8/18/2019 Complaint About Final Decision

1/1

COMPLAINT ABOUT LGO’s FINAL DECISION

(Case ID – 15016673) 

From: Xxxxx To: J.Burns@coinweb.lgo.org.ukSent: Monday, March 28, 2016 4:40 PMSubject: Re: Confidential: Case ID - 15016673 (COMPLAINT)

Dear Ms Burns 

Complaint 

I note from various items of correspondence that the Ombudsman is mindful of using publicresources sparingly which suggests to me that the vast majority of complaints have to befiltered out. I guess this is enabled by the fact that the LGO, being a statutory complaintsprocess, can apply the law so that one or a number of exemptions can be applied to justify

rejecting a complaint based upon it being outside the organisation's jurisdiction. The statutorynature of the process serves as protection for the organisation from those already aggrievedby their council who are further let-down by the LGO as it is able to threaten them with theprospects of having to enter the casino justice system (judicial review) if they disagree with itsdecision.

The law has been enacted to enable its application with such flexibility that the samecomplaint could either fall within the LGO's remit and be accepted for investigation or beconsidered outside its remit and be rejected. The law can therefore be applied so thatcomplaints which are valid and cause the aggrieved person undue amount of injustice, can ifthe organisation has no desire to address it, call up the law to back up its decision. Anyonetaking the only action open to them which is the High Court would not, in my mind stand achance of success because the law covers all angles in favour of the LGO. A system which Iassume is in place to provide a safety net for the oppression of local authorities must bequestioned in respect to why its function relies on having the ability to magnify the injusticeinfinitely by inviting litigation in the High Court.

The organisation appears not to provide any deterrent to local authorities from causinginjustice to its residents, presumably because they know that the probability is low with regardto complaints made against them being investigated and upheld. A changein policy, which involves a tougher approach might not only improve the attitude of localgovernment but have the affect of lessening the strain on resources as the number ofcomplaints escalated to the organisation would likely plummet. 

Regarding my complaint specifically, I can hardly add more to what I have already submitted

in my representations. They have in my mind been completely ignored and can not possiblysee how the LGO, if this is typical of all cases, can claim to be acting in the interest oftaxpayers who are affected by oppressive councils. The existence of the Ombudsman in mycase has clearly made the gross injustice suffered at the hands of the council at least tentimes as bad.

 

Yours sincerely 

X. Yyyyyy