Hi, I am publishing this not to harm anyone. I am just curious why the commissioner is not following their complaints, review or conduct procedures.
Below is an ongoing email chain between someone at the commissioner and myself. The problem is they do not seem to know how to process my conduct complaint against Daniel Zeichner.
I will continue to add their responses.
You will note that they do not leave a named manager or commissioner that is required by the commissioner.
- - - email chain - - -
From: Ryan Tremble-Niccolls <ryan.niccolls@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 at 08:27
Subject: Re: Private & confidential: ref PCS1851(4)
To: Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk>
Dear Complaints Team, please pass my conduct complaint to an accountable person.
The efforts taken to not decide a non judicial reviewable matter are not in the interests of justice. The commissioner publishes all decisions except this one. The responses are unreasonable.
In the interest of transparency and justice, I intend to publish this email thread along with the original conduct complaint, redacting party including all associated requests, responses, and any formal rejection of the complaint.
I am writing to follow up on my initial conduct complaint regarding Daniel Zeichner's handling of my casework. I have yet to receive a substantive response, despite the protocol providing an exemption for allegations concerning breaches of Paragraph 11 (bringing the House into disrepute).
Your precedents suggest the following allegations are breaches of paragraph 11. (1) involved in corruption, (2) disregard for or of the law, (3) endangering the public interest and harassment and bullying.
I allege that Daniel Zeichner breached these when he in order to frustrate the case work progressing.:
(a) repeatedly said he would refer a complaint to the psho, when he knew that a signature was needed and asked for, and he had not provided a signature
(b) He asked the a member of PSHO staff to state that a final letter was needed when PSHO guidance said that one was not needed.
(c) He asked a member of staff from the DWP to state that the complaint will be between him and the dwp, summarise the complaint, not clarifying it, and taking one month instead of 14 days - a process not part of DWP guidance.
I may amend this to add direct quotes from emails and items published by the committee so that the public can see that this is properly supported by evidence.
Regards
Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Introduce a statutory duty to track and provide notifications for DWP complaints
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/775893
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 at 10:16, Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk> wrote:
Dear Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Thank you for your further email.
There is nothing else we can helpfully add to our previous emails. You have not provided evidence to show that a rule of conduct has been breached. We have explained that it is up to each individual MP to represent their constituents as they see fit and the Commissioner is unable to investigate allegations based on an MP’s handling of, or decision about, constituency casework.
Kind regards
Correspondence team
Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
From: Ryan Tremble-Niccolls <ryan.niccolls@gmail.com>
Sent: 22 September 2026 17:14
To: Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk>; Glenys Williams: Secretary KH Branch Labour Party <reply+bg3xe9ntfqslovc2ihjyu7mrpzk8ad46@labour.email>; complaints@labour.org.uk
Subject: Re: Private & confidential: ref PCS1851(3)
Dear Correspondence Team
I am concerned that the no commissioner has seen my conduct complaint about Daniel Zeichner. That simply again someone has picked out my name and stopped the complaint.
No conduct investigation has happened because no official rejection letter has been made by a commissioner, but the communications team.
Also a commissioner would not have given the two answers even by email as they are unreasonable. First it was said casework excluded. But this refusal ignored the fact I was alleging a breach of paragraph 11 - required to overcome casework exclusion, as per the protocol 18.
This reply seemed to be accepted as another reason was provided, that namely paragraph 11 was a high bar. However, this is nowhere in the code or protocol. A commissioner would not have said this.
I do believe that I am being treated unreasonably, so I have copied Labour complaints and a secretary from the Labour party for transparency. Because the behaviour that brought me here seems to have followed me.
Daniel Zeichner was telling the PHSO not to follow its guidance. To ignore the final letter exemption. Now the same appears here, with the code and the protocol being ignored.
I am not entitled to a review but I’m entitled to a commissioner seeing my complaint and providing a reasoned decision in the first instance: Not a flat refusal from the correspondence team. Significant parts have not been addressed by a commissioner. Please either review or send to a commissioner in the first instance.
Complaints not covered
The following complaints are not complaints about our service.
A complaint about the Commissioner’s decision not to start an inquiry.
There is no right to have a decision reviewed and there is no right of appeal. If the
Commissioner decides not to begin an inquiry, the reasons will be clearly explained.
The Commissioner may review his decision if:
- The decision was based on inaccurate facts which, when corrected, might change the Commissioner’s decision
- You have relevant new evidence not previously submitted
- A significant part of your complaint was not addressed
Regards
Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Introduce a statutory duty to track and provide notifications for DWP complaints
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/775893
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 at 16:10, Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk> wrote:
Dear Ryan
Thank you for your further emails.
As confirmed in our email of 16 September, the Commissioner will not be opening a formal investigation into the matter raised in your email.
