Cultural patterns of disputing behaviour?

This essay builds on my previous comparative work on Ombuds users and develops the notion of cultural patterns, and attitudes, towards disputing in Germany and the UK (Creutzfeldt & Bradford 2018, Creutzfeldt 2016). I argue that expectations of Ombuds processes are grounded in our socialization of legal or legal-adjacent processes. I explore, through the lens of legal consciousness, the role that legal culture plays in our interactions with the Ombuds in two countries. I do this through drawing on evidence from my existing empirical datasets. Then, I discuss the impact of the pandemic on the developed notion of cultural disputing behaviour in Germany and in the UK and I posit that we have to reimagine legal consciousness in the online justice space, which claims its own hegemony. For instance, an indication of the things which shape, or problems which arise out of, or are enhanced by, the digital space shaping our legal consciousness. The essay concludes by suggesting new ways of thinking about our patterns of online disputing, detached from our national cultural context, embracing an emerging digital legal consciousness with an enduring impact on our expectations from a justice system and the Ombuds process. Dieser Artikel baut auf meiner früheren vergleichenden Forschung über Ombudsnutzer:innen auf und entwickelt den Begriff der kulturellen Muster und Einstellungen gegenüber Streitigkeiten in Deutschland und Großbritannien (Creutzfeldt & Bradford 2018, Creutzfeldt 2016). Ich argumentiere, dass die Erwartungen an Ombudsprozesse in unserer Sozialisation von rechtlichen oder rechtsnahen Prozessen begründet sind. Ich untersuche durch die Linse des Rechtsbewusstseins die Rolle, die die Rechtskultur in unseren Interaktionen mit den Ombudsleuten in zwei Ländern spielt. Dabei stütze ich mich auf Erkenntnisse aus meinen bestehenden empirischen Datensätzen. Anschließend erörtere ich die Auswirkungen der Pandemie auf das entwickelte Konzept des kulturellen Streitverhaltens in Deutschland und im Vereinigten Königreich und stelle die These auf, dass wir das Rechtsbewusstsein im Raum der Online-Justiz, der ihre eigene Hegemonie beansprucht, neu konzipieren müssen. Ein Beispiel hierfuer sind Hinweise auf die Dinge, die unser Rechtsbewusstsein prägen, oder Probleme, die sich aus dem digitalen Raum ergeben oder durch ihn verstärkt werden. Der Aufsatz schließt mit einem Vorschlag für neue Denkweisen über Formen von Online-Streitigkeiten, losgelöst von unserem nationalen kulturellen Kontext, unter Einbeziehung eines entstehenden digitalen Rechtsbewusstseins mit nachhaltigen Auswirkungen auf unsere Erwartungen an ein Justizsystem und das Ombudsverfahren

Towards a digital legal consciousness?

The justice system is over-stretched and constantly expected to perform beyond its capacity. It is operating with delays, high costs, not providing access to justice for all and, as some argue, with outdated procedures. This reality has forced a shift from slow and tired paper-based, face-to-face procedures to a time, and cost-saving, digital turn. The digitalisation of justice has slowly evolved in different ways in justice systems around the world. This article discusses how this transition to digital justice affects (non) users’ perceptions of this system and what motivates their actions. I argue that users of the justice system need different sets of capabilities (legal and digital) to be able to navigate this new justice space. In turn, this highlights the divide between those who can, and those who cannot, access the digital justice system. I build on legal consciousness research, identifying its failure to disentangle conscience from capabilities and propose a framework through which users of a digital justice system can be better understood. I also argue that designers of such systems can use this framework to inform the creation of a better system of digital justice. Finally, I recommend this framework for empirical testing and refining

What do we expect from an ombudsman? Narratives of everyday engagement with the informal justice system in Germany and the UK

This paper looks at expectations people have of informal justice mechanisms through a rich empirical dataset of 2775 recent ombudsman users in Germany and the United Kingdom. In a cross-cultural comparison the ombudsman, as a model of justice is explored. Not much is known about people’s expectations towards the ombudsman model; this paper starts to fill the gap. Four roles became apparent as cross-cultural narratives in the dataset; people who interact with ombudsmen expect them to be interpreters, advocates, allies and instruments. The identified roles are largely common to both countries, but in some aspects they show national specificities. These national specificities are seen mainly in the use of language; in Germany it is more legalistic in comparison to the UK. I argue that this might be related to what has been described as the general legal culture of each country and the institutional set-up

