Dear Ministry of Justice,

It is said, no one is above the law.

Guidance for customer care at PHSO says at point 43

43.It is often the case that even after they have been in contact with Customer Care, some of our complainants are still dissatisfied and want to complain further. Complainants can challenge our decisions through a Judicial Review.
However, there is no organisation that can specifically look into an individual complaint about the service we provide.

What policies have MOJ in place to deal with this situation? No JR can succeed as PHSO have 'discretion'. It trumps all law.

How many complaints has MOJ had about this situation?

Yours faithfully,

Brenda Prentice

Wilson, Guy, Ministry of Justice

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Prentice,

 

Please see the attached response to your request.

 

Guy Wilson

Victims, Witnesses and Criminal Justice Delivery

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

Dear Wilson, Guy,

Thank you Guy I will ask another FOI.

You say the court needs to establish:

 Principles established by the Court - derived from public law cases e.g.
o the need to exercise the power reasonably;
o the need to exercise the power for the purpose for which it was provided;
o the need to take relevant factors into account when reaching a decision, and not take into account irrelevant factors. 
The obligation to exercise the power in conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) and/or the EU Treaties.  The duties imposed by the Equality Act 2010.

I can assure you that these principals are regularly broken by PHSO and they are not held accountable. There is much evidence from many people at phsothefacts.com

Where there is blatant and consistent poor service or collusion with authority, PHSO think a simply 'sorry' with no explanation is 'putting things right'!

I do wonder if in fact the PHSO are fulfilling their purpose in defending the establishment!

What can little people like me do about it. We do not have deep pockets which is the first principal of getting justice it seems.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Brenda Prentice

Wilson, Guy, Ministry of Justice

Dear Ms Prentice,

Thank you for your email of 29 January. Your request is outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act as it is not a request for information and therefore is being treated as official correspondence. Your query about the operation of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) has, in the first instance, been passed to the Cabinet Office has it is the lead Government department on the PHSO.

Guy Wilson | Victim Policy
Victims, Witnesses and Criminal Justice Delivery

show quoted sections

propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

Dear Ms Prentice,

Thank you for your email of 29 January to the Ministry of Justice. It has
been passed to the Cabinet Office because you refer to the accountability
of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), and I have been
asked to respond.

The PHSO is independent of Government and is accountable to Parliament,
through the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
(PACAC), for its performance and the use of its resources.

Most recently, PACAC held its annual scrutiny session on the PHSO on 13
December 2016, having also collected supplementary written evidence.
Further details can be found on the committee's website at:
[1]http://www.parliament.uk/business/commit...
Yours sincerely
Ekpe Attah
Propriety & Ethics Team
Cabinet Office
70 Whitehall
SW1A 2AS

References

Visible links
1. http://www.parliament.uk/business/commit...

Brenda Prentice

Dear propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,
Dear Ekpe Attah

Thank you for your response.
"The PHSO is independent of Government and is accountable to Parliament,
through the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
(PACAC), for its performance and the use of its resources".

The PHSO is accountable to PACAC committee for it's administration and to the COURT for it's performance.

Although Bernard Jenkin and PACAC try to hold The Dame to account it does manage to do that and no JR has ever won against PHSO as it has 'discretion'. This trumps all law.

If you read the email stream that I hope came with my request, you will see that at point 43 (I think it was). case workers are told, no organisation can hold us to account.

This makes PHSO above the law.

I am requesting to know why this is the case? There must be information somewhere that up holds this position.

Also I was at the December 2016 meeting of PHSO which was a bit of a damp squib. The new draft Bill for the Peoples Ombudsman, has the same 'get out of jail free card' otherwise known as 'discretion', so there will be no change. The PHSO is above the law.

Yours sincerely,

Brenda Prentice

propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

Dear Ms Prentice,
Thank you for your email. The PHSO is independent of government, and I am
unable to comment on internal communications within that organisation.
However, I would reiterate the point I made previously about the
accountability of the PHSO to Parliament. As you say, the Government
published the Draft Public Services Ombudsman Bill in December 2016. The
new proposals seek to bring together the responsibilities of the current
PHSO and the Local Government Ombudsman to create a new organisation with
strengthened governance and accountability.
Yours sincerely,
Ekpe Attah

show quoted sections

Dear propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

Dear Ekpe Attah

MOJ say they don't have this information, which surprises me, and have sent it to your department. You have not answered the question and I think I am being given the run around.

