Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

holdon

I am in the concluding stages of dealing with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) and seek advice/assistance from anybody who has experienced the 'service'.
I wrote (24/12/2015) to the PHSO following a detailed complaint to firstly BT secondly Ofcom and the Ombudsman Service-Communications(OSC) and finally the PHSO. The PHSO say they have investigated my complaint and I received the final 'adjudication' which, in my opinion, is flawed in that it contains false assertions and less than accurate conclusions, they also state that Ofcom have no control over the OSC which in itself is less than encouraging, I understand that the OSC is the independent Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) organisation responsible for, amongst other things, complaints against telecommunication service providers. I also understand that in order to be appointed the OSC are required to be controlled/appointed by a 'competent authority', in this case I understand this to be Ofcom. Both the Ofcom and OSC websites advertise each other.
I have not received a reply from the PHSO to my letter of 24/12/2015 which was very detailed and contained further evidence in support of my contentions and discrediting what I had been advised by the PHSO.
The decisions of the OSC were flawed by the use of false assertions and incorrect conclusions, this was endorsed by a review by the OSC ombudsman, there was a review by the Independent Assessor(IA) who found in my favour on a number of issues surrounding 'maladministration' by the OSC, unfortunately his remit does not permit his to comment on the validity or otherwise of the OSC report, it was most clear from the IA report that the OSC are not equipped to deal with complaints about maladministration as their own is so bad.
I am haunted by maladministration issues as the PHSO appear to be suffering from the same problem, if nobody understands maladministration then where do you go to get a 'fair and just' hearing on a complaint. I believe that maladministration is important as when exhibited it throws the entire process into question and promotes 'distrust'.
I will be most grateful for suggestions based on experiences and for the future prospects and handling of my complaint.
For the removal of doubt, my 'post' is specific when referring to my problem with a telecom matter, the Ombudsman Service also present themselves as the ADR on other matters, including utilities. I have now posted this also on the telecom and broadband page.

iproposterous

I haven't much time to do a full post but would like to say that I have had similar problems with the Ombudsman Services Communications (OSC) They just ignore their Guiding Principles, Decision Guidelines and Terms Of Reference.

I have complained to Ofcom so we will see how they react to my complaint.

Cardew

This is the LPG and heating oils forum

Ectophile

First, what's this got to do with LPG, Solid and Other Fuels?

Also, according to their web site, the PHSO do not investigate complaints related to telecommunications. They probably aren't answering because it's nothing to do with them. The "Parliamentary and Health Service" bit is a bit of a clue there.

If you think you have a claim against BT, you could always take them to court. Otherwise, the appointed ombudsman has said that they do not think you have a case.

holdon

The real clue is that the PHSO investigate government departments, this includes Ofcom, it is therefor a matter for the PHSO.
I am aware that I entered the post on the wrong forum page but this I have corrected.
With the greatest respect, please read my post, although on wrong page it is suggestive of what my problem is and has been, I have also posted on the telecom/broadband forum page.

[Deleted User]

Hi, I'm in the middle of a complaint against the NHS, but I haven't quite got to the stage of referring it to the PHSO yet. The prospects don't look good though.

By their own admission, the PHSO rejects 99% of all complaints, 98% of those without even investigating (even the IPCC upholds 14% of complaints). There is an organisation here campaigning to reform the PHSO, but I don't hold out much hope, they are telling much the same story as you: of the PHSO arrogantly rejecting evidence that doesn't suit them for no reason. Hansard is very revealing on the matter, it's seems that the PHSO was deliberately designed to just fob the public off. At the time the ombudsman was set up in 1967 MPs were congratulating themselves on having created a "swindle," a "fraud," and a "nonentity":


“The Bill was always drafted to be a swiz, and now it is spelt into the Bill…………Anyone who contemplates an office of this kind is faced with the dilemma of making it either a Frankenstein or a nonentity—a Frankenstein if it has effective powers and a nonentity if it has not. The Government, quite rightly, has opted for its being a nonentity, and in that sense it is a fraud……… I congratulate the Government on its being a nonentity. A Frankenstein would, I think, have undermined the power of Ministers......”

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1967/jan/24/clause-5-matters-subject-to-investigation
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1967/jan/24/schedule-3-matters-not-subject-to

holdon

I am obliged for your reply jack..pott and I wish you luck with your 'issue'.
If people complain with a 'justifiable' complaint the PHSO should be forced to investigate by pressure groups, unfortunately I cannot yet find one.
I understand that 'resolve' is trying but it ends up being the 'resolve' of the complainant that hopefully wins through, with the assistance of your MP if you are lucky enough to have one that is active.

Ectophile

holdon wrote: »

The real clue is that the PHSO investigate government departments, this includes Ofcom, it is therefor a matter for the PHSO.
I am aware that I entered the post on the wrong forum page but this I have corrected.
With the greatest respect, please read my post, although on wrong page it is suggestive of what my problem is and has been, I have also posted on the telecom/broadband forum page.

I did read your post. Any connection is getting pretty tenuous. Ofcom have only a vague role to oversee the OSC, not second-guess each of their decisions.

But if the PHSO have rejected your complaint, then I think you've run out of ombudsmen.

holdon

This is not a case of OSC making a decision which is based on fact but where the OSC have made several 'false assertions' in an attempt at justifying the BT conclusion to a complaint of negligence which is both factual and evidence based.
The Independent Assessor found in my favour regarding the 'maladministration' of the OSC but unfortunately could not comment on the decisions/conclusion of the OSC, the decision/conclusions of the OSC are flawed which I have evidenced to the OSC and this is confirmed in later reports from their own ombudsman.
I am not the only person to have had 'questionable' decisions made by the OSC and you really do need to have experienced these yourself to comment on the decision making process of the OSC, they believe they are untouchable, I have my doubts because of the requirement to have a 'Competent Authority' approve the ADR scheme that the OSC merely administer.

iproposterous

I did read your post. Any connection is getting pretty tenuous. Ofcom have only a vague role to oversee the OSC, not second-guess each of their decisions.

I'm afraid that what you said above just isn't true. Ofcom is in the industry regulator for communications (including ISP's). If you have a complaint against say BT then you should send a copy of your complaint to Ofcom so that they are aware of the nature of your complaint.

Ofcom insists that the likes of BT has in place a Alernative Dispute Resolution scheme (ADR) for when you cannot reach agreement with your provider.

The OSC is the ADR scheme for some of the ISP's and is approved by Ofcom. Ofcom and the OSC are bound by the The ADR for Consumer Disputes Regulations 2015.

I have taken my case against the OSC to Ofcom for the way in which they handled my case. If I have cause for complaint against Ofcom then my next port of call is the PHSO as they are the ombudsman service for all government bodies (i.e. Ofcom).

I hope this in some way clarifies the "tenuous connection" for you.

[Deleted User]

holdon wrote: »

If people complain with a 'justifiable' complaint the PHSO should be forced to investigate by pressure groups

Scotland Yard are currently investigating the PHSO on 30 counts of Misconduct in Public Office for failing to properly investigate complaints. Three months after the investigation started the Law Commission announced plans to abolish the law of Misconduct. Who's going to force them if the Met Police can't?

http://phsothefacts.com/misconduct-in-public-office/
http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/misconduct-in-public-office/