Alternative to Local Government Ombudsman?

[jadesdaddy]

Hi Guys

I'm wondering if there is an alternative body to the Local Government Ombudsman. The reason that I ask is that I have now exhausted my local councils complaints procedure without any resolution. Unfortunately the LGO state on their website that they do not deal with matters relating to court procedure.

My complaint to my local council concerned the way that they conduct council tax hearings. Last year I was summonsed for non payment of council tax, upon arriving at court I was told by a council "court officer" that there were no magistrates sitting that day (a ridiculous lie that was seen to be told to everyone in attendance) I insisted upon my legal right for my case to be heard by a magistrate. Eventually I was ushered into a second court room which was packed full of people talking with council staff, most of whom I assume were making arrangements to pay. (stage two response claims this is for privacy, which is ridiculous as there was barely a place to sit and peoples private matters were being openly discussed in public)

I spoke to a council worker there, who told me that she was the prosecution for the council and continued with the charade of trying to convince me that there were no magistrates in attendance that day. After looking at the figures that I had brought to explain my income which showed there was no way that I could afford to pay she continued to try and convince me that there were no magistrates. At no point did she offer any advice about payment.

A few weeks later I received what I consider to be a very threatening and indtimidating notification that an order had been made against me in my absence and stating that unless I paid I would be receiving a visit from bailiffs. (never happened)

I contacted the local council leader about the way that I had been treated in court, he promised to look into my complaint and of course never bothered to get back to me. However, I found out later that he had been in contact with the council tax departments director concerning myself and my complaint. The way that I found this out was when someone in the council tax department (I don't know who) sent me a copy of an email, stating that they thought that a copy should of been sent to me. This was an email from the director of council tax to the council leader about me.

Beside explaining to the council leader that they would answer no correspondence from me until such time as I made an official complaint, he also stated:

"We have two courts at a hearing. One for our advisor's taking arrangements and another for the hearings themselves. We do try and avoid taking up court time with people who do not have a valid defence against the action and this is the majority of attendees."

I made my complaint, part of which asked how the council tax director could without any shadow of doubt state that the majority of attendees had no valid defence, and that I believed that a court was a place of law and not run by unqualified council workers.

Unhappy with the stage one answer I asked that my complaint be considered at stage two. My complaint was passed to stage two and promptly sent back to stage one to answer! Again I was unhappy with the updated response at stage one and asked again for my complaint to be considered at stage two. After waiting 11 weeks for a response (website states 10 working days) I informed stage 2 that unless I had a response within a week I would proceed to the LGO. Two weeks later I received a photocopied response from stage two, which was little better that the stage one response. Interestingly in this response I am told (inaccurately I believe) that the council can set the cost of a summons at whatever they please and that it is not a conflict of interest to have the councils own prosecutor advising people of their position in court, that position being that they have no case. Also unsurprisingly there was no mention in their response to my mention of the statements made by the director of council tax to the council leader and his comments about the "second court"

My local council deny that there is any conflict of interest when they use council workers including their own prosecutor to dissuade people from their right to be heard in court and to make arrangements to pay instead.

Finally it was mentioned in my stage two response that the council tax department had provided e-mails written by myself, which were written before I made any formal complaint, to the person handling the stage two response. However, I was told previously that any correspondence sent by myself up until the point that i made a "formal complaint" would be ignored. This would seem to be a very underhand tactic and in my opinion was done to bias the outcome of the stage two decision.

I'm not sure if there is anything that you guys can advise me that will enable me to take this any further but thank you for taking the time to read. I do have all relevant e-mails if they are required.

Thank You
Kenny.

[outlawlgo]

Re: Alternative to Local Government Ombudsman?

Hi Guys

I'm wondering if there is an alternative body to the Local Government Ombudsman. The reason that I ask is that I have now exhausted my local councils complaints procedure without any resolution. Unfortunately the LGO state on their website that they do not deal with matters relating to court procedure.

When they state this I wonder if they are referring to section 26(6) of the Local Government Act 1974 which lays down the Ombudsman's powers for investigating complaints.

If so you should be aware it has discretion to investigate a complaint if it is considered it would be unreasonable for a person to have to take action such as via the courts.

There is an example on the LGO's website which makes this clear:

The Ombudsman’s role and powers at paragraph 2:

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2 The Ombudsman normally expects someone to appeal to a court, tribunal or government minister if they have a right to. However, she may decide to investigate a complaint if she considers it would be unreasonable for a person to have to do so. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6))

A link to the legislation is here: Local Government Act 1974

The relevant section is here: section 26(6)

6) A Local Commissioner shall not conduct an investigation under this Part of this Act in respect of any of the following matters, that is to say,—

(a) any action in respect of which the person aggrieved has or had a right of appeal, reference or review to or before a tribunal constituted by or under any enactment;

(b) any action in respect of which the person aggrieved has or had a right of appeal to a Minister of the Crown [^F4or the National Assembly for Wales]; or

(c) any action in respect of which the person aggrieved has or had a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law:

Provided that a Local Commissioner may conduct an investigation notwithstanding the existence of such a right or remedy if satisfied that in the particular circumstances it is not reasonable to expect the person aggrieved to resort or have resorted to it.

[jadesdaddy]

Re: Alternative to Local Government Ombudsman?

Thanks very much for your response Outlawlgo it's very much appreciated.

[GraceCourt]

Re: Alternative to Local Government Ombudsman?

Beside explaining to the council leader that they would answer no correspondence from me until such time as I made an official complaint, he also stated:

"We have two courts at a hearing. One for our advisor's taking arrangements and another for the hearings themselves. We do try and avoid taking up court time with people who do not have a valid defence against the action and this is the majority of attendees."