If you choose not to see the PHSO is above the law, who can...? This is not about internal communications, or the new draft bill. It's about now, and the PHSO being above the law.

Please answer the question or take this as a request for an internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Brenda Prentice

propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

Dear Ms Prentice,
Thank you for your email and I apologise for the delay in responding.
First, I should make clear that I have not dealt with your email as an
internal review under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. This is because
your original email to the Ministry of Justice did not constitute a
request for recorded information under the Act.
I would stress that the PHSO is a statutory organisation which is obliged
to operate in accordance with the legislation which governs its work: the
Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 and the Health Service Commissioners
Act 1993. If you believe it is not operating in accordance with the law
you should raise this with the PHSO itself, or the House of Commons Public
Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) to which it is
accountable as a parliamentary body. You might also want to raise the
matter(s) with your MP. For the sake of completeness, I should add that
unlawful actions by the PHSO can also be challenged in the courts by way
of judicial review.
I would also refer you to the points I made in my previous emails, which
still hold. Finally, I would add that since your original email a new
Ombudsman, Rob Behrens, has been appointed. At Mr Behrens' pre-appointment
hearing before PACAC he set out his views on how the PHSO's performance
could be improved. The full transcript of the hearing can be found
here: [1]http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidenc...
Yours sincerely,
Ekpe Attah

show quoted sections

Brenda Prentice

Dear propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

My question was:
'What policies have MOJ in place to deal with this situation? No JR can succeed as PHSO have 'discretion'. It trumps all law'.

I can assure you I have tried all of the suggestion made, including being a witness to Mr Jenkin at Pacac. None have worked.

I have also written to Rob Behrens, he has not responded.

I take it that MoJ has no policies in place to deal with this injustice. So is there any advice?

Yours sincerely,

Brenda Prentice

Dear propriety&ethicsteam Mailbox,

I made a request to you and it was responded to on the 17th June. The answer is not satisfactory .
PACAC does not hold PHSO to account, as you say only a JR would do that, but no JR has worked as the PHSO has 'discretion'. No Judge is brave enough to go against that. So to take a JR would be ruinous for ordinary people.

PHSO, the last bastion of justice, is unaccountable and there is nothing anyone will do about it.

Mr B is pushing out all the old lines we have heard so many times before. He knows the problems, they are all documented, will he act? He has been in office for months now and nothing new so far...

How much longer do British citizens have to wait for Justice from , we at told, the best justice system in the world? Heaven help the others!

Britain is so good and pointing fingers at others while being the best at cover ups.

So under FOI please tell me what policy's are in place for bringing justice to the people of our country?

Yours sincerely,

Brenda Prentice

FOI Team Mailbox,

CABINET OFFICE REFERENCE:  FOI325126

Dear BRENDA PRENTICE

Thank you for your request for information. Your request was received
on 7/9/2017 and we are considering if it is appropriate to deal with under
the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This email is just a short acknowledgement of your request.

If you have any queries about this email, please contact the FOI team.
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Yours sincerely,

 Knowledge and Information Management Unit

Cabinet Office

E: [1][email address]

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

FOI Team Mailbox,

1 Attachment

Please find attached the reply to your FOI request

 

 

 

Regards

 

 

FOI Team

Room 405

70 Whitehall,

London, SW1A 2AS

E-mail -[1][email address

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear Ministry of Justice,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'Above the Law'.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a...

Yours faithfully,

Brenda Prentice

Calum Clark (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

The local government ombudsman is the same.

The relevant part of paragraph 5.15 of this LGO reply to pre-action protocol (Judicial Review); https://www.scribd.com/document/35981957...

".....As is clear from the case law above, the courts have consistently acknowledged the breadth of his discretion and will only interfere in the clearest cases on unlawfulness. That is a significantly high threshold to satisfy which we do not consider you have got close to in this case. We therefore consider that any claim for Judicial Review will be bound to fail."

Brenda Prentice left an annotation ()

And they say UK justice is the best in the world....

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org