Requesting details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,
much is made of the enactment of The Equality Act 2010 and the changes it brings to issues such as " hate crimes" .
Under the FOIA , l request the PHSO reply to supply statistics or evidential proof that more is being done since the bringing in of this Act , in relation to complaints where the persons making the complaint are vulnerable / elderly or disabled, in line with consideration being given to these persons specialist characteristics.
As a registered disabled person with limited mobility and partial hearing , l previously received an apology from Ann Abrahams in her then role as Ombudsman for the PHSO , for one of her review team calling me " stupid" and would like to see evidence that such things are dealt with in a much more productive way since the introduction of The Equality Act 2010,

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Akindele Temidayo, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

4 Attachments

Dear Ms Smith,

 

RE: Your information request, our ref FDN-274396

 

I write in response to your information request received by the
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman on 16 February 2017.  The
wording of your request is as follows:

 

much is made of the enactment of The Equality Act 2010 and the changes it
brings to issues such as " hate crimes" .

Under the FOIA , l request the PHSO reply to supply statistics or
evidential proof that more is being done since the bringing in of this Act
, in relation to complaints where the persons making the complaint are
vulnerable / elderly or disabled, in line with consideration being given
to these persons specialist characteristics.

 

We have processed you request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

 

Response

I can confirm that we hold information within the scope of your request.

We do not have the statistics you have requested but we have taken steps
as an organisation to ensure that the requirements of the Equality Act are
incorporated into our complaint handling processes.   We have done this
by:

o updating our Service Model guidance with wording about our legal
obligations under the Equality Act included regularly throughout. 
Please see sections 1.13, 1.21, 1.37, 2.94, 5.28, 8.13 and 8.23 of the
attached which is an updated version of the Service Model guidance.
This version will soon be published on our website.  The version
currently published on our website can be viewed on the following page
[1]https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/co...
o running internal campaigns to promote and raise awareness of our legal
obligations under the Equality Act 2010.  These campaigns have been
running since December 2015;
o including texts in our template cover letters and draft reports about
how we consider extension requests for draft reports;
o creating a checklist for consideration of request for reasonable
adjustments for staff to use.

 

I hope my response is helpful.  If you believe I have made an error in the
way I have processed your information request, it is open to you to
request an internal review.  You can do this by writing to us by post or
by email to [2][Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]. You will need to
specify what the nature of the issue is and we can consider the matter
further. Beyond that, it is open to you to complain to the Information
Commissioner’s Office ([3]www.ico.org.uk).

 

Sincerely,

 

Freedom of Information / Data Protection Officer

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

E: [4][email address]

W: [5]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

Follow us on

[6]fb  [7]twitter  [8]linkedin

 

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/co...
2. mailto:[Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]
3. http://www.ico.org.uk/
4. mailto:[email address]
5. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
6. http://www.facebook.com/phsombudsman
7. http://www.twitter.com/PHSOmbudsman
8. http://www.linkedin.com/company/parliame...

Fiona Watts left an annotation ()

Dear FOI team,

On 16th March 2017, you seemed to have hoodwinked anyone scanning through this response. You have provided a link that does not work. I am fully aware that many people on this website have complained to your team that the links from the PHSO not working.

Unfortunately it seems that NOBODY bothers to listen to feedback from the public at the PHSO.

Here is another example of this unresolvable maladministration.

The link states the following;

"404 Sorry we can’t find the page you are looking for. We may have moved or deleted it. Please try searching again or email us at digital@ombudsman.org.uk and we’ll look into it for you. "

What a farce.
Never mind, you all consider yourselves to be untouchable and above The Data Protection Act 1998 and other data laws at The Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman don't you?

But, you are not immune to the Tort of Misconduct In Public Office.

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

Dear Fiona,
the person's the PHSO did not want to be investigated in my case, now one works as the Senior Fraud Resolution Specialist at EXPERIAN!!!! and the other was a barrister.
The PHSO runs with the agencies they are meant to be in place to investigate to the point of targeting vulnerable and disabled persons of their homes and assets.
Proof is the timelines involved where the PHSO ignored my pointing out perceived conflict of interest and their failure to then stop a barrister who was a commissioner for Legal Services Commission ( even living with their Director of Legal and Governance) , from then later sitting as a Deputy Adjudicator for a Land Registry Hearing that should never have occurred because of a known caution being in play and previous involvement of two judges and always in my favour for the wrong information held about me that amounted to an "error " l was entitled to correction of, that everyone including the PHSO did not want corrected.
The PHSO are crooked from the ground up and do not let anyone tell you any different. The Deputy Adjudicator l refer to actually headed a panel in a land mark case over conflict of interest of a local councillor who was fed up with having to speak out if he had connections to do with issues the parish council he sat on came up. The poor guy was crucified by this barrister very publicly. As a barrister the oath he will have taken means he is duty bound to speak out if issues of conflict of interest arise. He obviously is cut from the mould of dishing out punishment for others that he is devoid of punishment himself for , because the complaining body that should act, WON'T!!

Brenda Prentice left an annotation ()

I asked for parity with the Morrish Family and a second investigation into one of my cases under the Equality Act.
The answer was no, why? I don't know.

Equality's Act.... yea right...No wrong, PHSO don't do that.

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Requesting details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010'.

Although record records my contacting the PHSO through my MP in March 2009 and ny having maintained reasonable contact regularly since and including my meeting with it's senior staff on the 26 th June 2014, there is no record of there ever being proper investigation into what are serious misconduct issues .