Kind regards
Correspondence team
Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
From: Ryan Tremble-Niccolls <ryan.niccolls@gmail.com>
Sent: 16 September 2026 17:28
To: Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk>
Subject: Re: Private & confidential: ref PCS1851(2)
Hello,
I can tell you have not processed my formal complaint. Please process it and tell me the stages of the Formal complaint process. Give me a complaint number and a full response. So that I can appeal it if necessary. I have seen decisions where the commissioner stated they will not investigate. But you have not provide anything like that so. Please continue my investigation and provide your name.
Regards
Ryan
On Wed, 16 Sept 2026 at 15:03, Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk> wrote:
Dear Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Thank you for your reply.
Rule 11 sets a high bar as firstly an MP's actions must cause significant damage and secondly, any such damage must impact more widely than on the reputation and integrity of the individual MP involved.
We realise that this will not be the answer you were hoping for but there is no organisation or individual tasked with investigating complaints about how MPs handle issues brought to them by their constituents. It is up to each individual MP to represent their constituents as they see fit and they are not obliged to respond to every matter. It is at the discretion of MPs as to whether they take on your case and the Commissioner is unable to investigate allegations based on an MP’s handling of, or decision about, constituency casework.
Kind regards
Correspondence team
Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
From: Ryan Tremble-Niccolls <ryan.niccolls@gmail.com>
Sent: 16 September 2026 14:48
To: Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk>
Cc: redacted <redacted>
Subject: Re: Private & confidential: ref PCS1851
Dear Standards Comissioner,
I am writing to formally complain that the commissioner followed protocol 18C without following Protocol 18.
"18. The Commissioner cannot investigate the following, unless as part of an investigation into an alleged breach of paragraph 11 of the Code:...
c) a Member’s handling of or decision about their casework, including their handling of correspondence, whether or not anyone involved is a constituent of the Member."
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmcode/1084/report.html
My allegation that casework breached paragraph 11 was rejected because casework was excluded under protocol 18C. However, the exception in protocol 18 was not applied concurrently.
The exception to this exclusion under - Protocol 18 means that allegations of paragraph 11 of the code include casework.
Please reinstate my case and process the complaint.
Further is also a precedent for accepting any scope of complaint, that involves a disregard of or for the law. See Margaret Ferrier. She was not practicing as an MP, and therefore was acting in her private and personal life. However the commessioner applied the precedent of that widens the scope when an MP shows a disregard of or for the law, or COVID guidance. Daniel Zeincher is ignoring the PHSO guidance. This give a wider discretion than the exception in Protocol 18. This is considering that in the protocl 19 there is no exemption written for personal and private life.
Both apply to these allegations. I have attached the complaint again for you to read and apply Commissioner protocol 18 correctly.
To resolve the complaint accept the complaint regarding conduct.
--
Regards
Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Introduce a statutory duty to track and provide notifications for DWP complaints
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/775893
On Wed, 16 Sept 2026 at 13:33, Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk> wrote:
Dear Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Thank you for your email.
The Commissioner is in general expressly prevented by the Procedural Protocol in respect of the Code from investigating how an individual MP handles casework, including correspondence from constituents. So he will not be opening a formal investigation into the matter raised in your email and is unable to intervene in this specific matter in any other way. However, the Commissioner’s responsibilities are wider than investigating complaints, and he takes careful note of concerns raised by members of the public relating to parliamentary standards. Those concerns feed in to the Commissioner’s wider remit in the following ways:
- The Commissioner monitors parliamentary standards and gives advice in different forms to Members, individually and collectively, designed to enhance implementation in the performance of MP's functions of the Seven Principles of Public Life that underpin the Code of Conduct (openness, accountability, honesty, integrity, objectivity, selflessness and leadership).
- In particular, from time to time, the Commissioner advises Members on standards of openness and accountability, as well as other matters relevant to MPs’ interactions with their constituents and the public (for example, you will see some Advice Notes he has issued here).
- The Commissioner reports on his work to the House of Commons each year and in his Annual Report he highlighted his concerns regarding MPs’ responsiveness to constituency correspondence (see Appendix 4). The Commissioner will continue to draw attention to matters of concern to the public which, for one reason or another, have not given rise to individual investigations.
The Commissioner is grateful to you for taking the trouble to write, and will be taking careful account of emails received by his team in the course of the activities described above.
Kind regards
Correspondence team
Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
UK Parliament, Westminster, London SW1A 0AA
OPCS Privacy Notice
From: Ryan Tremble-Niccolls <ryan.niccolls@gmail.com>
Sent: 16 September 2026 12:54
To: Standards Commissioner <standardscommissioner@parliament.uk>
Cc: redacted <redacted>
Subject: Daniel Zeichner MP Conduct of complaint to commissioner
Good Afternoon,
redacted and I would like to file this complaint about the conduct of Daniel Zeciner MP for Cambridge. The complaint and the email evidence it attached. Please confirm receipt and next actions.
The attached evidence is the email chain between Daniel Zeicnher, redacted and I. More evidence is available. The additional evidence concerns the situation of maladministration with the DWP.
Please contact me with any questions.
--
Regards
Ryan Tremble-Niccolls
Comments
Post a Comment