-
Is it worth submitting a
complaint to the LGO?
Yes and no, in many cases a
complainant has no other form of redress so even though the odds
are heavily stacked against them it is still worth pursuing a
complaint through the LGO. If you do submit a complaint to the
LGO you can significantly increase your chances of success by
taking a number of precautions. A list will be published very
soon. In any event, the LGO have to find in favour of some
complainants or else they would give the game away. You never
know, you may just be one of the lucky ones! If you can afford it
and you have any form of legal redress against the authority in
question then it is almost certainly better to take legal action
rather than involve the LGO. In one case a Solicitor managed to
recover damages of £5,000 when the complainant would have
been lucky to have been awarded £200 by the LGO. Why do you
think most authorities actively encourage complainants to take
their complaint to the LGO? The last thing they want you to do is
seek legal advice!
[Back to the top]
-
What should replace the
LGO?
The LGO should be replaced by
local tribunals. Similar in many ways to an employment tribunal.
Local Councils should be made to fund such tribunals and either
party should be able to appeal a tribunal decision in a court of
law. That would bring the system into line with the Human Rights
Act as far as accountability, oral hearings and the right to a
fair trial is concerned. In addition their findings should be
legally binding on both parties and enforceable. The Chair of the
tribunal should have legal experience and qualifications. In
addition they should not be ex authority personnel. Justice
should not only be done it should be seen to be done. That's not
possible with the LGO but it is possible with a tribunal.
Anything would be better than the LGO
[Back to the top]
-
How much does the LGO cost the
taxpayer?
The Ombudsman state that the
average cost of a complaint during 2005/6 was £640. They
also state that they had 18, 321 complaints during the period
with a total running cost of some £11.7 million. The
problem is that the LGO have a habit of using smoke and mirror
tactics to improve the publics perception of their cost
effectiveness. For example, when they give out figures for
settlements they always give the highest figure but when they
give out the figures for costs they always give out the lowest
figure. If they used the same criteria for both they would
produce the following figures. All complaints, cost of each
complaint approx £640, average compensation approx
£92 Complaints within their remit, cost of complaints
approx £1064, average compensation £152 Each
complaint that the LGO investigate costs £1400 and the
average compensation received is only £201. Even if a
complainant is successful the average compensation recommended by
the LGO is only a paltry £620. Their statement that the
average cost of a complaint is £640 can only be achieved by
including complaints they are not legally entitled to consider.
The question auditors should be asking is why do the LGO include
complaints they are not legally entitled to consider?
[Back to the top]
-
Can I appeal against the LGO's
findings?
No. There is no appeals
mechanism, the LGO's decision is final. Having said that there
are three avenues open to a complainant who is not satisfied with
an LGO's decision. The first is to ask the Ombudsmen to review
the decision, the second is to seek a Judicial Review of the
Ombudsman's decision and the third is to tell everyone about it.
The problem with asking the Ombudsman to review the decision,
which has usually been taken by a junior member of their staff,
is the fact that they rely on a summary prepared by the very
person who's decision you are challenging. That makes the review
inherently unfair because it allows the investigator to skew the
summary in support of their original decision. When you also take
into account that the LGO don't like to admit they ever make
mistakes, getting them to change their decision is extremely
difficult.
Embarking on a JR against the LGO is essentially a waste of time
and money for a number of reasons. Firstly, even if you win the
best a Judge can do is ask the LGO to look at their decision
again. Secondly, the LGO use a devious tactic to block Judicial
Reviews. If you have a good case they will offer to review their
decision at the last minute. If you accept their offer you are
stuck with your own costs up to that point and after another
delay (Just long enough to stop you launching another Judicial
Review of their original decision.) they just reaffirm their
original decision. That means you would have top start the whole
costly process again. And round and round the judicial mulberry
bush you go. If you don't accept their offer to review their
decision and proceed with a Judicial Review the Judge has no
option but to make an award for costs against you. The rationale
being that the Judge couldn't give you more than you have already
been offered and as a result you have technically wasted the
courts time. You then have to find the LGO's costs as well as
your own. (If you have the money to take court action take it
against the authority that caused the injustice in the first
place, don't waste your time and money on the LGO.)