There has been much effort made to avoid me whereby a hundredth of this effort would have obtained answers and redress to matters already supposed sorted through the involvement previously by Judges sitting in 2002 & 2003.

I seek parity through requesting internal review and also answers to the continuation over many years of the discrimination of staff at the PHSO whose mission it appears is to commit disability hate crime on a very personal level against me.

The level of this discrimination against me has been the lead that Land Registry / Legal Servicea Commission / The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry / The First Tier Land Tribunal / Information Commissioners Office and The Independent Complaints Review have rather eagerly also got on board with, making an inpenitrable set of circumstances , when considerable evidence exists that senior level persons have written supporting the maladministration existing in the public bodies involved in orcastrated prevention of the evidence being considered and the certain corrections l am long overdue according to a very senior judges ruling in February 2012.

Police involvement has also proved the neglect of these public bodies when it comes to my rights regarding my information and documents that are my own property, that to date the PHSO perhaps do to want pay the least attention to ?

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

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

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Requesting details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010'.

I notice on the WDTK website that the sending of my requesting Internal Review has a question mark against it to wether it was recieved by the appropriate person at the PHSO.

However l received an acknowledgement it was received.

So to clarify matters and for followers of WDTK , I explain the issues l am experiencing here.

Please accept this as my further underlining l am requesting Internal Review of my request ,

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

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Akindele Temidayo, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Smith,

 

Your information request (FDN-274396)

 

I am writing further to your email of 19 April which requests an internal
review of your information request.

 

In your email, you set out reasons for your dissatisfaction with the
service you have received from PHSO in relation to a complaint, rather
than setting out the reasons why you feel that your information request
was dealt with incorrectly.

 

If you are unhappy with a service you have received from PHSO or a
decision it has made in relation to its ombudsman service, you can contact
us using the following details:
[1]https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/fe...

 

If, however, you are unhappy with the way we have responded to your
information request, please respond and set out the reasons why you think
it was dealt with incorrectly, and we will consider how best to resolve
the issues you have raised.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Freedom of Information / Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [2]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

From: Diana Smith [[3]mailto:[FOI #390087 email]]
Sent: 19 April 2017 04:45
To: InformationRights
Subject: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Requesting
details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010

 

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health
Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Requesting details of the
PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010'.

Although record records my contacting the PHSO through my MP in March 2009
and ny having maintained reasonable contact regularly since and including
my meeting with it's senior staff on the 26 th June 2014, there is no
record of there ever being proper investigation into what are serious
misconduct issues .

There has been much effort made to avoid me whereby a hundredth of this
effort would have obtained answers and redress to matters already supposed
sorted through the involvement previously by Judges sitting in 2002 &
2003.

I seek parity through requesting internal review and also answers to the
continuation over many years of the discrimination of staff at the PHSO
whose mission it appears is to commit disability hate crime on a very
personal level against me.

The level of this discrimination against me has been the lead that Land
Registry / Legal Servicea Commission /  The Adjudicator to HM Land
Registry / The First Tier Land Tribunal / Information Commissioners
Office  and The Independent Complaints Review  have rather eagerly also
got on board with, making an inpenitrable set of circumstances , when
considerable evidence exists that senior level persons have written
supporting the maladministration existing in the public bodies involved in
orcastrated prevention of the evidence being considered and the certain
corrections l am long overdue according to a very senior judges ruling in
February 2012.

Police involvement has also proved the neglect of these public bodies when
it comes to my rights regarding my information and documents that are my
own property, that to date the PHSO perhaps do to want pay the least
attention to ?

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

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

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[5][FOI #390087 email]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:
[7]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit [8]http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/fe...
2. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
3. mailto:[FOI #390087 email]
4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/r...
5. mailto:[FOI #390087 email]
6. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
7. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...
8. http://www.symanteccloud.com/

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Requesting details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010'.

To date I have found there to be no joined up approach when requesting information under information acts which after all are Acts of Parliament and issues where the PHSO constantly drag their feet.

Much is written in reviews and consultation papers that ultimately never filters through to improve responses when contacting to seek information that is a public right in law.

I wish to ascertain the areas that the PHSO think have changed and how this achieves assistance when seeking information to obtain redress and correction when things go wrong ,
[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

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

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Smith

 

Your information request (FDC-274396)

 

I am writing further to your email of 19 April 2017, in which you request
an internal review. 

 

We will not be processing an internal review of your Freedom of
Information request, as the dissatisfaction you express relates not to
your information request but the handling of a complaint by the PHSO.

 

I have forwarded your email to our Customer Care Team for their
information, but you will need to contact them directly and provide
further information about your case and the nature of your complaint in
order for them to be able to look into your concerns.  Information on how
to get in contact with PHSO’s Customer Care Team is available on our
website at the following address:
[1]https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/fe...

 

Yours sincerely

 

Aimee Gasston

Freedom of Information and Data Protection Officer

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [2]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

Please email the FOI/DP team at: [3][Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]

 

 

From: Diana Smith [mailto:[FOI #390087 email]]
Sent: 19 April 2017 04:45
To: InformationRights
Subject: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Requesting
details of the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010

 

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health
Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Requesting details of the
PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010'.

Although record records my contacting the PHSO through my MP in March 2009
and ny having maintained reasonable contact regularly since and including
my meeting with it's senior staff on the 26 th June 2014, there is no
record of there ever being proper investigation into what are serious
misconduct issues .

There has been much effort made to avoid me whereby a hundredth of this
effort would have obtained answers and redress to matters already supposed
sorted through the involvement previously by Judges sitting in 2002 &
2003.

