Our custom search bar searches the
following web-sites. Local
Govermment Ombudsman Watchers, Public Service Ombudsman Watchers,
Ombudsman Watchers Resource Centre, Scottish Public Service Ombudsman
Watchers, Associated Web-sites & Blogs, the LGO, PHSO, Scottish PSO
and the PSO for Wales.
Welcome
Welcome to the Public Services and Local Government Ombudsman
Watchers Resource Centre.
This resource centre, a one stop shop if you like, is being developed
to house all the information and evidence we collect concerning the
activities of Public Service and Local Government Ombudsmen! This is a
long term project that we anticipate will take a number of years to
complete. We hope you find this facility useful. Please note we still
have a tremendous amount of information to upload so please be patient.
Local Government Ombudsman
They, lie to complainants ~ lie to Government Departments ~ lie to the public ~ collude with councils ~ fabricate documents ~ misinterpret statutes, policies and guides etc in favour of the council ~ manipulate evidence in favour of the council ~ use fallacious reasoning/argument to explain their perverse findings ~ don't allow a complainant to see or challenge much of the evidence ~ manipulate/fiddle their statistics to hide the truth ~ manipulate/fiddle customer satisfaction surveys in their favour ~ are biased in favour of the council ~ don't understand many of the technical and legal issues surrounding a complaint ~ often ignore legal and human rights issues ~ very rarely criticise any council officer for lying or misleading them ~ allow councils to misuse 1974 LG Act part III section 32(3) notices ~ very rarely admit their mistakes ~ often terminate a complaint after a quick telephone conversation with the council ~ are unaccountable ~ are not fit for the purpose ~ constantly raise the level of injustice a complainant has to suffer before they will investigate a complaint ~ often use linguistic gymnastics to evade the truth ~ use delay as a tactical tool to help councils and exhaust other avenues of possible redress ~ attack the complainant for asking a question rather than answering the question ~ misuse their own policy and guidelines ~ ignore natural justice and the law when it suits them ~ misuse discretion ~ are toothless tigers ~ dilute the remedies they recommend after discussion with a council ~ defy logic ~ double and in some cases triple count complaints to artificially boost complaint numbers ~ label complainants unreasonable when they challenge their perverse findings ~ alter deadlines to make it easier for councils to meet them ~ waste taxpayer's money ~ don't meet the criteria for membership of the British and Irish Ombudsman's Association ~ are ineffective in reducing maladministration ~ betray the good citizens of this country ~ are impotent ~ allow councils to swap Ombudsmen but don't allow complainants the same freedom ~ are guilty of mission creep ~ often use argumentum verbosium ~ ignore inconvenient facts ~ have developed a system in which maladministration pays ~ fail to meet complainant expectations ~ often ignore part of a complaint altogether ~ break their promises ~ fail to keep adequate records ~ they give investigators a bonus if they close a complaint down quickly ~ recruit most of their staff from councils.
Want to let others know how the LGO have
mishandled your complaint?
Then why not use this resource centre to tell them.
Don't get mad get even. Publish your case study, personal account, letter or
tell others what you think about Ombudsmen on the public forum
