average ratio (to workers) of chief executives' pay had risen from 47 to 128 over the past 10 years (www.theguardian.com>Business>Executivepay). By 2016 chief executives earned 183 times more than their workers. (www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33952393)

Flat U, 95 Eaton Square, London, SW1W9AQ (leasehold) had risen in price from £7.300.000 Sept 27 2010 to £15.056.000 06 Feb 2017.

But somewhat bizarrely and seemingly in defiance of the basic tenets of economics, Property complainants' "financial awards" had fallen from £1.511.76p in 2009 to 50 quid in 2016. That is an extraordinary logic defying trend.

 

     It really is a really topseyturvey world at Ombudsman Services where instead of three     times one equalling nine, it seems that three times nine equals one.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, how do you account for these extraordinary figures?

 

The RICS, who according to Consumer Focus, are apparently unable to adequately regulate their Members and Member Firms - and so hand their problems over to you - also have a Memorandum of Understanding with their redress scheme regarding the "effective resolution of disputes."

These are disputes that arose because RICS couldn't, in the first instance, effectively regulate their very own Members and Member Firms. A regulator which can't regulate - there's a thing.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, is reducing financial awards for Property disputes from £1.511.76p to 50 quid, "an effective resolution of a dispute?"

Q. Lord Tin Clement Jones, when house prices and the cost of surveys have both gone up how do you explain the downward trend in financial awards other than RICS' direct interference in the independence of the Ombudsman's ability to make independent decisions?

Libor rates were rigged in the banking sector and rates of redress for Property complainants appear to be being freely rigged at this private redress scheme.

RICS are Regulators,  who according to one branch of government can't regulate and yet who send their Members' disputes to their "appointed" redress scheme, have or had, Steven Gould RICS and Walter Merricks RICS sitting on the board and a Memorandum of Understanding determining, "the effective resolution of disputes," and a, "close and continuing relationship" with another branch of government. This seems about as rigged as it could possibly get.

Otherwise things would be different.

Q. Mr Clark, are you able to assure consumers that when they take their complex and expensive complaints to Ombudsman Services:Property that they will each be meticulously investigated by a truly independent Ombudsman?

 

Recommendation 1:  

   RICS cease all involvement with Ombudsman Services and start effectively   regulating their Members and (Un)Regulated Firms.

 

   Yours sincerely,

501458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com

OmbudsmansServices' Liberal Lord Victimises Victims. (594)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary,

and

To the Chair, Ombudsman Services.

For Clarity - Attempt 594.

594) Ombudsman Services' Liberal Lord Victimises Victims.

Jeremy Corbyn for Prime Minister.

Congratulations Luke Pollard - Plymouth's Sutton and Devonport new Labour MP.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

Blaming victims for the shortcomings of an organisation whose Ombudsman doesn't, "routinely ask questions" - or answer them - is about as sensible as calling an early general election, after saying you wouldn't, and then contriving to lose your majority.

    Although, "everyone who contacts OS is treated with respect, honesty and integrity - they     are far more than a number" this doesn't apply to, "some consumers" for whom, "our best   efforts will never be enough."

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, how many consumers are dissatisfied with your best efforts and why don't you number them in your Annual Report? 

In the three years when DJS Research carried out Customer Satisfaction Reports for the company, dissatisfaction levels rose from 61% to 64%. DJS Research were replaced and the figures went with them.

One can only guess at where they stand today. Lord Tim Clement Jones isn't saying.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, just what exactly are those numberless dissatisfied consumers dissatisfied with - you don' say?

Before DJS Research's services were given the heave-ho they were able to highlight deep levels of complainant dissatisfaction with so-called "financial awards" grudgingly handed out like Maundy money by an Ombudsman keen to ensure that Members were getting value for money.

The company's minutes for 15th December 2009 state,

"5.8 The Chief Executive noted that there had 'been some concern' over the levels of recent awards."

There certainly was and what happened? See for yourself - although as Chair you will already know.

In 2009-10 the average award for property complaints was: £1.511.76p.