The third option is to tell others what an unfair and unjust
system the LGO operate. The LGO hate to have their rock lifted
because their perverse decisions are exposed to public scrutiny.
Write to your MP, write to your local paper, write a blog, make a
fuss and never give up. Keep asking the Ombudsman to review your
case and one day they may realise that the only way they are
going to get rid of you is if they can openly and honestly
justify their original decision. The LGO can't argue with that
because in a recent LGO survey carried out by BMG they identified
that this was a key requirement. If the LGO expect complainants
to accept their decisions they should give full reasoning behind
every decision and show both parties the evidence they relied on.
You can make it difficult for them to ignore a proper
review.
[Back to the top]
-
What can I do to
help?
If you have any information
that you think the public should be aware of please consider one
of the following options, If you have information about a
particular council write a short summary and submit it to the
Local Government Watchers Blog If you have information about the
LGO write a short summary and submit it to us. If you would like
to publish a full account of your experience with the Local
Government Ombudsman for the benefit of others please consider
publishing the information either with us or on a blog. We can
assure you it's very cathartic after years of being put down by
the LGO and Local Government. The bottom line is that the more
people who go public about their experience with the LGO the
better. We are aware that thousands of people are dissastified
with the LGO and when all these people let the public know they
are dissatisfied something may be done about the problem. Don't
keep your experience to yourself tell the world.
[Back to the top]
-
Has anyone tried to do
something about the problem?
Yes. In the past a few people
have attempted to do something about the problem. The situation
improved with the launch of the Ombudsman Watch website. That
allowed people to realise that they were not alone in their
struggle for justice against the LGO and Local Government. Quite
a few people also gave evidence to the select committee inquiry
into the 'Role and Effectiveness of the Local Government
Ombudsman". More recently a number of Local Government Ombudsman
Watchers also started blogging about the LGO. This website was
started by members of the LGO watchers blog ring.
[Back to the top]
-
Why won't the Government
improve the LGO?
It is not in the Governments
interest for the truth about Local Government maladministration
to be made public. That's why they continue to support such a
corrupt institution. They were given the chance of improving the
system when a Government select committee looked into the 'Role
and Effectiveness of the Local Government Ombudsman'. Many
complainants gave evidence to that inquiry. The interesting point
being that no one gave evidence in support of the LGO. What was
the eventual outcome? The Government replaced the chairman of the
select committee and the matter was quietly dropped. If you are
interested you can read the damning evidence against the LGO that
was submitted by dissatisfied complainants to the select
committee
here. LGO support local government by hiding the true
levels of maladministration. So consequently the Government hide
the problems with the LGO.
[Back to the top]
-
Can I complain about the
LGO?
The LGO have an internal
complaints procedure. Should you wish to complain about a member
of staff you should write to the Deputy Ombudsman marking your
letter 'Internal Complaint'. If you have a complaint about the
Deputy Ombudsman you have no option but to write to the
Ombudsman. (I can assure you that after the Deputy Ombudsman has
dealt with your internal complaint you will have a complaint
about the Deputy Ombudsman.) If you have a complaint about the
Ombudsman you have no option but to write to the Ombudsman.
Unlike the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the Local
Government Ombudsman is not accountable so you have no one to
turn to if you have a complaint about the Local Government
Ombudsman. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely.
[Back to the top]
-
What is a provisional
decision?
The LGO often issue a
provisional decision prior to a release of a formal decision. The
LGO suggest this is so the authority and the complainant have a
chance to comment on the decision and bring to the LGO's
attention anything that they may have overlooked before their
formal decision is released. In reality a provisional decision is
very rarely changed. Floating a provisional decision allows them
to test the water to see what happens.The LGO just use the
information from the complainant to shore up a poor decision.
This is one of the oldest tactics in the book and has been used
by poor decision makers for years. The LGO never admit they are
wrong they just shore up or hide bad decisions. A provisional
decision is very rarely changed.
