Local Government Ombudsmen Decision's......

[frances1p]

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

 

 

Edited June 25, 2018 by Andyorch
Name removed and paras

[sgtbush]

Need a lot more info to be able to help.

[Ethel Street]

Have you put your real name at the end of your post? You might want to ask site admin to remove it.

 

LGO publishes its decisions, with identifying information deleted (you'll be referred to as Ms X in it or something similar.) Can you give us a link to the LGO's published decision about your complaint?

[frances1p]

Thank you for your response, sorry it taken a while for me to revisit and respond accordingly.

 

Anyway, your suggestion re the published Ombudsman Decisions, is an excellent idea and I am happy to provide the reference for you to view it online - the reference is :

 

Complaint against: London Borough of Bromley

Complaint Reference: 16 010 559

Date: 27 March 2018

 

I look forward to your feedback after reading the complaint/ decision, after which there are a few points I will raise, which has meant my not being treated fairly - but I shall wait until you have had the opportunity to read through first.

 

I look forward to your response in due course

 

Many thanks

 

Edited July 3, 2018 by frances1p
incorrect reference number quoted

[Ethel Street]

The case doesn't seem to be on LGO site.

 

Searching for LB Bromley cases gives this, which has the latest case reported shown as 26/3/18 - the day before your case, and nothing published since. I don't know why.

 

https://www.lgo.org.uk/Decisions/SearchResults?t=both&fd=0001-01-01&td=2018-07-03&dc=c%2Bnu%2Bu%2B&aname=bromley&atype=L&sortOrder=descending

[frances1p]

That's strange? I wonder if they have a schedule for publishing decisions in batches? eg: decisions published every 20 days etc?

 

I shall make enquiries and report back here as to my findings?

 

BRB ..................... thank you

[Ethel Street]

I have also contacted LGO as it's not just your/Bromley cases not appearing in the search, there appear to be almost no decisions after 26th March 2018 at all, for anywhere. I wondered if it wasn't something to do with my browser so I cleared all caches and cookies and tried different browsers and still nothing. I'll post what LGO say.

[frances1p]

I just spoke to the LGO enquiry line. I asked about the frequency in publishing their decisions online? They said: quote "we dont publish all decisions, those that we do publish are posted online in batches, every 3 months (on the closest Wednesday to the 3 mth period?).

 

If this is correct, then it really allows them to 'cherry pick' which decisions they publish, putting them in a good light - or appearing impartial? The whole point I have with my own particular complaint/ referral to LGO/ their decision/ their decision review - is that I feel they have clearly been biased towards me in reaching what I consider to be a very unfair decision and have not defended my rights - owing to their prejudice toward me? (if that makes sense).

 

I thought the idea of publishing decisions online, was to show transparancy, fairness and imparitiality in their investigative processes and decision making? This seems to indicate otherwise?

 

Confusing?????

[Ethel Street]

Ah, yes, I hadn't spotted this statement at the top of the search page that I posted a link to earlier:

 

As an open and accountable ombudsman service we are committed to having transparent decision making processes. We publish all of our decisions. Real names are not used. In certain cases where it is not in the complainant's interest or anonymity may be compromised, we can decide not to publish a decision. We publish decisions three months after the date of completion.

 

 

This confirms what they told you about publishing three months in arrears. But what they told you about not publishing all decisons is a bit different to what the website says. The website says they publish all decisons unless "it is not in the complainant's interest or anonymity may be compromised".

 

So your one should be published any day now.

[Ethel Street]

Your decision has now been posted

 

https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/children-s-care-services/looked-after-children/16-010-559

 

As far as challenging the LGO is concerned they answer your question here. They will only review once and after that the only way to take it further is by Judicial Review.

 

https://www.lgo.org.uk/information-centre/about-us/our-performance/challenging-our-decisions

 

Judicial Review is uncertain, potentially very expensive, and you may have already exceeded the time limits for bringing a JR.

 

 

It also depends what you want to achieve. What is the most you could gain from even a successful JR against the LGO? That they found fault with the council's original actions? If they did then what? They can't overturn the council's original decisons, only, possibly, direct some sort of reconsideration by the council. That might not change anything.

 

 

In your first post you said you wanted "the merits of their decision scrutinised". To be clear, the LGO cannot scrutinise the merits of the council's decision and a judge in a JR cannot scrutinise the merits of the LGO review. In both cases they look only at whether correct procedures were followed.

 

 

Would it better to concentrate on the law surrounding the detention of your son under the Mental Heath Act? Not something I know anything about but I'd think there are mental health charities who could help you.

[ScarletPimpernel]

One thing that stood out for me in the LGO report is that they had asked for the evidence the complainant said she had that disproved the Council's version of events, but it had not been provided, and so no fault by the Council could be shown. I'd have thought that if there were any scope for looking at this again, the question would be asked as to why this evidence was not provided, as it seems to be key to the complaint.

 

On the mental health front, for someone to be detained under the Mental Health Act there are clear procedures to be followed. When someone is detained for a longer period than the initial section, again there are clear procedures (including regular reviews), and the individual has rights under the legislation.

 

For example, the right to access an Independent Mental Health Advocate, and the right to appeal against detention to a Mental Health Tribunal. The NHS website has good information on this, as do those of MIND, the Mental Health Alliance and Mental Health Law Online.

 

Also, just because no charges are brought doesn't mean that nothing happened. Police will often look at alternatives to charging where this will be more beneficial to the individual. It's not always a black and white process. If someone is already detained under the MHA, the question of capacity may arise, and there is also the issue of whether charging will serve a useful purpose.

[sgtbush]

You were asked to provide evidence which you did not do.

Further more you claim your son was never charged. This does not mean it didn't happen. Te CPS would of decided if there was a good possibility of securing a conviction, but given the general circumstances of your sons situation id say they decided not in Lue of the mental health act etc