Ombudsman Services Register

Register of Facilitation requests, Formal Complaints, Hearings, and Appeals,
as well as Outcomes, Actions, Recommendations, and Sanctions

IN PROGRESS ~ OUTSTANDING ACTIONS

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0015
Reason: Course not as advertised
Date Lodged: 31st May 2021
Complainant: Ms AMG
Respondent: Master Distributor for a Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: Commercial Training Organisation
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Following on from a review of the information received, it was determined that:

4 points were raised against Respondent (Master Distributor for a Private Commercial Training Organisation).

  1. Respondent sold a course to Complainant under pressure.
  2. Respondent and his team were unable to answer any questions about the course
    (e.g. about accreditation, membership area, role of the General Manager, student support, etc).
  3. Respondent hasn’t responded to Complainant’s complaint, nor does it offer a formal complaints procedure on their website.
  4. Respondent isn’t transparent about its company details.
    In Respondent’s email of 25th March 2022, Respondent 1 confirms that he is the Private Commercial Training Organisation – Distributor for the UAE, and in this case not acting from his own company (although the payment receipt had been issued in his private company name).

2 of these points are against Third Party (CEO of Private Commercial Training Organisation):

  1. Third Party’s advertising suggests that they are accredited by 5 bodies, which could be misleading.
    The Complainant has had confirmation that Third Party is not accredited by at least one of those bodies (ILM) but they don’t specify if that’s the Respondent or Third Party that isn’t registered with them.
    The responses/feedback from the 4 other bodies is still pending at the date of writing this Notice of Resolution.
  2. Third Party refused to take any responsibility in handling the Complainant’s complaint, even after they were told that the Respondent wasn’t responding to any communication.
    Third Party’s response was to refer the Complainant back to the Respondent.
Outcome: Respondent: Upheld
Third Party: Resolved through information shared
Outcome Issued: 20th May 2022
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: Recommendations
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party: Recommendations
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding for the Respondent and Third Party.
Complainant: 20th May 2022
Respondent:
Third-Party:

.
The outcome was that:

Respondent (Master Distributor for a Private Commercial Training Organisation)

  1. Although our investigation doesn’t prove that Respondent applied pressure as a selling technique, in general, it is recommended all life coaches/training providers provide their customers with a reasonable timeframe to consider making purchases for which a significant investment is required.
  2. No evidence has been submitted to show that Respondent and his team were unable to answer Complainant’s questions, except for Complainant’s questions about accreditation.
  3. Timelines indicate that the complaints form had only been sent to Complainant at a very late stage in the complaints process and only after the Complainant had registered their Request for Facilitation and Discussion with the Ombudsman Service. Evidence shows that this was done after multiple requests to provide this were made by Complainant and Third Party.
  4. The company information provided isn’t transparent.
    It is good business practice to publish company contact information consistently and transparently across all business documentation and promotions, which isn’t the case as evidenced by both parties.
    When multiple companies are involved in offering a product, the relationship between such companies and the roles and responsibilities of each of those companies should also be made very clear.
    Sending an invoice from one company, and then a receipt from another company for the amount paid, is confusing and incorrect.

Third Party (CEO of Private Commercial Training Organisation)

  1. The Ombudsman Service has found evidence that at least some of the information provided was incomplete or incorrect.
    • Third Party isn’t accredited by the IRCM.
      The IRCM does not provide accreditation services to training companies, nor does the IRCM endorse training companies. The IRCM does offer a registration service to training companies who commit to adhere to the IRCM’s Codes of Conduct (standards, ethics, core competencies) and disciplinary procedures.
      Third Party, a UK limited company, is registered on the IRCM’s Education Directory.
      Respondent is not, nor has ever been registered or listed on the IRCM’s Education Directory.
    • Third Party forwarded the Complainant’s complaint to their Professional Body, who responded that they couldn’t process this complaint because Respondent is not registered/accredited with the Professional Body.
    • ILM has confirmed that Third Party is an approved centre.
      No proof of approval has been provided for Respondent.
  2. It has been evidenced that Third Party had been in contact and discussed the complaint with the Complainant.
    In this contact, Third Party offered various solutions to come to an amicable agreement on the way forward, which included training with a different Master Distributor and participating in another course free of charge.
    Although Third Party offered various solutions, it has also been evidenced that, as the process progressed, when it came to the repeated request for a refund, the Third Party referred the Complainant back to the Respondent, as the contract was between the Complainant and Respondent.

