Most people use the Local Government Ombudsman LGO) to pursue a complaint with a public authority in order to protect themselves from the significant costs and risks associated with taking legal action through the courts.
However, what many fail to realise, when deciding to use the discredited Local Government Ombudsman, is that even after the Local Government Ombudsman's involvement, they may still end up being forced into legal action against a Council to secure the remedy for the injustice they have suffered through maladministration. With the only alternative being to abandon their fight for justice.
This anomaly comes about because a Local Government Ombudsman cannot enforce their recommendations. An anomaly which more and more Councils are now exploiting because they know this is normally the point at which most complainants give up their fight for justice because of the costs involved.
If a complainant can afford the cost and risks associated with court action, a recent case has proven that they may be able to secure compensation for the injustice you have suffered through Council maladministration.However, if they can afford legal action, why bother with the discredited Local Government Ombudsman in the first place?
Which brings me to the point of this post. The Local Government Ombudsman is merely a Government ploy to provide the illusion of justice to those who can't afford the real thing. This saves the Government a significant amount of money in the legal aid that would be necessary to provide a proper system of administrative justice for all.