How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Michael Holly Your Own Question
Michael Holly
Michael Holly, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 7071
Experience:  I have 20 years of experience as a solicitor in litigation and other areas
Type Your Law Question Here...
Michael Holly is online now

I've chosen family law as I weren't sure which area

This answer was rated:

I've chosen family law as I weren't sure which area of law this issue falls under. This is a social care problem.
After a 2 year battle with my local council fighting for justice for neglect, the LGO has finally instructed the this council to make 3 major apologies for their neglect of me. There is one remaining primary issue they refuse to acknowledge. The Ombudsman claims she placed a restriction on the case, though I don't recall this being in writing when I received the email granting me the investigation, and on searching for this particular email on my server it has conveniently disappeared; throughout this case there has been criminal activities of email hacking, and that evidence has since been escalated to the NFIB.
Prior to this case closing I submitted a letter to the LGO requesting this restriction be officially lifted (I have acknowledgement receipts for this), but unfortunately have heard nothing from her or her team since.
She has approved media coverage for me for the neglect from Adult Care Services, but refuses me publicity for the remaining issue unacknowledged quoting the restriction they proportedly placed on the case.
Putting that debatably aside, I had previously approached Just Answer for the definition of 'restriction' within this context and I was prompted to ask the LGO myself.
Now, although the LGO tells me they 'wouldn't expect me to go ahead with this publicity, am I to assume they would take legal proceedings against me if I did? They have given me 3 months in which to decide whether I escalate this remaining issue to the high courts, but stress they would strenuously defend themselves whilst indirectly attempting to perturb me from taking this further with implications of high court costs for me. I suspect they would due to their fears of acknowledging the seriesness of my complaint; it involves administrative malpractice.
My main concern though is the restriction issues as I feel strongly about having my story told. They have caused untold damages to my health and livelyhood, and I feel publicity would prevent repeat occurrences happening to others. I have journalists on standby who see the need for this ordeal to be aired.
Your comments would be appreciated?
Many thanks,
Dear *****This is puzzling. Reporting restrictions are not uncommon, there may be children involved in a case or the judge does not want the case "tried in public".However once a case is finished and the verdict given it becomes a matter of public record. The Ombudsman's report is a public document and anyone is free to comment on it including the press.It might be that the LGO is concerned that you say something that could lead to claims of libel and is trying to warn you of thisI hope this helps. If there are any further points please reply I will be happy to respond.Best wishesMichael
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Yes, I agree.There are children's issues involved in this complaint indirectly resulting from the administrative / inappropriate behavioural malpractices. Though, I would still need to know whether my request to have this restriction lifted prior to this case closing should have been granted, and in writing to myself. No one is giving me a decisive answer to this?
Dear *****Reporting restrictions once given by a court will continue after the case. In the case of children they cannot be identified or information released that may lead to them being identified in case they are teased or victimised as a consequence.I have checked this morning and I cannot find that the LGO has any power to order a restriction at all. As such the restriction would have the status of a direction by the LGO. I think the language used by the LGO and their reluctance to positively answer this point confirms this. They are saying they would rather you did not talk about the case. If there was a sanction for doing so then they would surely say so.Best regardsMichael
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
...a forgone conclusion; there was no restrictions needed lifting.The LGO has reiterated a restriction reminder when commenting on the In Confidence side of their investigation, but I guess with these issues not directly involving any children or particular names, this wouldn't involve a court judge anyway?It sounds like their main concern is that of answering to the malpractices of the local council.Thank you, ***** ***** my question.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
One more thing Michael; would this same ruling apply to the term In Confidence too?
Yes I think the LGO is concerned that the privacy and , perhaps, job security of people who assisted in the investigation may be threatened if it comes out exactly what they said. However , you can simply avoid reporting any sources directBest regardsMichael
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Thanks Michael, that's all I needed to know.
My pleasureMichael
Michael Holly and 2 other Law Specialists are ready to help you