I seek parity through requesting internal review and also answers to the
continuation over many years of the discrimination of staff at the PHSO
whose mission it appears is to commit disability hate crime on a very
personal level against me.

The level of this discrimination against me has been the lead that Land
Registry / Legal Servicea Commission /  The Adjudicator to HM Land
Registry / The First Tier Land Tribunal / Information Commissioners
Office  and The Independent Complaints Review  have rather eagerly also
got on board with, making an inpenitrable set of circumstances , when
considerable evidence exists that senior level persons have written
supporting the maladministration existing in the public bodies involved in
orcastrated prevention of the evidence being considered and the certain
corrections l am long overdue according to a very senior judges ruling in
February 2012.

Police involvement has also proved the neglect of these public bodies when
it comes to my rights regarding my information and documents that are my
own property, that to date the PHSO perhaps do to want pay the least
attention to ?

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

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

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[5][FOI #390087 email]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:
[7]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit [8]http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

References

Visible links
1. https://www.ombudsman.org.uk/about-us/fe...
2. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
3. mailto:[Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]
4. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/r...
5. mailto:[FOI #390087 email]
6. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
7. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...
8. http://www.symanteccloud.com/

Dear InformationRights,
your customer service team have previously called me stupid , to which l then received a lengthy apology from Ann Abrahams , who was the Ombudsman at that time.
Therefore l have reservations regarding being passed to a unit within your agency that from what l can tell , never learned from their mistakes and have continued to discriminate against me for quite some years now.
I have on many occassions been told l would be contacted by this unit and it never materialise's.
Please bump my information request up a peg to someone capable of a full investigation of the discrimination of me that is clearly not being flagged up,

Yours sincerely,

Diana Smith

Informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

C Rock left an annotation ()

Dear Questioner
I have enquired on this topic. The PHSO continue to prevaricate and dodge showing no intent to address.
I have complained verbally and in writing. The office is clearly in breach of Disability law but it's still in their modus operandi to bully and wear down, as far as I can detect. It could have been addressed many years ago when first made aware of complaints. I'll look forward to seeing an acceptable answer.

Diana Smith left an annotation ()

Thank you C Rock,
my nightmare started following an Industrial Accident working for the NHS that was gross negligence of being made to work in a building that had a demolition order on it and my accident occurring as a result of the unsuitability and flaws of the fabric of the building.
Whilst seeking to relocate to enable my son and husband to flourish with their job and schooling respectively, l was targeted in my purchasing a property , to then at the last post to loose my pension and compensation rights to plunge me into requiring a mortgage on the property l was buying.
Plunged into a massive property / land fraud that is perhaps happening all across the UK, l have had to endure rape / attacks / verbal threats of attack / attempts on my life / pets and livestock targeted for torture and poison.
The UK Public need to know how far all this has filtered through to involve our courts / police / councils / land registry office's / energy providers / banks / building society and tripping over into agencies like the legal aid agency / information commissioners office / ombudsman / complaints bodies / CAB / MP's.
When you have the absolute proof and no-one is listening, then you know this country of ours is on a handcart to hell.
The one common denominator with all the victims cases l have heard of is that it is our own personal information that becomes the tool those l have listed , use to steal our homes / land / assets / identity and in some cases they go as far as taking the life of the person being targeted.
The sooner more members of the UK Public join up the dots of what is National Corruption, then the tide will turn and like in The Hillsborough Disaster, we will learn the history of how such awfulness has become the norm rather than the exception.
My own property / land issue, became something Land Registry used to alter section 66 of the Land Registration Act 2002 and then together with the Information Commissioners Office "THEY" sent unredacted copy of details of me and my case to other victims as a means of restricting these other cases

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

I write requesting internal review as is my entitlement by law,

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,
please find copied below my communication to William Moore at the PHSO Offices , sent here via the public accessible website of "whatdotheyknow", to make record of the fact l remain unsatisfied overall with the service('s) of the PHSO and as further / additional evidence to back up my requesting internal review for my lodged information request under what is after all an Act of Parliament. I understand by making this a "public record" other requesters on this site will read and be able to refer to similar aspects of their own experienced dissatisfaction , that surely will enforce the need for better practises for complaints and information handling. I can only apologise for any discomfort by persons reading the contents of this communication, and state it is my truth of the circumstances l have experienced while being targeted of property / land for which Land Registry make much of there being a "State Guarantee of Title " by and through Land Registry, that there is an overall general public consensus of opinion is completely denied to victims targeted of their homes and assets such as land :-

"-----Original Message-----
From: diansmt5 <[email address]>
To: William.Moore <[email address]>
Sent: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 8:05

Diana Smith,
Corner Farm,
Rotten Row,
Theddlethorpe St Helen,
Lincolnshire,
LN12 1NX.

7 th November 2017.

