When you take your complaint to the Legal Ombudsman you are sent a 'little blue book' entitled "The Legal Services Ombudsman explained". So you read this 'little blue book' and note that it states, amongst many things, "They (ref. to the OSS) should carry out a detailed, unbiased investigation, within a reasonable time. They must take into consideration the views of everyone involved, and then make a reasonable decision based on all the available information". "involved" in my case was a District Judge who 'rebuked' my Solicitor for taking 'five years too long', a Barrister who labelled Thos Boyd Whyte's Solicitors 'negligent' and 'incompetent', Ann Abraham (ex-Legal Ombudsman) who used the words " their work was so bad ". The third Solicitor on my case wrote in an 'attendance note' that she didn't think I had been treated correctly and Gordon Luckhurst the Senior Partner stated in a letter to the OSS that he had not handle my complaints properly. In my own case I made "available information" that showed TBW were 'deceitful', 'dishonest' and told numerous 'lies'. Thos Boyd Whyte refused to comply with the 'Client Care Agreement' that comes under Solicitors rule 15 in that on two occasions the Senior Partner refused to see me, plus he did not turn up for a previously prearranged meeting, and discuss my 'dissatisfaction' on how they had handled and were handling my affairs, when it came to the 'Office for the Supervision of Solicitors' investigating my complaint it sounded like the 'three wise monkeys', "Hear no evil, see no evil, say no evil".
Now we move on to the Ombudsman 'little blue book' that goes on to state "She will always look at what you have to say and, if she can't help, she will tell you why" also "What the Ombudsman will do is check that all your complaints were addressed and that this was done within a reasonable time", the point here is, do you believe in fairies? If you do then the chances are you will probably believe the load of crap in the Ombudsman's 'little blue book'. In my case she must be 'blind, deaf and dumb" for she didn't 'see', 'hear' or 'address' my complaints.
Has Zahida Manzoor got all her marbles?
If you read an article by Zahida Manzoor she describes a case that happened to a woman identical to what happened to me as "Ludicrous and things have got to change" unfortunately I happen to be 'White and a Male', in the past she campaigned for race and sexual equality so what she said, in her opinion, would not apply to me. Oh yes, we all thought the Legal Service Ombudsman was supposed to be neutral with no axes to grind? Well that's what her number one fan tells me, then again we are all 'Right Charlie's' at times.
If you read an article in 'The Mail on Sunday' dated 18 January 2004 you will see a 'Fireman missed out on a job ...just because he was 'White and a Male'. "A FIRE chief has been found guilty of hiring unfit and unqualified firefighters to meet Government targets for women and ethnic minorities" In Zahida Manzoor's case is it likely the standard was lowered twice, once because she is a woman and again because she is a member of an ethnic minority?Why did the Lord Chancellor make her the LSO?
I don't think that takes a lot to work out. First and foremost is so that no one can turn round and wave that magic 'racist flag' regardless of how she treats appeals to her department. You would think after the Kamlesh Bahl affair 'Charlie' would realise these people turn round and bite you then come back again and sting you. 'Charlie' should stop making hypercritical rubbish speeches and take to reading what 'Enoch' had to say. Oh yes, don't let us forget 'Charlie' is going to appoint Zahida Manzoor as the new Legal Services Complaints Commissioner (LSCC) she asked 'Dickie' who was the Marquis of Queensberry, but he didn't know either. With Lord 'Charlie' in Zahida's corner there is no way the Law Society will lose any fight because their 'Protection Racket' is foolproof.