The basis for my determination of the complaints
Jump to
My approach
In simple terms, when determining complaints that injustice has been sustained in consequence of maladministration, I generally begin by comparing what actually happened with what should have happened.
So, in addition to establishing the facts that are relevant to the complaint, I also need to establish a clear understanding of the standards, both of general application and those that are specific to the circumstances of the case, which applied at the time the events complained about occurred, and which governed the exercise of the administrative functions of those bodies and individuals whose actions are the subject of complaint. I call this establishing the overall standard.
The overall standard has two components: the general standard, which is derived from general principles of good administration and, where applicable, of public law; and the specific standards, which are derived from the legal, policy and administrative frameworks relevant to the events in question.
Having established the overall standard, I then assess the facts in accordance with that standard. Specifically, I assess whether or not an act or omission on the part of the body or individual complained about constitutes a departure from the applicable standard. If so, I then assess whether, in all the circumstances, that act or omission falls so far short of the applicable standard as to constitute maladministration. The overall standard which I have applied to this investigation is set out below – which, in this case, is wholly derived from the Ombudsman’s Principles.
The Ombudsman’s Principles
Since this Office was established we have developed and applied certain general principles of good administration in determining complaints. In February 2009 I republished my Principles of Good Administration, Principles of Good Complaint Handling and Principles for Remedy.11 These are broad statements of what I consider public bodies should do to deliver good administration and customer service, and how to respond when things go wrong. The same six key Principles apply to each of the three documents. These six Principles are:
- Getting it right
- Being customer focused
- Being open and accountable
- Acting fairly and proportionately
- Putting things right, and
- Seeking continuous improvement.
All six of the Principles of Good Administration are relevant, but the three that are most pertinent to the complaints made by Mr A are:
- ‘Getting it right’ – public bodies should plan carefully when introducing new policies and procedures; public bodies should provide effective services with appropriately trained and competent staff; decision making should take account of all relevant considerations, ignore irrelevant ones and balance the evidence appropriately.
- ‘Being customer focused’ – there must be accurate, complete and understandable information about a service; public bodies should aim to ensure that customers are clear about their entitlements; public bodies should communicate effectively; public bodies should treat people with sensitivity, bearing in mind their individual needs, and respond flexibly to the circumstances of the case.
- ‘Acting fairly and proportionately’ – public bodies should always deal with people fairly and with respect; people should be treated fairly and consistently, so that those in similar circumstances are dealt with in a similar way.
- The Ombudsman’s Principles is available at www.ombudsman.org.uk.