How the shift to online legal processes leaves many behind

The administrative justice system has moved to increasingly digital modes of operation. But does this enhance accessibility or deepen divides? Arabella Kyprianides, Naomi Creutzfeldt, Ben Bradford and Jonathan Jackson explore whether the shift to online legal processes – intended to streamline justice – has inadvertently side-lined the most vulnerable in society

Procedural Justice in Alternative Dispute Resolution: Fairness Judgements among users of Financial Ombudsman Services in Germany and the United Kingdom

This article uses the lens of procedural justice theory to explore peoples' experiences of an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) model: Ombudsman services, focussing on two services that deal with complaints about financial services in Germany and the UK. We ask two key questions: is the complaints process more important than its outcome; and does the importance of process and outcome vary between countries? In both countries we find a strong association between perceptions of fairness, confidence in the ombudsman service, and decisions acceptance. Against expectations, these associations are broadly invariant across the German and UK samples; but, despite this, all else equal German respondents expressed consistently more positive views. Our data add some nuance to the existing literature on procedural justice and suggest that the national context also plays a role. We suggest that national legal cultures provide for a framework of rules that guide people's perceptions and behaviours in legal, quasi-legal and related environments

Consumer Protection in Turkey: Law, Informality and the Role of the Media

This report is part of a University of Oxford John Fell funded collaborative project:Informality and the Media in Consumer Protection in Emerging Economies. This pilot project seeks to shed light upon consumer complaint behaviour through social media in emerging economies. This report is about Turkey. It offers an overview of consumer protection laws, and a summary of what Turkish consumers complain about and how they choose to do this. The aim is to set the scene and context for further in-depth analysis into social media as a tool for consumer complaints

Confusion, gaps, and overlaps: A consumer perspective on the UK's alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) landscape.

This report is about the help available to consumers who have experienced a problem with a business that they have been unable to resolve on their own. Some of these problems end up in the small claims courts, but increasingly consumers can turn to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) schemes. This report is about the UK's current approach to ADR. The report does 3 things. It provides an up-to-date map of ADR schemes available to consumers in the UK. It presents a detailed comparative assessment of a small selection of these schemes. And it sets out consumer insights drawn from interviews with consumers who have used ADR. The research presented in this report involved desk-based internet research, interviews with ADR schemes, and interviews with consumers. The report comes at a crucial time. There have been longstanding criticisms of ADR provision for consumers and there is wide consensus that the system is incoherent and confusing. The current government has an opportunity to address some of these criticisms in a forthcoming Consumer Green Paper. This is, therefore, an opportune time to be thinking about how to ensure that ADR meets consumers' needs and serves their interests.div_BaMpub4942pu

How has the pandemic changed the way people access justice? Digitalisation and reform in the areas of housing and SEND

We explored the impact that the pandemic has had on the delivery of, and access to, justice in the areas of housing and special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in England. We chose to focus on these distinct areas of law as - before the pandemic - the Administrative Justice Council (AJC) had facilitated a familiarisation workshop between Ombuds and Tribunal judges. The aim of the workshop was to develop their relationships and to identify overlaps in administrative justice responsibility to assist help-seekers find the best pathway for their grievance in a complex system. The Housing Ombudsman and the Property Chamber were interested to work together; and in SEND, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), and the SEND Tribunal expressed an interest to start conversations about raising awareness and supporting users navigate the respective pathways to redress. Our project had three connected aims: (1) to better understand the effect of rapid digitalization on advice system, redress systems and users; (2) to identify the effects on access for marginalised groups; (3) to explore how trust can be built and sustained in a justice system affected by the pandemic

The ‘Ombuds Watchers’: Collective Dissent and Legal Protest Among Users of Public Services Ombuds

This article examines the phenomenon of the ‘ombuds watchers’. These are groups of dissatisfied users of public service ombuds schemes who engage in legal protest against the current system of redress for citizen-state complaints. Through the lens of legal consciousness scholarship we propose a framework that conceptualizes the collectivized protest of the ombuds watchers. Based on an empirical dataset, our analysis has shown that the ombuds watchers meet each of the defining characteristics of dissenting collectivism and demonstrates the existence of forms of legal consciousness which present ‘opportunities to build alternative imaginaries and institutions’ (Morgan and Kutch 2015, p. 567). Our case study provides an insight into the potential for dissenting collectives to challenge the hegemonic structures of state law, while at the same time emphasising the continuing power of legal ideology in shaping popular understandings of justice. The article also suggests a pathway for future empirical research into ombuds