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0009: part 1
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0006,  0007,  0008:part 1,  0009:part 1
Reason: Issuing Invalid Qualification and Invalid Accreditation
Date Lodged: 21st August 2020
Complainant: Miss FD
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: #1: Coaching and Mentoring Professional Body
#2: Complementary Medical Professional Body
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Following a review of the information received, it was determined that:

  • there were three complaints registered:
    1. TCM 12-week NLP Practitioner Programme: where the qualified trainer left mid-way through the course and the resultant qualification is not recognised by the NLP industry or by the Consumers.
    2. TCM 12-week Coaching Qualification Programme, Accredited Foundation Training Course – Equivalent Level 4: where the training organisation awarded their students certification and accreditation; and not a qualification.
    3. Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondents.
      .
  • which resulted in the following complaints:
    1. Issuing Invalid Qualification
    2. Issuing Invalid Accreditation, and
    3. unacceptable Professional and Ethical behaviour including Representation, Terminology, and Consistency.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 21st September 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party #1: Recommendations
Third-Party #2: Recommendations
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party #1:
Third-Party #2:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0009: part 2
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0008:part 2,  0009:part 2
Reason: Unprofessional behaviour and Non-delivery of services/products
Date Lodged: 21st August 2020
Complainant: Miss FD
Respondent: Mr JM
Third Party/ies: Commercial Training Organisation
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Wrapped into a marketing package, an entrepreneur included the price of a Coach training course by a Commercial Training Organisation.  There was no handover from the entrepreneur to the Commercial Training Organisation, and once the students were on the Commercial Training Organisations database; additional courses were sold to them.  When faced with complaints both about the package he sold and the courses, the entrepreneur responded making himself the focus of the response.

Following a review of the information received, the Head of Ombudsman Service has determined that this complaint centred on:

  1. Managing Expectations,
  2. the Quality and Quantity of Services delivered or not delivered, and
  3. the Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondent.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 4th December 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party: cross-reference to Respondent in 0009: part 1
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding for the Respondent and Third Party.
Complainant: N/A
Respondent:
Third-Party:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0008: part 1
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0006,  0007,  0008:part 1,  0009:part 1
Reason: Issuing Invalid Qualification and Invalid Accreditation
Date Lodged: 20th August 2020
Complainant: Miss VS
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: #1: Coaching and Mentoring Professional Body
#2: Complementary Medical Professional Body
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Following a review of the information received, it was determined that:

  • there were three complaints registered:
    1. TCM 12-week NLP Practitioner Programme: where the qualified trainer left mid-way through the course and the resultant qualification is not recognised by the NLP industry or by the Consumers.
    2. TCM 12-week Coaching Qualification Programme, Accredited Foundation Training Course – Equivalent Level 4: where the training organisation awarded their students certification and accreditation; and not a qualification.
    3. Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondents.
      .
  • which resulted in the following complaints:
    1. Issuing Invalid Qualification
    2. Issuing Invalid Accreditation, and
    3. unacceptable Professional and Ethical behaviour including Representation, Terminology, and Consistency.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 21st September 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party #1: Recommendations
Third-Party #2: Recommendations
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party #1:
Third-Party #2:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0008: part 2
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0008:part 2,  0009:part 2
Reason: Unprofessional behaviour and Non-delivery of services/products
Date Lodged: 20th August 2020
Complainant: Miss VS
Respondent: Mr JM
Third Party/ies: Commercial Training Organisation
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Wrapped into a marketing package, an entrepreneur included the price of a Coach training course by a Commercial Training Organisation.  There was no handover from the entrepreneur to the Commercial Training Organisation, and once the students were on the Commercial Training Organisations database; additional courses were sold to them.  When faced with complaints both about the package he sold and the courses, the entrepreneur responded making himself the focus of the response.

Following a review of the information received, the Head of Ombudsman Service has determined that this complaint centred on:

  1. Managing Expectations,
  2. the Quality and Quantity of Services delivered or not delivered, and
  3. the Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondent.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 4th December 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party: cross-reference to Respondent in 0008: part 1
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding for the Respondent and Third Party.
Complainant: N/A
Respondent:
Third-Party:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0007
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0006,  0007,  0008:part 1,  0009:part 1
Reason: Issuing Invalid Qualification and Invalid Accreditation
Date Lodged: 4th August 2020
Complainant: Miss AT
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: #1: Coaching and Mentoring Professional Body
#2: Complementary Medical Professional Body
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Following a review of the information received, it was determined that:

  • there were three complaints registered:
    1. TCM 12-week NLP Practitioner Programme: where the qualified trainer left mid-way through the course and the resultant qualification is not recognised by the NLP industry or by the Consumers.
    2. TCM 12-week Coaching Qualification Programme, Accredited Foundation Training Course – Equivalent Level 4: where the training organisation awarded their students certification and accreditation; and not a qualification.
    3. Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondents.
      .
  • which resulted in the following complaints:
    1. Issuing Invalid Qualification
    2. Issuing Invalid Accreditation, and
    3. unacceptable Professional and Ethical behaviour including Representation, Terminology, and Consistency.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 21st September 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party #1: Recommendations
Third-Party #2: Recommendations
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party #1:
Third-Party #2:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0006
Single investigation amalgamated with: 0006,  0007,  0008:part 1,  0009:part 1
Reason: Issuing Invalid Qualification and Invalid Accreditation
Date Lodged: 4th August 2020
Complainant: Miss LAT
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: #1: Coaching and Mentoring Professional Body
#2: Complementary Medical Professional Body
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Following a review of the information received, it was determined that:

  • there were three complaints registered:
    1. TCM 12-week NLP Practitioner Programme: where the qualified trainer left mid-way through the course and the resultant qualification is not recognised by the NLP industry or by the Consumers.
    2. TCM 12-week Coaching Qualification Programme, Accredited Foundation Training Course – Equivalent Level 4: where the training organisation awarded their students certification and accreditation; and not a qualification.
    3. Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondents.
      .
  • which resulted in the following complaints:
    1. Issuing Invalid Qualification
    2. Issuing Invalid Accreditation, and
    3. unacceptable Professional and Ethical behaviour including Representation, Terminology, and Consistency.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 21st September 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: None
Respondent: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party #1: Recommendations
Third-Party #2: Recommendations
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party #1:
Third-Party #2:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0004
Reason: Conflict of Interest
leading to a Non-Delivery of Service
Date Lodged: 29th July 2019
Complainant: Miss ABJ
Respondent: two coaches in a Private Commercial Organisation
Respondent #1: Mr SS
Respondent #2: Mr CN
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details:

The Complainant approached the Private Commercial Organisation for coaching/mentoring on a recommendation from a close family member. The one point she raised was that there was no Conflict of Interest from the coach who would provide the service to her.  After the Complainant found that the coach was also coaching the close family member, she was transferred to a second coach. She subsequently discovered that the second coach had a personal relationship with the close family member.  From the Ombudsman Service investigation, the Private Commercial Organisation proceed in a professional manner, resulting in her loss of confidence in the company.  This led to the non-delivery of her contract (which had been paid for in advance).

Following a review of the information received, it was determined that:

  • the question to be answered is: ‘was the Complainant allocated a coach/mentor from the Respondent’s company that met the Complainants’ requirements?’
  • this complaint centred on Conflicts of Interest and Clarity.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 29th October 2019
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: Recommendations
Respondent #1: Recommendations
Respondent #2: Recommendations and Sanctions
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Recommendations and Sanctions remain outstanding.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

.

  • Rejected
  • Resolved through facilitation
  • Resolved through discussion
  • Resolved through information shared
  • Resolved through information shared during the discussion or hearing
  • Upheld.

.
Further details can be found under Policies

A single investigation may incorporate more than one grievance about the same topic.
An example of this is found in references 0006, 0007, 0008, and 0009.

The first is to provide each consumer (client, student, member of a Professional Body) with an independent authority to address disputes and complaints in line with current consumer policy.

The second is to identify systemic failings.
The systemic failings are identified through the use of the International Regulator of Coaching and Mentoring CIC’s remit to, through the International Regulator of Coaching and Mentoring CIC’s Steering Committees, work with all organisations and individuals in the industry to clarify definitions, standards, ethics, competencies, etc. to the benefit of the consumer.  Where the Ombudsman Service identifies an injustice, it works with all relevant parties/bodies to put this right with an emphasis on fairness and transparency.

.

Ombudsman Service Case Studies

.

Ombudsman Service

.
COMPLETED

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0016
cross-reference to: 0006,  0007,  0008:part 1,  0009:part 1
Reason: Issuing Invalid Qualification and Invalid Accreditation
Date Lodged: 6th July 2022
Complainant: Mr DSM
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: Coaching and Mentoring Professional Body
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Full details were not made available to the Ombudsman Service.
Outcome:
  • Closed
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 15th September 2022
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
As the Ombudsman Service was unable to get a response from the Complainant for further details, this complaint was not progressed.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

REQUEST FOR FACILITATION

Reference: 0014
Reason: Breaking contractual terms
Date Lodged: 20th August 2021
Complainant: IRCM
Respondent: Coaching Support Group – a division of a Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Invalid use of Toolkit
Outcome:
  • Resolved through discussion
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 25th August 2021
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: Recommendations
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Complainant: N/A
Respondent: 25th August 2021
Third-Party: N/A