Dear William Moore,

please can you help me regarding the fuel costs l was promised reimbursement of , from my attending the meeting with the PHSO staff on the 26 th June 2014, at the community centre in Hackney , along with other members of the campaigning group -" PHSO, The Facts"?
I was for a time in direct contact with Dame Julie Mellor's PA , who was addressing it for me , but the last time l tried to contact her, she had left the employ of the PHSO and l was told someone else would contact me.
I had sent in the form provided to me and copy of the fuel bill receipt ( dated for that day) for £50-00p, which l estimated would cover the fuel for the trip.
I know others put in for meals / refreshments, but l would have been satisfied with just the costs of my fuel outlay.
I never was contacted by anyone about my concerns regarding the untimely death of my fiancée ( Andrew Starr) aged 53 at Boston Pilgrim Hospital in May 2013, that was meant to have been taped and transcripted for the review paper that emulated from our cases discussed at the meeting.
In fact apart from the contact between myself and the PA about my being reimbursed my fuel costs , there was no further contact from the PHSO to do with Andy's death.
To reiterate, Andy was admitted to hospital with stomach pains , following eating an Indian Take Away and l had visited him with a friend accompanying me.
I made the ward staff aware of who l was and left my contact details which my friend witnessed me doing.
Andy was meant to telephone me a couple of days later and when this did not happen, l telephoned the Pilgrim Hospital and was passed from ward to ward with no one able to tell what was happening. Eventually l heard someone reply with "Records", and l asked had l been put through to the wrong extension as l was looking to speak to a patient and l gave Andy's name. The woman l was speaking to , just shouted " he died " and slammed the telephone immediately down on me.
For record l would like to state and affirm that contact with the PHSO since my first recording my complaint in March 2009 on the direct advice of Denise Dewson of The Independent Complaints Review, regarding a case that Land Registry should never have referred for the involvement of The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry, as not only had the land involved already been confirmed as my protected and registered land "according to records held there at Kingston upon Hull Land Registry" and l was assured it would be useless for anyone to try and lay claim to it.
The content of my complaint letter to the PHSO on the relevant form sent through my elected MP's office was the previous issues involving both Legal Services Commission and KUH Land Registry and it having been confirmed on the 23 rd October 2007 by Ian Flowers at Land Registry Head Office that these issues of my neighbours claim to land , being related to the previous "errors / mistakes" already flagged up many times by me , going back to early March 2000 for LSC and involving two Lincoln County Court District Judges in 2002 & 2003 , who both found in my favour.
Earlier that day ( 23 rd October 2007) , the CSM of KUH Land Registry( Claire Graham) had come on the telephone to me screaming at me that l could not be complaining about another property , as l did not according to her "own another property" and Ian Flowers advised me most strongly to make record to the CSM at their Head Office of her conduct towards me and her also bragging that she had telephoned my acting solicitors.
These matters together with the fact it had been recorded after the completely wrong fact of the hearing before the AHMLR being allowed to go ahead , completely uncontested by the PHSO or stopped by the AHMLR , whom l copied into the PHSO's MP's complaint letter prior to that hearing and before a deputy adjudicator who was a commissioner for LSC as well as his being a barrister sworn to speak out in matters of conflict of interest.
The files KUH Land Registry finally provided for my DPA(SAR) lodged in March 2009 on the direct and worded for me advice of the head of civil bills at LSC ( Robbie Crane ), only provided to me on the 28 th September 2011 ( it being recorded at that time by The Information Commissioners Office that Land Registry had breached the DPA for their non-compliance with my valid information request), contained record of the fact it had been excepted that l was not liable for the costs of the AHMLR hearing on the 28 th & 29 th May 2009 as the other sides solicitors had written to the AHMLR saying they knew l had been timed out on the issues of costs by my acting solicitor ( being Dennison Till Solicitors of York) and they requested the issuing of a certificate by the AHMLR to allow them billing said solicitors direct.
Instead l was forced to attend a hearing at Nottingham Magistrates Court before Judge Arnold in 2010 as the deputy adjudicator ( being a barrister and a commissioner for LSC) , had decided to ignore the Chief Adjudicator ( Edward Cousins) allowing me extra time in which to lodge a request to appeal and the fact l was not deemed liable for any costs, and he put the costs against me and allowed matters to proceed .
This whole matter had been allowed to get grossly out of control as the actual owner of the piece of land that was the total of the original claim , was never contacted and had been excepted to have died, only to be proved alive and well some two days after the receiving of the AHMLR deputy adjudicator's decision.
KUH Land Registry's Chief Registrar and it's Assistant Registrar failed to apply for a stay on the AHMLR deputy adjudicator's decision , preferring instead to telephone me on the 23 rd July 2009 and shout at me to put the burden on me to contact the AHMLR to ask for a stay, telling me they could not get a reply from the AHMLR office, which was the same recorded statement they made to the ICR according to the ICR files Elizabeth Derrington sent to me in March 2012.
The recorded consensus of opinion of the head of The Economic Crime Unit and Elizabeth Derrington of the ICR is that KUH Land Registry had no right to have my own conveyance document and Mr Derrington directed Land Registry to return the document to me with offer of £250.00p for the inconvenience of my not having had the document to use in my defence.
In information provided recently via an information request lodged with Land Registry on the "whatdotheyknow"website, for copy of the " Final Responses Log", left off of the information they sent me , was my pre-arranged meeting at KUH Land Registry offices on the 26 th September 2008 where l attended with my carer and with a AP1 Form their own assistant registrar had sent me.
I was refused allowance of my carer staying with me and told that Land Registry was admitting their " mistakes / errors" and would put the whole matter right by rectification of the register at no cost to me.
It therefore defies belief this crucial event was left off of my FOIA request for copy of "The Final Responses Log" when KUH Land Registry actually disengaged with me in August 2009 , while according to the communications between my acting solicitor and Edward Cousins , my case was still live and on-going at that time, because of the existence of Mr W----- ( owner of the land) and Mr Cousins allowing an extra month in which to lodge request to be allowed to appeal.
