This list was compiled and published by the now defunct ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ web site. It is however still available here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111016000540/http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/
The main change is the addition of the post of Sheriff.
It is also considered that any Independent Regulator should be considered as a form of ombuds service.
No
Ombudsman
Court of Law
1
Ombudsmen work in private
Court proceedings are held in public
2
Ombudsmen' findings of fact cannot be appealed under any circumstance
Either party can appeal a judgement on a finding of fact
3
Ombudsmen don't have to be qualified for the job
A judge or sheriff is qualified, and regulated.
4
Ombudsmen can, and indeed do, delegate their job to a junior member of staff no matter how unqualified or incompetent.
A judge or sheriff can't delegate their job to a junior member of staff
5
Ombudsmen don't have to show all the evidence to the complainant and they usually don't
ALL evidence is shown to both sides
6
Ombudsmnen can and often do talk to the staff of the Body under Jurisdiction without the complainant being aware that any discussion took place.
A judge or sheriff can't talk to one side without the other side being present
7
Ombudsmen settle the complaint with the Body under Jurisdiction. A complainant can't refuse such a settlement,
Any out of court settlement is agreed between the two parties. The judge or sheriff plays no part,
8
Ombudsmen don't have to follow previous decisions / precedents / case law
A judge or sheriff must follow case law or provide a valid reason for not doing so
9
An Ombudsman is free to define maladministration as they see fit
A judge or sheriff must follow statutory definitions which exist for all legal wrongs
10
Ombudsmen are free to determine the level of injustice you must suffer before investigating your complaint
A judge or sheriff can't stop you taking court action even if the injustice you have suffered is slight
11
Ombudsmen are free to engage in propaganda (or as Justice Lightman calls it an evangelical agenda)
A judge or sheriff cannot use self promoting publicity (propaganda)
12
Ombudsmen probably don't meet the requirements of the Human Rights Act. Justice Lightman's view
all court/tribunal cases have to be human rights compliant
13
Ombudsmen often accept false statements from a council officer as the truth without any validation,
(Ombudsmen's 5th pillar of injustice ensures nobody else is in a position to challenge this ludicrous pillar of injustice
(Ombudsmen's 5th pillar of injustice ensures nobody else is in a position to challenge this ludicrous pillar of injustice
Statements are not accepted as the truth by a judge without:
a) being made under oath and
b) tested by cross examination by the other party,
a) being made under oath and
b) tested by cross examination by the other party,
14
Ombudsmen don't take action against any officer of Body under Jurisdiction who has lied to them
Action can be taken against anyone who commits perjury in court
15
Ombudsmen don't report any potentially criminal act they identify during their investigations to the Police.
A judge or sheriff would report any potentially criminal act they identify during a trial to the Police.