A Public Service Ombudsman

We welcomed the opportunity to respond to the recent consultation on the creation of a new Public Services Ombudsman. It was around bringing together the functions of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, the Local Government Ombudsman, and the Housing Ombudsman.

In considering our response, we also reviewed feedback from landlords and tenant representative groups to the consultation. You can read snippets from their responses below.

The outcome of the consultation is available online.

Representative group responses

Quotes from the landlord and tenant representative groups to the recent ‘A Public Service Ombudsman’ consultation.

“We consider that over the last decade or so THO has evolved into an organisation that is so valuable to, and respected by, the landlords and tenants it serves that to subsume it within a larger generic ombudsman service would lead to a reduction in its impact, customer confidence and potentially much of its independent funding stream.” HouseMark 

“We are satisfied with the performance, approach and support provided by the Housing Ombudsman and would be concerned that this may get diluted if merged with other Ombudsman services which may not operate in the same way.” St. Mungo’s Broadway

“In our experience the Housing Ombudsman’s collaborative approach to working with landlords is valuable in building effective resolution. We are also concerned that a merger would risk loss of expertise, ease of access and the collaborative, resolution focused approach of the Housing Ombudsman.” East Thames Group

“It isn’t broken – it doesn’t need fixing. It already provides quality – in all the areas listed in the Cabinet Office consultation – and good value for money.” The Confederation of Co-operative Housing

“…there is a risk that the momentum gained by the Housing Ombudsman in improving its visibility and the housing sector’s understanding of good practice complaints handling would be lost during transition to a new organisation” TPAS