Upheld reviews and associated information

The request was successful.

Nicholas Wheatley

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

Please provide the following information for the periods 2014-15, 2015-16,
2016-17.
Please break down the results by initial checks and assessment, and investigations

1. How many reviews of decisions?
2. How many reviews of decisions upheld?
3. How many upheld reviews lead to further investigations of complaint?
4. How many upheld reviews lead to a change of the final decision?
5. How many upheld reviews lead to compensation paid to complainant by PHSO?
6. How many upheld reviews lead to an apology by PHSO but no compensation?
7. What is the average compensation paid by PHSO to a complainant when a review is upheld?
8. Please list any other action taken by PHSO when a review is upheld

Yours faithfully,

Nicholas Wheatley

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 Mr Wheatley,

 

RE: Your information request response FDN-274870

 

Thank you for your email request to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman (PHSO), received on the 21 October 2017.  You asked for the
following information:

 

"Please provide the following information for the periods 2014-15,
2015-16, 2016-17.

Please break down the results by initial checks and assessment, and
investigations

 

“1. How many reviews of decisions?

2. How many reviews of decisions upheld?

3. How many upheld reviews lead to further investigations of complaint?

4. How many upheld reviews lead to a change of the final decision?

5. How many upheld reviews lead to compensation paid to complainant by
PHSO?

6. How many upheld reviews lead to an apology by PHSO but no compensation?

7. What is the average compensation paid by PHSO to a complainant when a
review is upheld?

8. Please list any other action taken by PHSO when a review is upheld” 

 

Response

 

We have considered your request under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

 

We consider that complying with your request will exceed the FOIA
appropriate time limit and so we are refusing your request in line with
section 12(1) of FOIA. The appropriate limit for the cost of complying
with a Freedom of Information request is set out at section 3 of the
Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees)
Regulations 2004, and for the PHSO the amount is £450 (18 hours x £25). 

 

We do not hold the information in the requested format. Our records
indicate that between 2014 and 2017 we reviewed 71 upheld decisions, from
a total of 691 complaints undergoing review. We have been able to identify
these cases using the keywords upheld and review. However in order to
provide the level of detail requested, we will have to carry out a manual
search of the above number of cases in order to extract specific
information. This estimates that it will take us over of 2.5 working days
to collate all information, in response to your request.

 

Please be advised that under [1]section 1 of the FOIA, there is no
obligation to create information in response to a request. You may wish to
refine your request by narrowing its scope. Although we are unable to
guarantee that any refined requests would fall within the cost limit. For
example, you could try reducing the scope of your request to a shorter
time period such as a specific year.

 

You may find this guidance on making an FOI request useful to narrow the
scope of your request:
[2]https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/offici....

 

I am sorry that I could not be of any further help. If you believe I have
made an error in the way I have processed your information request, please
contact the Freedom of Information and Data Protection Team. You can do
this by writing to us by post or by email to
[3][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. Furthermore
you are entitled to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s
Office ([4]www.ico.org.uk).

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

E: [5][Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]

W: [6]www.ombudsman.org.uk

[7]PHSO logo

 

______________________________________________________________________
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. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
2. https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/offici...
3. mailto:[Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]
4. http://www.ico.org.uk/
5. mailto:[Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman request email]
6. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/

Dear InformationRights,

In that case would you please provide the details requested only for reviews of investigations.

Yours sincerely,

Nicholas Wheatley

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
______________________________________________________________________

J Roberts left an annotation ()

"Our records indicate that between 2014 and 2017 we reviewed 71 upheld decisions".

Interesting, complainants with 'upheld' decisions also complain (request reviews). It's not just the 'not upheld' who seek reviews.

Nicholas Wheatley left an annotation ()

I think they are referring to the total number of reviews upheld over 3 years, which is a pitiful 71 apparently, especially when you consider there were more than 5000 review requests!

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

I would like to amend my request to the following:

Would you please provide the details requested only for reviews of investigations. If that would take too long then please provide the details requested for reviews of investigations upheld in 2015-16 and 2016-17.

Yours faithfully,

Nicholas Wheatley

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
______________________________________________________________________

Brenda Prentice left an annotation ()

If I remember rightly, a review looks at the PROCESS of investigation and if that is right, then the out come MUST be right, regardless of the decision.

Got that? Its called justice I think?

M Boyce left an annotation ()

Yes Brenda, we all know that PHSO's investigations are synonymous with justice - think justice, think PHSO.

I have recently asked justice, sorry the Customer Care Team at the PHSO, to 'review' my Final Decision. They based their decision on evidence that they said they had seen, but which they refused to let me see. I repeatedly asked to see this evidence, but they just kept saying go the Customer Care Team. I have great confidence that I will receive PHSO, sorry, justice now!

Brenda Prentice left an annotation ()

You have a right to the information, if they can't supply it, does it exist? Ask Information Commissioner

M Boyce left an annotation ()

You've hit the nail on the head there Brenda. I do have a right to the information, but I know the information doesn't exist. I asked my caseworker for this information they said they had seen at least five or six times, and each time they just sent me completely irrelevant information. My case is now with the Customer Care Team. If they try and perform a spectacular cover-up then I will proceed to apply for judicial review.