My fully lodged request to be allowed to appeal under the practises / procedures / protocols of the AHMLR were lodged on the 23 rd August 2009 on the basis that Mr W---- was alive and had made a statement to his ownership , that the deputy adjudicator had agreed in his decision with me , being Diana Smith, that the "green strip" was owned by Mr W----- .
Besides my making statements both in October and November 2007, when requested by KUH Land Registry to do so, and stating the "green strip" to not be owned by me , but actually owned by Mr W---- ; l also attended the planned and pre-booked appointment with my carer on the 26 th September 2008 and allowed Mark Lawson to view / handle / copy , my original Title Deeds that recorded a conveyance of the land of the "green strip" in 1960.
The reliance was for Land Registry to have addressed or challenged the claimant to this land, which they failed to do and they failed to offer any investigation into their already telling me in February 2007 that the land was my registered and protected land.
Besides the theft of my stolen conveyance document , there has been also the theft of my covenant document , meant to have been held at solicitors Dale & Co ( Lincoln) whom Robbie Crane of LSC had me put a "lien" on my files held there on the 4 th January 2004.
The solicitors for the claimant of the land , in my full view in July 2010 , used my covenant document in an attempt to obtain a restriction against my property ,at the hearing before Deputy Judge Roebuck , that she not only refused use of this document against me , she went on record refusing it's use.
I lodged complaint with these solicitors and KUH Land Registry and myself and the Judge were ignored as the restriction went on.
The covenant document states that the scope of the land previously with the property , reverts back twenty-one years after the death of the surviving partner of the original holders for the setting up of the document.
This means the actual house ( it also includes my owning anything that is built on the covented land) of the claimant , reverted back to my title and my ownership, as did their parents house ( they entered the fathers unprobated will and it was allowed into the AHMLR hearing, although it was never disclosed to either myself or the other four contesters of the claim).
A manager at Inland Revenue has confirmed in writing that both myself and the vendors before me , had paid stamp duty land tax on the whole acreage , also including the fifty acres and Nordale Farm on Nordale Lane LN12 1PE.
KUH Land Registry staff while confirming this fifty acres on the TID they sent for my title LL112066 dated the 13 th February 2007, after speaking to me on the 15 th February 2007 , then removed it from my registered title on the morning of the 16 th February 2007.
The files provided for my DPA(SAR) also contain record that the claimants solicitors were instructed over the claim to this land in May 2007.
The Adjudication of The Advertising Standards Authority dated for the 30 th May 2007 holds published record of Land Registry stating "no claim of adverse land possession can be lodged against already registered land".
The "land" was confirmed to me , to be registered land on the 13 th February 2007 and again on the 15 th February 2007 , only for the "totally paperless claim ", "solely based on declarations", for my neighbours claim of adverse land possession , to be allowed to be lodged on the 23 rd July 2007 and the "land" supposedly surveyed on the 3 rd August 2007 , without the affected parties whose boundaries adjoined it or ever myself being informed.
The "plan" and "photographs" of the survey did not match, not one taken photograph matched any of the recorded positions the photographs were meant to be taken from.
As the claimant was confirmed by his employers ( East Lindsey District Council) to work at that time in Graphical Interfacing within their planning department, perhaps it can be assumed he par-taked in the photographs being taken?
Exhibited was many forceful tactics as KUH Land Registry knew the statement made by I-- T---- of H---A--- LN12 1NX , to be false and even wrote with advice to the claimant's solicitors saying should they be using him as a witness .
Mr T---- had written to KUH Land Registry in October 2007 stating the land the claimants were seeking was his already registered land , then in November 2007 he also contested the claimants to the land, to then make a statement that he had lived at his property since 1994 and that to his knowledge no one save the claimants had ever laid claim to the land.
Proved is the fact the vendors from whom l bought registered title LL112066, knew the including of the land into the registered title here , as they had owned "W---- C----- ,LN12 1NX" , and their deeds for that property showed it originally joined with the boundaries here .
I have sourced maps /plans , lodged with ELDC for the planning application of the building of "R------- ,LN12 1NX", that illustrate the land here with Corner Farm for timelines that match the other factors of my own deeds / documents.
Hence the knowledge to the land involved when the vendors set up the electricity board wayleave for lines to be laid under the land , that the claimants had attacked the two vendors in May 1995 in front of workers attending to start the work.
Claire Ward of Yorkshire Electricity Board Telephoned me on the 5 th July 1995 and informed me of the threats these claimants had made to her staff in an attempt to stop the lines being laid according to the vendors rights and wishes, she stated the calls had been extremely and abusive swearwords used.
I have clear record of the covenant document being held in the file of Dale & Co Solicitors (Lincoln) , that l placed a lien on that file in 2004 , and it being my property / document , and it to be held along with any further information about me and my home / property / land , to my order only in accordance with The Solicitor's Rules and the Solicitors Regulation Authority have provided to me hard copy of the "SRA Code of Conduct 2011", invoked by Brigit Prentice as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice as she took The Legal Services Act 2007 through The House of Commons; that is further proof the things that have been occasioned by KUH Land Registry's involvement in telephoning my acting solicitors ( also being my solicitors for my purchase of LL112066) on the 23 rd October 2007 and the fact there was now "excepted non-disclosure" of the declarations this whole stated to be paperless claim to land was ultimately based on.
Smoke and mirrors to obtain already registered / protected land , with previous involvement of two judges in 2002 & 2003 in the matter of Dale & Co Solicitors for the "error" legal aid charge that l was sent in March 2000 for someone else , that on many occasions KUH Land Registry failed to bother to correct the address details over.
Privacy Statements of Land Registry and LSC should have been the first area that the PHSO should have investigated to observe how l had complained to both organisations and copied them into matters.