In 2016 it stands at a massive 50 quid.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why have Property "financial awards" plummeted from £1.511.76p to a paltry 50 quid?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why are these derisory, so-called, "financial awards" no longer broken down as was once the case?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why do you no longer inform property complainants that the maximum "financial award" is £25K and how many managed to hit the £25K jackpot?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, 1166 property complaints were "resolved" by the Ombudsman in 2016 which could have resulted in RICS surveyors having to pay out £29.150.000 (£29.1M). However 64% got an average award of £50 - or £37.300. Does this not go some way in explaining why complainants are so dissatisfied with your, "best efforts?"

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, who expressed "some concern" over the level of financial awards and isn't this a corrupt and criminal interference in the supposed independence of the Ombudsman?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, doesn't such interference in the running of this private redress scheme explode the myth that the Ombudsman is independent?

Q. Lord |Tim Clement Jones, isn't the truth of the matter RICS click their fingers and you jump to attention?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why weren't DJS Research's concerns listened to and Property complainants financial awards raised in line with customer expectations?   

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why are the company's minutes no longer published on your company's website for your numberless victims to scrutinise?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, are you demonstrating unimpeachable integrity when you blame consumers for your organisation's failure to live up to their expectations?

The company's CEO and Chief Ombudsman, The Rev Smith, refers to complainants as, "a stock of work."

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, isn't the truth of the matter that we are all numbers in a private redress scheme that very efficiently feeds us in one end and dumps us out the other?

The company's Annual Property Report has gone from 8 pages to I and "financial awards" from £1.115.76p to 50 quid. Complainants were once asked what they thought of their, "customer journey." Now their opinions are no longer sought. Instead they're patronised by Lord Tim Clement Jones.

Q. Mr Clark, according to Prof. Dame Janet Finch, the former Chair of this company, your department has a close and continuing relationship with Ombudsman Services. Do you still assure consumers that when they take their complaint to this private redress scheme they will be treated with respect, honestly and integrity and that they will have their complaint expertly investigated by an independent Ombudsman?

Yours sincerely,

Victim 501458.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com

Ombudsman Services - The Vanishing Statistical Evidence, Transparency and Accountability. (593)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary

and

To the Chair of Ombudsman Services, Lord Tim Clement Jones

For Clarity - Attempt 593.

Well done Jeremy Corbyn.

   Congratulations Luke Pollard the new MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport.

593) Ombudsman Services - The Vanishing Statistical Evidence, Transparency and Accountability.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

The previous Chair of Ombudsman Services, Prof Dame Janet Finch, had an apparent deep phobia for statistical data and information - especially when it came to OS:Property - as was evidenced by the evisceration of such information under her maladministration. (You will be aware of the First and Last Independent Assessment by the company's previous Independent Assessor who had never seen such instances of maladministration in an ombudsman service up until then.)

In 2009-10 the Annual Property Report ran to 8 pages. The 2016 Property Report is now 2 pages, one of which is waffle.

The Head of ERCE oft wrote to us on the 8th February 2013 stating,

"I have investigated this matter (the replacement of DJS Research by a new research company) and understand that OSP has confirmed that the new company will ask the same questions as those used in previous surveys, with the addition of some new questions about the OSP website.

Should we have any concerns about the surveys conducted by the new company, however, we will raise these directly with OSP."

Really? Just look for yourselves. But of course you will already know this.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why is there in effect only one page of scant statistical evidence relating to consumers' Property complaints?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why are complainants no longer asked if they thought the Property Ombudsman, "arrived at decisions in a logical manner" when it came to "investigating" their complaint?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why are property complainants no longer asked if they were: very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with Final Decision handed to them by the Property Ombudsman?

It is patently obvious that the same questions are not being asked or reported upon. Just look for yourselves. But you will already know this.

Q. Mr Clark, why have government civil servants shown no concern over the total failure of the new research company to ask the same questions as DJS Research?

Q. Mr Clark, why replace a company with a proven track record in research with one that will simply replicate what has already been done remarkably well, if not to hide the disturbing truth that the Property Ombudsman is neither fair nor independent?

Q. Mr Clark, why is the Conservative government allowing consumers to take costly property disputes to a private redress scheme that is so lacking in transparency and accountability?

