I was told by the Ombudsman nearly three months ago that the council had decided what they were going to do and that they (the council) were going to write to me imminently to inform me of their decision.
Definition of imminently: Threatening to occur immediately.
After a few weeks I informed the Ombudsman that the council had not written (i.e.broken their promise to the Ombudsman. Not the first time the council had done this).
I then received the following bizarre response. The Ombudsman's office informed me that when they stated that the council were going to write to me imminently, they didn't mean imminently, they meant imminently after the Ombudsman had written the final report. So when are you going to write the the final report I asked. The Ombudsman may not write a final report was the answer.
Leaving aside the fact that after writing a Provisional Report in November 2007 and a Draft Report in March 2008 it appears rather strange that they don't now write a Final Report. We are now in a catch 22 situation of the Ombudsman's own making. The council are not going to write to me until after the Ombudsman writes a final report which the Ombudsman is now suggesting they may not write.
So using perverse reasoning they have been able to redefine the word 'imminently' to mean the exact opposite.
Why the perverse reasoning?
Because it gets the council off the hook for breaking their promise and not writing. The real questions are why do Local Government Ombudsmen bend over backwards to get councils out of their self created difficulties? What hold do councils have over Ombudsmen? Why would an Ombudsmen be willing to make themselves look stupid in order to protect a council? Please refer to the 'you won't believe it' post below for another example. More to come.