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0013
Reason: Use of IRCM CIC logo without permission
Date Lodged: 6th October 2021
Complainant: IRCM
Respondent: Coaching Support Group – a division of a Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: No response had been provided to the Complainant after they had requested information.
Outcome:
  • Resolved
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 10th October 2021
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: Recommendations
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Complainant: N/A
Respondent: 10th October 2021
Third-Party: N/A

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0012
Reason: Validation of a Commercial Organisation that provides Coaches and/or Mentors
Date Lodged: 26th July 2021
Complainant: Mr/Ms SH
Respondent: Private Commercial Company
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: No response had been provided to the Complainant after they had requested information.
Outcome:
  • Resolved through information shared
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 27th July 2021
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: Recommendations
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Complainant: N/A
Respondent: 27th July 2021
Third-Party: N/A

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0011
Reason: Proof of course completion
Date Lodged: 31st May 2021
Complainant: Ms AC
Respondent: Commercial Training Company
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: No certificate had been provided on conclusion of the course.
Outcome:
  • Resolved through discussion
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 21st July 2021
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: Recommendations
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Complainant: N/A
Respondent: 9th August 2021
Third-Party: N/A

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0010
Reason: Unsolicited emails
Date Lodged: 31st May 2021
Complainant: IRCM 
Respondent: Commercial Training Company
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Commercial Training Company used the IRCM’s email address for their organisation’s marketing purposes.
Outcome:
  • Upheld
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 30th June 2021
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: Recommendations
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
Complainant: N/A
Respondent: 30th June 2021
Third-Party: N/A

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0005
Reason: Non-delivery of Services
Date Lodged: 9th May 2020
Complainant: Miss MS
Respondent: Private Commercial Company outside the remit of the coaching and mentoring industry
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Private Commercial Company outside the remit of the coaching and mentoring industry
Outcome:
  • Closed
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 12th May 2020
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: N/A
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
This Formal Complaint was lodged against a Private Commercial Company outside the remit of the coaching and mentoring industry.  Therefore, this Formal Complaint was not progressed.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0003
Reason: Non-delivery of Services
Date Lodged: 7th May 2019
Complainant: Miss PB
Respondent: Mr KHL
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details: Full details were not made available to the Ombudsman Service.
Outcome:
  • Closed
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 22nd August 2019
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: N/A
Respondent: N/A
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
As the Ombudsman Service was unable to get a response from the Complainant for further details, this complaint was not progressed.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0002
cross-reference to 0001
Reason: Professional Conduct
Date Lodged: 18th July 2018
Complainant: Miss SJB
Respondent: Mr GDFO
Third Party/ies: N/A
Witness/es: N/A
Details:

Following a review of the information received, it was determined that there were 30 different complaints included in the documentation:

  • 10 complaints UPHELD
  • 2 complaints PARTIALLY UPHELD
  • 6 complaints had INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE to support the grievance statement
  • 1 complaint was RESOLVED
  • 9 complaints were NOT UPHELD
  • 2 complaints were NOT RULED UPON, as they were incorporated into the ruling of other complaints.
Outcome:
  • Upheld 
  • subsequently Withdrawn by the Complainant
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 23rd March 2019
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: Sanctions
Respondent: Sanctions
Third-Party: N/A
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
As this complaint was withdrawn (2nd May, 2019) by the Complainant, the Ombudsman Service has not progressed this complaint and as such has not received completion of the Resolutions, Outcomes, or an application for the Sanctions to be lifted.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Reference: 0001
Reason: Incorrectly issuing a diploma
Date Lodged: May 2017
Complainant: Miss SJB
Respondent: Commercial Training Organisation
Third Party/ies: Mr IJ
Witness/es: N/A
Details:

Following a review of the information received, it was determined that there were 30 different complaints included in the documentation:

  • 10 complaints UPHELD
  • 2 complaints PARTIALLY UPHELD
  • 6 complaints had INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE to support the grievance statement
  • 1 complaint was RESOLVED
  • 9 complaints were NOT UPHELD
  • 2 complaints were NOT RULED UPON, as they were incorporated into the ruling of other complaints.
Outcome:
  • Upheld 
  • subsequently Withdrawn by the Complainant
    .
  • Outcome Issued: 23rd March 2019
Hearing Date: N/A
Resolutions, Outcomes, Sanctions: Complainant: Sanctions
Respondent: Sanctions
Third-Party:
Mr IJ: Sanctions
Appeal Submitted: No
Dates that this grievance was completed through Resolutions, Outcomes, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
As this complaint was withdrawn (2nd May, 2019) by the Complainant, the Ombudsman Service has not progressed this complaint and as such has not received completion of the Resolutions, Outcomes, or an application for the Sanctions to be lifted.
Complainant:
Respondent:
Third-Party:

.

.

Currently, all information provided by and correspondence with the IRCM is in English.