York Crinkley Bottom

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS made this Freedom of Information request to The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Dear Local Government Ombudsmen,

On 15 October 2009 CLAE Minutes state in relation to Minute 8(3) that:

3) To defer a decision on the transfer of Lancaster City Council in order to establish the
current guidance in relation to the number of years that needed to elapse before a
previous employment of an LGO could be reasonably be disregarded.

The 01 December 2009 minutes state in relation to matters arising that:

Minute 8: Local Commissioners' areas
Agreed: to transfer complaints about Lancaster City Council from Coventry to York
with effect from 1 April 2010.

Taking account the LGO Yorks experience with a Crinkley Bottom in Lancashire amongst other things. Please provide a copy of all documentation related to this change of mind and under whose authority it was made.

Finally please identify which Ombudsman has been responsible for Lancaster City Council since 15 October 2009, and if they are investigating the Crinkley Bottom scandal.

Some of the issues are discused here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/thi...

It is understood that the York LGO was employed by Lancaster City Council at the blobby blobby time.

Yours faithfully,

Stuart Hardwicke Carruthers

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation ()

Not forgetting another Lancaster fiasco just after Blobby-gate: During 1999 the current York based LGO was involved in the unfair dismissal of a member of staff at Lancaster City Council. The tribunal described the investigation by Ann Seex, director of community services at the council, as 'coloured and flawed'.

It is also interesting to note that the previous York based LGO, Pat Thomas lives in the Lancaster area. The reason why she couldn't determine complaints about Lancaster.

I think the LGO have a ten year rule which allows the new York based Ombudsman to determine complaints about a council they used to work for over 10 years ago.

I think it may be worth an FOI to Lancaster to see what percentage of staff still work there who may be in a position to use skeletons in the cupboard to their advantage.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pe...

Anne Hide left an annotation ()

Look at the date, 1 April. Are the fools playing the fool?

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS left an annotation ()

In 2008 the estimate was 31 per cent of the staff were in post when Anne Seex was employed by the Council

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lo...

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation ()

In 2008 the 10 year rule would have blocked Anne Seex from determining complaints against Lancaster. However, irrespective of the 10 year rule I think Anne Seex will be in a very difficult position should a member of the public's complaint involve any of her ex friends or colleagues. If there are more than 25% of staff and members still working at Lancaster the odds are that she will be called to determine a complaint involving an ex colleague and this can't be right under any circumstance. In addition Pat Thomas, the Ombudsman she took over from and trained her, also lives and works in the Lancaster area.

I am sure prospective complainants from the area would be concerned to find that an ex colleague [of a significant proportion of people still working at Lancaster City Council] is going to be in charge of determining their complaint against the council.

As a Lancastrian myself I think the citizen's of Lancaster deserve a truly independent complaints system and not one manipulated for the convenience of the LGO.

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS left an annotation ()

Understand that the person with responsibility for the Lancaster complaints system knew Anne Seex..

Foi Officer, The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

Dear Mr Carruthers

Our ref: CS/10/023

This is to acknowledge receipt of your request below received on 2 March. We will respond within the 20 working day target (which would be by 30 March 2010) or, if unable to do so, we will write to you again explaining why.

Yours sincerely

Hilary Pook
Communications & Records Manager | DL: 020 7217 4734 |
Local Government Ombudsman's offfice | 10th Floor |
Millbank Tower | Millbank | London | SW1P 4QP |
www.lgo.org.uk |
|

show quoted sections

Foi Officer, The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Carruthers

Our ref: CS/10/023

I attach a letter in response to the request below.

Yours sincerely

Hilary Pook
Communications & Records Manager | DL: 020 7217 4734 |
Local Government Ombudsman's offfice | 10th Floor |
Millbank Tower | Millbank | London | SW1P 4QP |
www.lgo.org.uk |
|

show quoted sections

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Dear Foi Officer,

I don't use Microsoft Open Office XML Format (.docx) - would it be possible to provide the information in an accessible format (i.e. pdf, txt, doc, etc).

Would you additionally review your handling framework to take account of software.

Yours sincerely,

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Foi Officer, The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Carruthers

The letter should have been in compatible format - I don't know what happened there.

Here it is again.

Hilary Pook
Communications & Records Manager | DL: 020 7217 4734 |
Local Government Ombudsman's offfice | 10th Floor |
Millbank Tower | Millbank | London | SW1P 4QP |
www.lgo.org.uk |
|

show quoted sections

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS

Dear Foi Officer,

Many thanks - am pleased to note that Jane Martin is not investigating the cellulite in Lancaster.. although it is understood that Jerry White has.. doubtless Jerry White failed to make his files available to Jane martin

Yours sincerely,

Stuart Hardwicke CARRUTHERS