1) I note in the cases of E----- W----- and her sister R------ C------ , different addresses have proved costly to both of these victims of Land Registry's acting outside of their prescribed remits ,and having run with a bank that defeated a bear trust , using what was a frozen inactive document in Mrs W------'s case, and solicitors wishing to deprive them both of their legally purchased properties.
2) There are many of these cases , another being A--- C---- and her property in Blackpool in the matter of a restriction wrongly put on by Land Registry.
3) L--- L------'s case where as an excepted vulnerable adult under The Court of Protection, he was evicted with his teenage daughter into the street as Land Registry allowed the lodging of a document by his wife's divorce barrister forcing the sale of his dwelling / home.
4) M----- G---- 's case where although being costs protected by her legal aid , evicted together with her beloved twenty-three dogs over a builders dispute she was advised to raise by her architect and surveyor, because Land Registry allowed selling of her home even though in 1992 it could not be registered and was only ever registered in 1996, four years after being purchased by an architect who was brother of a local councillor.
5) J-- B------'s property in The Isle of Wight, seized and sold because his own solicitor lied over a form he had to sign and it actually being the means to occasion through Land Registry it's sale ( being a Deed of Priority Document), and his now at eighty-two years old still being persecuted for daring to question the intrusive measures metered out to victims if they speak out of injustice / miscarriage of justice matters.
6) M---- J---- in Skegness chased for legal aid money and accrued interest for money she paid out many years ago regarding her own disputes involving her home.
7) P----- M--- -F----- - evicted and reduced to living in her car with her dog in the middle of winter , again over legal-aid costs and bailiffs turfing her out into the street just because they could and the law be blowed, all aided by Land Registry their privacy statements not adhered to and their running with LSC.
8) P----- C----- whose hotel Lincoln business was seized and her being evicted all on the premise of a false document for a rental agreement for a fire alarm that had no companies house registration number on as it was an altered document made to look like a loan agreement, and this was the third time this lady was targeted of assets having lost a manor house and a scaffolding business previously. She suffered appalling health issues and suffered a yet unexplained death , perhaps broken in spirit?

