Submit a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman and you may just be one of the lucky few complainants who obtain justice, however, your chances are not that great.
Whilst, the Parliamentary Ombudsman finds national authorities guilty of maladministration in 67% of all complaints submitted to her, Local Government Ombudsmen, for some unexplained reason, only find local authorities guilty of maladministration in less than 1% of all complaints submitted to them. (Even when the Local Government Ombudsmen fiddle their figures by excluding some of the complaints the best they can achieve is about 29%.)
Do local authorities commit four times less maladministration than national authorities? I doubt it. Are the investigators working for the Parliamentary Ombudsman better than those working for the Local Government Ombudsman? I doubt it.
So why do Local Government Ombudsmen prefer to use the techniques illustrated in my last six posts to bury much of the maladministration they should be uncovering?
Many people think it's because all Local Government Ombudsman used to work in local authorities as did many of their staff, however, there could be another reason. Please post your thoughts on the public forum.