I made my complaint, part of which asked how the council tax director could without any shadow of doubt state that the majority of attendees had no valid defence, and that I believed that a court was a place of law and not run by unqualified council workers.

This is an astonishing claim by the Council, and it is completely untrue. It is true that the Council is legally entitled to print and send out its own summonses, bearing the facsimile signature of the Clerk to the Court, but that is it. By issuing the summons and laying an "information" at the Court (i.e. telling them that the summons is being issued) the legal proceedings have commenced, and you are obliged to attend the Court. The first stage that you describe is not a Court hearing, nor is it anything other than a discussion between you and the prosecutor.

Why do I know this? Personal knowledge of having - before the CPS was formed! - prosecuted in Court as a police officer, and the extraordinary events last Friday, when - as the result of a fundamental error by my local Council - I was sent a "Reminder Notice" about nearly £200-worth of Council Tax that was unpaid, a Notice that had someone else's account number on it and was for a member of my family who had not lived here for over five years. I immediately used the Council web site facility for Council Tax queries to advise them of their error. A number of weeks later, I received the summons for non-payment! Again, I advised the Council of its mistake, and told my relative what was happening - as a result of which he paid the whole sum due.

But there was no response from the Council, and - as I was legally obliged to - I attended the Court, which required me to take time off work. I, too, was interviewed under the "first stage", in an area apart from the public waiting area, where there were numerous chairs and tables, arranged as an interview area. I was asked why I had attended Court, given that this same Council officer had written to me on 21 November, a week previously. I asked if this had been sent "Recorded Delivery", but it had not, and I certainly hadn't received such a letter, so the answer to the question was "Because I'm legally obliged to respond to the summons". I was then told that the summons had been withdrawn, which I knew wasn't true, because that could only happen at the hearing and it is a judicial function of the magistrates to permit the withdrawal a summons on application by the prosecutor, not a Council one. I therefore advised that, as the Council was admitting an error in prosecuting me, I was there to make an application for costs. This rattled the Council officer, who went off to consult her manager.

Given that I knew I was being lied to, when she returned, I set my phone to record and placed it overtly on the table between us - it was not at all unreasonable for an accused person to record a conversation with the body who is prosecuting him at all, far less wrongly and following an admission of error!

This was too much for the Council officer who flatly refused to say any more unless the recording was stopped, and after fruitless discussion about this, I said I would take my place in the public waiting area. A little while later, I was approached by the manager, and we went through the same farce: he claimed it would be illegal for me to record there, and when I offered to step outside for the conversation, he refused as he might be called into Court, Again, it was claimed that the summons had been withdrawn. I again stated that I was awaiting the hearing to make an application for costs, and asked him to make sure that the Clerk knew I was present when the case was called - he declined. I therefore said that I would wait in the Court, and did so.

A short while later, a Court security official asked me to step out to the waiting area, when he stated that the Council staff had alleged that I was in contempt of Court by making the recording, and that I would have to delete it. I explained that the recording was not made in the Court within the meaning of Section 9 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and that it is a travesty of natural justice if a prosecutor's interview with an accused person in a private area of the Court building cannot be recorded by either or both parties... nevertheless, the magistrates before whom I had to appear could legally deal with the alleged contempt and of course I would obey their directions and accept any punishment. I then returned to the Court and - surprise, surprise! - a short while later two police officers came into the Court and asked me to step outside. I have to say that they were extremely professional and well-informed and after I explained, they stated that in consequence of the allegation, they would have to seize my phone, which I knew they were entitled to do under Section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

Hours later, after lunch, the Council Tax hearings commenced - the Council asked for leave to withdraw the summons, I made my application for costs, but also stated that I would be proceeding against the Council in the County Court for damages under Section 13, Data Protection Act 1998, because of these serious consequences of their error and their failure to rectify it. After deliberation, they declined to award costs, and advised me to make those costs part of my civil claim. They had already been advised by the Clerk to the Court that my actions in recording the Council interview were not a contempt of Court and just prior to the hearing, the police returned to the Court and gave me back my phone.

There are lots of learning points there for ANYONE reading this thread! I'm presently compiling my "Letter before proceedings" to the Council and on the basis of an award by the Local Government Ombudsman against Sandwell Council in a comparable case, I'm seeking £450 in damages. I'm not using the Ombudsman because (a) you first have to go through the Councils complaints process, (b) the case of R v Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, ex p Balchin [1997] JPL 917 gives serious concerns about the Ombudsman process, against whose decisions the only legal remedy is a judicial review, and (c) the Council can simply refuse to agree with an Ombudsman and thereby pay the successful complainant nothing whatsoever - it's not at all an uncommon situation.

In any event, Section 26(6)(c) of the Local Government Act 1974 states that the Ombudsman shall not accept complaints about matters for which the complainant has a remedy in law (although there is a discretionary power under certain circumstances) and I have the DPA 1998 remedy for the outrageous behaviour of the Council officers because it was a direct consequence of their failure to process my personal data lawfully.

Sorry for this rather lengthy story... but I hope that it is of use to readers.

Edit - Postscript - I should have explained that the disquiet arising out of the "Balchin" case was because the Local Government Ombudsman for that area had ruled that there was no maladministration by Norfolk County Council, and as stated above the only remedy was a judicial review - but the Balchins applied for one! Long story short, the case revealed that the Council had without doubt been guilty of maladministration, that the LGO had made its ruling without even investigating the Balchins' claims, and that had the Balchins not persevered over a period of 20 years(!) they would never have received the £200,000 compensation for their blighted property that they eventually did receive.

Did I mention that all LGOs are ex-County Council chief executives, and that almost all of their staff are ex-Council employees?