The PHSO refuse to contemplate the real fact that Land Registry is out of control and far from protecting the public's ownership of property and land, they run with picking up the telephone and performing extra curricular activities of orchestrating the targeting of victims to deprive them of property/ land.
My personal details and that of my property / home / case , have been sent out unredacted to other victims of the crimes Land Registry is committing under The Human Rights Act, that states no one can be deprived of property or land without receiving payment for it.
I am a victim of rape , prevented twice from reporting the details and having it investigated as if there had been any investigation the fact there was a wrong person and wrong address for my property / registered title would have come out in 1999 or 2012.
How can Land Registry on notice from the Information Commissioners Office in August 2011 for their breach of the DPA, continue to act in giving my fifty acres of land to the cautioner and her ex-husband on the 7 th September 2011?
When l caught Mike Westcott-Rudd red handed with my stolen conveyance document on the 3 rd June 2011 , that even after the already involvement of The National Crime Unit and The head of Lincolnshire's Economic Crime Unit and their saying no one should have had the document except me , he still refused to let me have it.
Julius Juispais of the AHMLR instructed me to keep sending the required proof of the three consecutive conveyance documents for the relevant time frame to KUH Land Registry until they corrected the register .
Land Registry are in law acting retrospectively , shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted .
I reported the legal aid charge and it not being a charge for me, but it was being used hidden in the caution register with the claimants for the adverse land possession claim listening in on my telephone line spying on me to ensure l did not discover no correction was occurring at Land Registry and this claimant excellently placed to be in daily contact with Land Registry employees through his working for ELDC,

Yours sincerely,
Diana Smith Tel 01507 473053.

[email address]"

Reply Reply All Forward

© 2017 Oath (UK) Limited. All Rights Reserved

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman should have responded by now . I am requesting an internal review,

Yours faithfully,

Diana Smith

informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Smith

 

Re: FDC-274899 / Request for Information.

 

I write in response to your correspondence sent to the Parliamentary &
Health Service on 8 November 2017 and your further email dated 30 November
2017 where you have requested an internal review as you believe your
request is ‘long overdue’. I will address your correspondence in 2 parts.

 

Part 1

 

The title of your request is marked ‘Requesting details of the PHSO status
on issues of The Equality Act 2010’.

 

Please see our response that is attached. We appear to have responded to
the same request from you in March 2017 and have provided you with a copy
for ease of reference. Please note that we received your request on 8
November 2017 and as per the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), a
response is due within 20 working days. Therefore our response is within
the above mentioned timeframe as per the FOIA.

 

 

Part 2

 

In your request of 30 November 2017, the subject matter is titled
‘Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Requesting details of
the PHSO status on issues of The Equality Act 2010’. Your exact request is
as follows:

 

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

 

this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, The
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman should have responded by now .
I am requesting an internal review,

 

In order that we can conduct an internal review, we ask that you provide
us with further details setting out the reasons why you feel that your
information request was dealt with incorrectly.

 

At this stage it is not clear if you are requesting an internal review on
your request that we received on 8 November 2017 or your previous request
from March 2017. Our records indicate you previously requested an internal
review in April 2017 and a response was provided to you. That said it
would be helpful if you could provide us with some clarification in order
that we can consider your request for an internal review.

 

I hope my response is helpful. If you believe I have made an error in the
way I have processed your information request, it is open to you to
request an internal review. You can do this by writing to us by post or by
email to [Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]. You will need to specify what
the nature of the issue is and we can consider the matter further. Beyond
that, it is open to you to complain to the Information Commissioner’s
Office (www.ico.org.uk).

