Talk:Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[edit]

Most of the original stuff on this page was typed by me, in preperation for my public law exams, although I didn't move it to here.--Will.S 13:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I amended the reference to Dyer, as my understanding of the case was slightly different from the original. A check of the case head note on LawTel confirmed my recollection. I deleted the reference to the House of Lords, as Dyer was only a High Court decision. I also added a comment on the current practice of the Office (for confirmation check the Ombudsman's website) to share decisions with both "sides" before formal completion. That practice removes one of the bones of contention in Dyer. --DJ Stock 07:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Ombudsman[edit]

There could be some interesting stuff that could be discussed at that point. However, I am not sure how one could reference it (doubtless, though, there are academic articles on the subject). One bone of contention in respect of any Ombudsman service will be the pool from which it recruits, or how it recruits. The Parliamentary Ombudsman historically took career civil servants on three year loans from departments and agencies. There was no effort to stop staff investigating departments/matters they had a previous involvement in. With such practices it is easy to see why people could dismiss the Ombudsman's work- whether or not such criticism was well-founded is a separate matter. --DJ Stock 07:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the section, awaiting more substantive addition. – Kaihsu 18:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

NHS-Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

NHS-Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:12, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

NHS-Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:31, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum Award[edit]

I have been informed that as of 2023 the maximum award they are allowed to pay is £10000, £10K, ten thousand pounds. That's a lot of Oxford and Cambridge for such small change 146.199.68.99 (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]