The job description for The New Chair of Ombudsman Services insisted that the new incumbent have - "unimpeachable integrity."

Lord Tim Clement Jones you have said,

"This is an inclusive vision that everyone can identify with and benefit from."

You then immediately contradict this by attacking certain consumers. You state,

"For some consumers our best efforts will never be enough - their expectations of our service and the powers we have to resolve an issue are too great." 

Your Member Firms (rebranded Participating Companies) - especially RICS surveyors - get no such public dressing down.

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, by your own words you are clearly Good For Business but Bad For Certain Consumers, is this not blatant bias on your part and have you not impeached yourself?

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com and Facebook.

"For some consumers our best efforts will never be enough - their expectations of our service and the powers we have to resolve an issue are too great." Lord Tim Clement Jones. (592)

   To the Business, Industry and Industrial Strategy Secretary:

And

Lord Tim Clement Jones, Chair, Ombudsman Services.

For Clarity - Attempt 592.

592) "For some consumers our best efforts will never be enough - their expectations of our service and the powers we have to resolve an issue are too great." Lord Tim Clement Jones, Chair, Ombudsman Services.

Dear Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones,

Good Lord - what has the world come to?

We now have uppity consumers (obviously from peasant stock) with the temerity to challenge the, "eye wateringly ludicrous decisions" that are handed down to them by your motley crew, Lord Tim Clement Jones.

In one of our first Attempts At Being More Specific - a very long time ago now - we quoted Julia, who thought OS:Property's best efforts were simply not good enough.

She said,

"We chuckle when we read the reply from our surveyor to our complaint - please refer to the surveyors Ombudsman!! That was a no risk strategy for them!

It has been eye wateringly ludicrous! We have suffered financial loss and severe health issues.

I really do want to tell my story if for nothing more than to help other people."

We hope Julia was able to recover from her ordeal at the hands of the Ombudsman Services:Property Ombudsman and well enough to tell her story.

That she was able to help others. 

It's taking us a very long time to tell ours although we sincerely hope we've helped others avoid the con that is the RICS surveyors' ombudsman scheme - by taking their complaint elsewhere.

Q. Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones, why is it a, "no risk strategy" for RICS surveyors to refer their dissatisfied clients to their RICS "appointed" ombudsman?

Q. Mr Clark and Lord Tim Clement Jones, why has it been, "eye wateringly ludicrous" for Julia and countless numbers of other consumers who - in spite of what you say Lord Tim Clement Jones - have not been treated honestly or with respect?

Q. Lord Tim Clement Jones, why have you failed so abysmally to ask property complainants what they thought of the "service" you've provided them?

Have a nice day and make sure you vote Labour.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com

Ombudsman Services and Lord Tim Clement Jones. (591)

To the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary:

For Clarity - Attempt 591.

591) Ombudsman Services and Lord Tim Clement Jones.

Dear Mr Clark,

The new chair of Ombudsman Services, Lord Tim Clement Jones, says in his first foreword,

"Everyone who contacts Ombudsman Services is treated with respect, honesty and integrity - they are far more then just a number."

(Ombudsman Services Annual Report January - December 2016)

It has taken six months to publish not very much.

Q. Mr Clark, if what Lord Tim Clement Jones says is correct, why hasn't a single property complainant been asked if they feel they have been treated with: respect, honesty and integrity by his company?

He goes on to say,

"This is an inclusive vision that everyone can identify with and benefit from."

Q. Mr Clark, if this is indeed true why hasn't Lord Tim Clement Jones asked property complainants if:

 a) they share his vision

and

b) have benefitted from it?

It would seem that some consumers see things very differently from Lord Tim.

He tells us,

"For some consumers our best efforts will never be enough - their expectations of our service and the powers we have to resolve an issue are too great."

Q. Mr Clark, isn't the truth of the matter this - that this company's best efforts

simply aren't good enough?

This is a private redress scheme, that claims to "investigate" consumers' complaints with honesty and integrity and yet can't be bothered to ask those very same consumers if they are satisfied or dissatisfied with their, "customer journey."

They're really just numbers after all.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Gilbert.

The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is at: www.blogger.com