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

W: [1]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

show quoted sections

Dear InformationRights,
my request was to enquire to the level of service the PHSO offers to the UK Public and their perceptions to has this improved in line with the coming in of The Equality Act 2010.
I wanted to be able to compare the service issues at large as to the way my own experiences measure up.
I was sceptical from the start of contacting the PHSO through my elected Member of Parliament ( Sir Peter Tapsell) in early March 2009 , but having involved this same MP for some nine years at that stage and on the recommendation of Denise Dewson of The Independent Complaints , as the second stage complaints process for matters of complaints involving Land Registry, it was the way forward to make the PHSO aware that the referral of my case involving my already registered title to judicial involvement of The Adjudicator to HM Land Registry was wrong procedurally and that the PHSO as the top tier complaints body needed to redirect matters to prevent what amounted to a long controversy of involvement on the part of Kingston upon Hull Land Registry and Legal Services Commission ( presently The Legal Aid Agency).
Having experienced the involvement of the complaints system previously through lengthy involvement of forty-three staff at LSC and their Land Charges Department over some ten years back to 1999 and the involvement of two investigation officers of differing levels of experience at The Office for Supervision of Solicitors that in 2004 brought on board The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and everything dying a death with no further contact and no one coming back to me when l chased matters up or even explaining why after it had been proved there had been fraud / corruption/ court entered altered documents/ defamation of my character and lying on court records and forms , for the hearing before District Judge Toombs on the 6 th June 2002 that no one including Court Staff could tell me what the outcome was.
I was forced l felt to take the matter back to court and the LSC wrote to me in 2003 stating they would reimburse me for the further hearing of the 1 st July 2003, as it was after all only reinforcement of the outcome involving Judge Toombs , but this time in front of District Judge Hudson.
The culprit solicitor for the wrongdoing that caused these hearings was asked to pay me back the overpayment he had extracted from me and my mother , who had in fact sold her own home to enable paying my legal fees to avoid a legal aid charge against my home.
As said everything halted with no more involvement and records show Kingston upon Hull Land Registry who l had copied into the involvement of LSC and the OSS , failed like LSC before them , to correct the details regarding my ownership and address issues for what l had reported in 2000 & 2002 as a wrong address.
The PHSO were notified through my MP in early March 2009 of the facts of the previous involvement of LSC and KUH Land Registry and my being told by Ian Flowers of Land Registry Head Office that these previous issues were related to what was happening with my neighbours adverse land possession claim.
I copied the AHMLR into the letter sent to the PHSO through my MP, expecting a halt on matters if only to re-examine why Land Registry would refuse to investigate the land already being registered to me , although l excepted the mistake that Land Registry made including Mr Wilsons small piece of land and provided my title deeds in person to allow them the proper evidence of Mr Wilson and his son buying that particular bit of land in 1960.
All that was needed was for KUH Land Registry or the solicitors for the original claim to just this piece of land , to seek to contact the Wilsons.
No one did and as l was fairly new to this area and did not know who to begin to ask , the only remarks made were that Mr Wilson and his son had both died.
The declarations that were the sole basis for this totally paperless claim to already recorded to be registered land, and that there was non-disclosure of by Land Registry and my own acting solicitors who had witnessed them in 1990 & 1993 and an excepted point in law against KUH Land Registry according to their own solicitor Darren Cavill ; were in fact elicited and made while Mr Wilson senior was still alive and living only feet from the land.
Mr Wilson and his son had given permission for the neighbours to use a narrow strip of the access / green strip to grow vegetables on , by the giving of permission to use land , it halts any claim to ownership , and the access was still fully open to the road and a reported 26 1/2 feet wide.
Behind the back of Mr Wilson and his son , these neighbours had lied on a planning application in 1991 upon the death of Mrs L---- father , saying they owned the land.
There was also intervention of HM Post according to paperwork previous residents on Rotten Row provided to me, to stop residents finding out about the proposed planning application and presumberly telling Mr Wilson or his son.
These neighbours making a false planning application that failed and then going on to use declarations in order to made a claim of adverse land possession of the "green strip", have lived in the village since the early fifties / sixties and knew the Wilson Family well because of the Wilson's owning the village pub over many years and even invited Mr Wilson to their wedding reception, which he attended.
I repeat no attempt was ever made to contact the true owner of the land even when l made statement's that l did not own it and named who did own it in October & November 2007 and my providing in person on the 26 th September 2008 my title deeds showing the conveyance to Mr Wilson of this bit of land in 1960.
Mark Lawson at KUH Land Registry copied my Title Deeds and admitted everything had been the fault of errors and mistakes made by Land Registry and he refused my lodging the document John Edon as assistant registrar had sent me , because the land being the back part of the access was already like the "green strip" already registered land. Mr Lawson promised me rectification of the register would occur at no cost to me , and this was all later denied to have taken place as Mr Lawson had not allowed my carer to stay with me to witness this.
As a registered disabled person with limited mobility , it was most stressful having been taken to this pre-booked appointment as a partial hearing person and not allowed a fully hearing person who has taken care of me since 2000 to stay with me and assist me.
I felt stripped of my rights.
Recently Land Registry provided for an information request details of "The Final Responses Log " that the events surrounding my attending KUH Land Registry on the 26 th September 2008 have been removed from.
Land Registry's disengagement of me in early August 2009 was while my case was still live and while it was for Land Registry to request a stay on the decision of the AHMLR as Mr Derrick Wilson had been found and made a truth statement to his identity and his ownership since the death of his father in June 1994 of the "green strip" and my rights to use it
Land Registry Head Office directed John Edon to tell me to put in for he stay with the AHMLR as the office of the AHMLR was said to not be answering him , which is also the story he told the ICR according to their files l have been provided copy of in March 2012.
Edward Cousins as the Chief Adjudicator had allowed my acting solicitor an extra month in which to lodge a request to appeal and the deputy adjudicator bi-passed this by completely over-looking my lodged appeal of the 23 rd August 2009.
This deputy adjudicator in his decision had agreed with me - Diana Smith , that Mr Wilson owned the green strip and was totally ignoring his now proved existence , he even e-mailed direct to my personal e-mail address saying he had already dealt with matters and would deal with the matter of costs when he was next in the tribunal.
I was never deemed liable for the costs of the AHMLR hearing as solicitors acting for me in the matter of the costs had timed me out and were excepted to be liable for the costs and the solicitors for the other side had stated this in a letter to the AHMLR and asked for a certificate to be issued in order to bill these solicitors direct.
Again this deputy adjudicator ignored this and put the costs against me , referring it to a judge at Nottingham Magistrates Courts.
As l was denied the information for my DPA(SAR) made to Land Registry on the advice of Robbie Crane of LSC in early March 2009 , l was not only denied my own conveyance document that had been stolen , but l was also denied office copy of it for the AHMLR hearing and this one document would have prevented all judicial involvement as together with the two conveyance document l already had it made the "three consecutive conveyance documents for the relevant timeframe of the registration" of registered title LL112066, that under Megarrys Land Law was indisputable proof of the land being registered land and protected by state guarantee of title by and through Land Registry.
Land Registry are at fault for confirming to me their holding of documents showing the land of the access and orchard and the land of Nordale Farm / 50 acres , to form my registered title on the 15 th February 2007 and then their acting off piste in hiding the lodging of a claim of adverse land possession of the "green strip" and surveying of the land , without informing any of the parties affected or whose properties boundaries adjoined the sought land.
As told to me by Alan Freedman of The Financial Services Ombudsman and a solicitor at my legal insurance, Land Registry should not have referred the matter to the AHMLR without first investigating their already confirming the land as my own registered land.
Involving the complaints process of the PHSO failed to prevent the case being sat over by a person with a conflict of interest as he was a commissioner for LSC and the live in partner of its director of legal and governance ( Ruth Wyatt), and this person not allowing me my fundamental rights of due process .
Robbie Crane of LSC whose boss was Ruth Wyatt , panicked when l told him who the deputy adjudicator had been and stated to me that it should never have been allowed to happen and that it was now a conflict matter.
I believed in his role as head of civil bills at LSC that Mr Crane would report matters for redress , instead he disengaged with me.
Karen Cole of "Legalmindedfriends" who l signed up to act for me , asked the question to both John Edon and the deputy Adjudicator Angus Andrew, had they considered the new evidence of the existence of Mr Wilson and neither would reply .
I was therefore prevented from taking matters through the civil courts as there was this total ignoral , although Edward Cousins seemed pretty annoyed with me as he presumed l had not bothered to lodge an appeal when he had allowed me the extra time in which to do so.
Throughout the demeanour of staff at the PHSO has been to belittle me.
They laughed at me when l stated that Alan Freedman had assisted me saying Land Registry had no right to involve the AHMLR.
The PHSO staff including Charlotte Carter have belittled me recently over my trying to obtain my fuel costs from attending a meeting on the 26 th June 2014 that l was promised l would be reimbursed for.
This was a meeting with the staff of the PHSO where l was seeking investigation into the sudden death of my fiancée Andrew Starr.
Even though the meeting was conducted by a third party group and recorded , l was not privy to anything that took place afterwards , l was exiled and Andy's death has not been looked into.
Andy was 53 years old with mental health issues , when he was admitted to Pilgrim Hospital with suspected food poisoning after eating an Indian takeaway.
I visited with a friend and left my contact details with the ward staff , and Andy was to ring me in a couple of days.
He never called and l tried to ring him and was passed repeatedly from ward to ward until someone answered saying records.
I asked had l been put through incorrectly as l was looking to contact a patient called Andy Starr and she replied "he's dead, he died" then slammed the telephone down on me.
No one has ever yet explained to me what happened.
As a disabled person and Andy having mental health issues we were both stripped of our rights.
This was what l told the staff of the PHSO when l met with them on the 26 th June 2014 and l said l was waiting to be allocated an investigator to look into Andy's death.
I am up against staff at the PHSO who do not listen to me and that ridicule me because of my being partial hearing and l have to say l have never come against such extreme discrimination ever .
Previously when a member of the review team called me stupid l received an apology from the ombudsman herself ( Anne Abrahams) and l thought matters could only improve from that point.
Charlotte Carter has told me my filed complaint through my MP has been destroyed and refuses to except that as a vulnerable disabled person l cannot on my own look through all the thousands of pages of paperwork to extract copy of the original letter my MP sent in March 2009.
I stressed l was in extreme financial hardship because the PHSO had failed to provide the £50.00p fuel costs I was promised reimbursement of and they laughed at me these staff at the PHSO.
This is why l lodged my information request , l wanted to see what had changed in how the PHSO conduct themselves , as to me nothing has changed and no one is listening,

Yours sincerely,

Diana Smith

Informationrights@ombudsman.org.uk, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman


Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your correspondence.

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org