Hi there - hope somebody may be able to help? It is in relation to the Local Government Ombudsmen - Decision Review? Following a complaint to my local authority, which dragged on for approx 16 months at Stage 1 and they refused to allow me to access my rights to progress to Stage 2 of the Statutory Complaints Procedure, I referred the matter to the LGO. Long story short, I was not happy with the LGO decision in finding no fault in the Council's actions. I then used the 'LGO DECISION REVIEW PROCESS' to voice the fact I was not happy with this decision and that it was unfair and there had been bias used against me etc. This did not result in any change of decision, the original LGO decision stood and I am told I have no further rights to challenge the LGO decision/ you only have one shot at requesting a review of the decision? I am trying to find out if this is the end of the road for challenging their decision, or is there any other route I can take for this decision to be properly investigated and the merits of their decision scrutinised? This seems so unfair as my complaint still unresolved and I now have no faith in a 'flawed statutory complaints procedure' if it does not live up to what it claims to do? Any advice would be greatly appreciated............many thanks

I am calling for justice, not just for HMRC, but for a system that requires no accountability. HMRC and other gov support are working from narrow guidelines without thought or often, much intelligence, and make cuts that they never have to take responsibility for. I know people well who have suffered from these cuts, living in poverty with great stress. Complaints take months, even years, and tribunals find against the complainant without having all the papers even. You can complain only about handling, not the outcome, and senior staff and even independent officers won't find fault. I have found this issue with ombudsman - even the highest point, their independent assessor/adjudicator - in all areas, not just HMRC. I have even seen evidence for corruption in the legal system, conveniently closing and losing cases that challenge them. We need a system where complaints are heard, not that we're put off for the stress and poor outcome. We need to work together for a fair, accountable system which has right of redress, which has people using their heads and hearts, not following flow chart rules under the pressure of targets for political and fiscal gain. We need to support those who need it, not rule that (this is a quote) "insufficient suffering" has occurred to warrant investigation and compensation, not to say that "need is not entitlement" (another true quote). I look to CAG to take steps to make this money and outcomes obsessed system into one that works for the people, not against us, that isn't about the agenda of those who rule.