How we examine the decision
We reduce the material to a numbered statement of complaint. Each point identifies what happened, what should have happened, the evidence, the resulting injustice and the remedy requested. That structure helps the investigator understand the case without exaggeration or repetition.
Our review method
- Define the decision and deadline. We identify what was decided, by whom, when it took effect and which review, complaint or appeal route applies.
- Reconstruct the chronology. Events, documents and changes of position are placed in date order so the reasoning can be tested against what was known at the time.
- Map policy to evidence. Each relevant criterion is matched to the material relied on, material overlooked and explanation given.
- Separate the available routes. Administrative complaint, statutory review, appeal, regulator and Ombudsman routes are not treated as interchangeable.
- State the remedy. The final work identifies a proportionate outcome and the evidence supporting it.
Frequently asked questions
Will an Ombudsman reconsider the whole decision?
Usually the focus is administrative fault and injustice, not simply substituting a different view on the merits.
Must I finish the organisation’s complaints process?
Usually yes, although schemes may make exceptions. The applicable scheme rules must be checked.
What remedy can I request?
Possible remedies vary and may include an apology, reconsideration, service improvement or a financial remedy for identified injustice.