Whats in their briefs?

[Marc Berger]

Well I am not sure what result that I got out of the ombudsman on briefs. It appears that I must have a brief but its not much of an injustice if they don't let me have a brief. What they haven't said is when I should be able to have the brief. I think the brief should be agreed for the Decision Notice and the archaeological Reasons for the brief should be presented in the Decision Notice Reasons

Local Government Ombudsman

10 June 2016


Mr Marc Berger
Beam End
Muckton
LOUTH
LN11 8NU
Your ref:
Our ref: 15 013 320 & 15 016 144
(Please quote our reference when contacting us and, if using email, put the number in the email subject line)



Dear Mr Berger
Complaint against West Lindsey District Council and Lincolnshire County Council The Ombudsman has asked me to review Ms Mead’s decision on your complaints to make sure this was justified by the evidence.

Ms Mead has the delegated authority of the Ombudsman to make decisions on her behalf. Her decisions carry the same weight in law as decisions made by the Ombudsman herself and can only be challenged by judicial review. There is no right of appeal, but we offer one internal review to consider whether the decision has been made properly.

After reviewing the two files and looking carefully at what you have said, I appreciate you may be disappointed, but I support the decision to close your complaints.

In relation to the complaint against West Lindsey District Council Ms Mead did in fact uphold your complaint acknowledging the delay in the Council sending you the brief. However she is correct when she says that the injustice was to the developer.

Our role is to consider complaints of maladministration and service failure causing injustice. We look for administrative faults such as unreasonable delay and failing to follow relevant policies and procedures. We will not investigate matters where the personal injustice caused by the fault is not significant.

With regards to your complaint against Lincolnshire County Council Ms Mead determined that an investigation would not be progressed because the complaint was outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is because you could have complained sooner and your claim for loss of earnings and libel are matters for the courts.

Because Ms Mead properly considered your complaints, I will not overturn the decision which she made on behalf of the Ombudsman under her delegated authority. Therefore, although I recognise that this will disappoint you, the decisions must stand.
I understand you may continue to disagree. Our process allows for one review of a decision, and this is that review. We have now finished considering your complaints and the decisions are final.

Your remaining means of challenging our decisions is through judicial review in the High Court. Please take some advice before considering taking such action as the Ombudsman will – as a publicly funded body – seek to recover our reasonable costs in defending unsuccessful applications.

The cases remain closed and we will not write about or discuss them further because we cannot justify the cost of continuing to communicate with people whose cases we have closed. We will note any further contact from you, but we will not acknowledge it or reply unless it clearly contains new information which we decide has a bearing on our decisions.

Yours sincerely
Donna Campbell
Assistant Ombudsman

Anybody got any advice on what I should do?