[Back to the top]
-
What is a local
settlement?
During an investigation if an
investigator finds evidence of maladministration the authority
are given the chance to buy off the finding of maladministration
and a formal report by offering to locally settle the complaint.
Unlike normal settlements this has nothing to do with the
complainant. The settlement is agreed between the LGO and the
authority. Both benefit from a local settlement, the authority
benefits because their is no report proving maladministration and
the LGO benefit because they don't have to bother writing a
report. The problem is that the complainants human rights to
justice has been compromised because whether they choose to
accept the paltry sum offered by the authority in settlement or
not the LGO still terminate the complaint. The reason why the LGO
call it a local settlement is just a smoke and mirrors attempt to
distort reality. They do not have the statutory authority to
settle a case. They only have the discretionary right to
terminate an investigation. What they do is suggest to everyone
that the have terminated an investigation because a local
settlement has been reached. That gives everyone the impression
that the case has been amicably settled between the authority and
the complainant whilst in reality nothing could be further from
the truth. The LGO has no statutory power to settle a
case!
[Back to the top]
-
What is the Comeback
Procedure? The Local Government
Ombudsman's Comeback Procedure states The term comeback is used
when a complaint has been determined without a formal report and
the complainant alleges that one or more of the following apply:
1. The complaint, or a material part of it, has not been
understood by the commission's staff; 2. Evidence submitted
before termination has not been taken into account; 3. The
council has not been telling the true story and evidence of this
is provided; or 4. New information has been supplied about the
original complaint If the complainant meets any of the stated
criteria, the initial decision not to investigate their complaint
should be reviewed by a senior officer.
[Back to the top]
-
Are the LGO
impartial?
The definition of impartial is
'Impartiality is a principle of justice holding that decisions
should be based on objective criteria, rather then on the basis
of bias, prejudice, or preferring the benefit to one person over
another for improper reasons.' The LGO has a policy of
believing the authority without any sort of prudent validation
whilst expecting the complainant to provide overwhelming
evidence. That policy is prejudicial because it clearly favours
an authority over a complainant. One member of staff is even on
record stating that an authority would not mislead (lie) to them.
That assumption is prejudicial because it also favours the
authority over the complainant.
[Back to the top]
-
What are the odds on getting a
formal report?
During 2005/6 some 18321 people
submitted a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman. Out of
these the Local Government Ombudsman only issued 120 reports
upholding (or partly upholding) a complaint of maladministration
causing injustice. When you initially submit your complaint the
odds of achieving that are a very slim 0.0066. That's only 66
complaints out of every 10,000 submitted or odds of about 150 to
1, no wonder local authorities like the LGO and complainants
think they are just a waste of time.
[Back to the top]
-
What level of compensation can
I expect? During 2005/6 the LGO
recommended to councils that they pay a total of £1.67
million in compensation. Out of 18321 complaints 2692 of those
either had their complaint upheld or settled by the LGO. If your
complaint is upheld about £620 on average (Note: councils
are not obliged in law to follow the LGO's recommendation so you
may end up with nothing)
[Back to the top]
-
Why is my complaint taking so
long?
The LGO have always given the
authorities much more time to respond to their letters than they
give a complainant. (So much for impartiality) The LGO even
extended the time they allowed authorities to respond because the
majority were missing the deadline. Authorities can and do ignore
it with impunity. All the LGO ever do is mention the authority's
response times in their annual letters. If they ever get to the
point where the majority of authorities are missing the deadline,
no doubt the LGO will just extend it like they have done in the
past. In many cases the LGO is also guilty of wasting time.
Delays of up to six weeks have been recorded between the LGO
passing on information from one party to the other. The LGO and
the authority under investigation can delay the proceedings for
as long as they want. That way you will be exhausted by their
complaints procedure long before you exhaust their complaints
procedure.
[Back to the top]
-
What statutory powers do the
LGOhave?
The Local Government Ombudsman
was set up by statute in 1974. The Government of the day used the
1974
Local Government Act Part III to empower the LGO.
[Back to the top]