Back-
Ombudsman presents results of DIs
The Office of the Ombudsman held a press conference on 11th May to announce the results of two direct investigation reports, namely “Housing Department’s Mechanism for Taking Follow-up Action against Unauthorised Alterations by Public Housing Tenants” and “Government’s Regulation of Factory Canteens”.
In a direct investigation, the Office of the Ombudsman has found that the policy towards factory canteens executed and enforced by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (“FEHD”) and the Lands Department (“Lands D”) is seriously outdated and a review of the policy is long overdue. The two departments have failed to administer effective control in approving applications for setting up factory canteens. This, coupled with lax enforcement against factory canteens serving public customers, has allowed the operators to continue to engage in such wrongful activity as if it were acceptable.
Moreover, the Ombudsman has completed a direct investigation into the mechanism that the Housing Department (“HD”) has in place for taking follow-up action against unauthorised alterations by public housing tenants in their units. The investigation reveals that prior to August 2016, HD had not formulated any procedures and timeframes for following up those cases, or stipulated the duties of the staff responsible for taking action. In one case, the reinstatement works of the housing unit concerned was found to be still in progress despite that HD had pursued it for nearly three years. This shows the serious delay on the part of HD. Moreover, some HD officers failed to follow established guidelines properly. Some allowed tenants to reinstate fixtures that should have been reinstated by HD, while others failed to require tenants to rectify all unauthorised alterations. These cases show the rashness in follow-up actions and laxity of enforcement by HD. They also reflect on the ineffective monitoring on the part of HD’s management of the problem of unauthorised alterations to fixtures and the progress and quality of follow-up actions by its officers, leaving the problem to persist.
Source: Office of the Ombudsman, Hong Kong