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

4 Attachments

Dear Mr Wheatley

 

Re: Your information request response FDN-274916

 

Thank you for your amended email request of 18 November 2017. The
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) does hold the
information you requested and the reduced scope comes within the
appropriate limit. Please see attached.

 

Please note that the information covers all three years you selected. The
spreadsheet also contains the held information for enquiries as well as
investigations for requests 1 and 2. This was obtained when your request
was first submitted, and this information was used as the basis of our
section 12 refusal.

 

Right of appeal

 

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact the Freedom of
Information Team. Please remember to quote the reference number above in
any future communications. If you are unhappy with the service you have
received in relation to your request or wish to request an internal
review, please respond to this email and explain why you are dissatisfied.

 

If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may
apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision.
Generally, the Commissioner will not make a decision unless you have
exhausted the complaints procedure provided by the PHSO. The Information
Commissioner’s Office can be contacted at:

 

The Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

[1]https://ico.org.uk/

 

Regards,

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

E: [2][email address]

W: [3]www.ombudsman.org.uk

Follow us on

 

[4]fb  [5]twitter  [6]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://ico.org.uk/
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
4. http://www.facebook.com/phsombudsman
5. http://www.twitter.com/PHSOmbudsman
6. http://www.linkedin.com/company/parliame...

Dear InformationRights,

The PHSO annual report for 2016/17 states there were, for 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17, respectively 32, 5, and 11 reviews upheld. The file you attached only gives information for 16, 5, and 9 reviews upheld. Could you please provide details for the missing upheld reviews in the same .xlsx format as previously.

Yours sincerely,

Nicholas Wheatley

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
______________________________________________________________________

phsothefacts Pressure Group left an annotation ()

Just a 0.04% chance of having a review upheld and yet PHSO deny internal bias. Also this data does not reveal the full number of review requests which is far higher than the number PHSO deem worthy of review. You can see the data for this here (which once again does not match) https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/r...

With 3,306 complaints in 2016/17 alone and most of these simply dimissed by PHSO how can they claim the 60% customer satisfaction rates?

Nicholas Wheatley left an annotation ()

And even in the extremely unlikely event that the review is upheld there is only a 1 in 6 or less chance of the decision being changed. Only 5 investigation decisions were changed after review for the 3 years between April 2014 and April 2017.

PHSO claim you can request a review if you aren't satisfied with your decision just like they claim you can go to judicial review if you still aren't satisfied after review. But both processes are so heavily weighted in favour of the Ombudsman that they make a mockery of justice.

InformationRights, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Wheatley

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Please accept my apologies for not providing you with the all of the
information held by the PHSO. This mistake occurred because the two
further upheld complaints against investigation decisions were held by the
Customer Care Team and not on the central record. Please see attached for
an updated version of the spreadsheet that was previously provided.

 

Regarding the discrepancy for the year 2014/15, the annual report stated
that there were 32 investigation reviews upheld. This included those
reviews which were upheld as well as those that were partly upheld. For
the years 2015/16 and 2016/17 the figures for partly upheld reviews were
not included (our central records state there were 3 and 10 partially
upheld reviews respectively for those years).

 

By my estimate I would be able to obtain the information relating to
partially upheld reviews for all three years within the appropriate limit.
If you would like to obtain this information then please let me know.

 

Furthermore, the figure on the annual report for 2014/15 states that 46
reviews were upheld for enquiries and assessments. As with investigation
reviews, this is the sum of upheld and partly upheld reviews. There were
28 upheld reviews (as per the spreadsheet) and 18 partly upheld reviews.

 

Regards,

 

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

E: [1][email address]

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

 

______________________________________________________________________
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. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/

Dear InformationRights,

Thank you for your prompt reply. Please would you provide the additional information relating to partially upheld reviews for the 3 years in question in the same format as the data for the fully upheld reviews.

Yours sincerely,

Nicholas Wheatley

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 Mr Wheatley

Thank you for your response.

I will obtain the additional information as requested. Please note that it won't be ready before the New Year.

Regards,

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
E: [email address]
W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

______________________________________________________________________
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 Mr Wheatley

Re: Your information request response FDN-274960

Thank you for your email of 20 December 2017 in which you asked for the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:

“Please provide the following information for the partly upheld investigation reviews for the periods 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17.

1. How many reviews of decisions?
2. How many reviews of decisions upheld?
3. How many upheld reviews lead to further investigations of complaint?
4. How many upheld reviews lead to a change of the final decision?
5. How many upheld reviews lead to compensation paid to complainant by PHSO?
6. How many upheld reviews lead to an apology by PHSO but no compensation?
7. What is the average compensation paid by PHSO to a complainant when a review is upheld?
8. Please list any other action taken by PHSO when a review is upheld.”

Response

The PHSO holds information relevant to your request. Please see the attached spreadsheet for details.

Right of appeal

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact the Information Rights team. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications. If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request or wish to request an internal review, you should respond to this email and explain why you are dissatisfied.

If you are not content with the outcome of your internal review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally, the Commissioner will not make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by the PHSO. The Information Commissioner’s Office can be contacted at:

The Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

https://ico.org.uk/

Regards,

Freedom of Information/Data Protection Team
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
E: [email address]
W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

show quoted sections

phsothefacts Pressure Group left an annotation ()

I can't really see the point in upholding if you are not going to change the decision. Very few cash payments made so what is the benefit of going through the review process at all?

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org