Olympic lottery boss takes over at Legal Ombudsman

Print This Post

10 December 2014


Ian Brack

Brack: “keen to hit the ground running”

Ian Brack, formerly chief executive and chief accounting officer of the Olympic Lottery Distributor, has been appointed interim chief executive of the Legal Ombudsman (LeO).

As first revealed by Legal Futures, Adam Sampson resigned as chief executive and Chief Legal Ombudsman last month after a controversy about travel expenses meant his organisation’s accounts are likely to be qualified by the National Audit Office.

Mr Brack was appointed by the Office for Legal Complaints (OLC) – LeO’s board – on an initial six-month contract.

Steve Green, chair of the OLC, said Mr Green had “a good record managing large budgets and a varied portfolio of work”.

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

Mr Green went on: “This experience should service him well at the ombudsman, where we face a number of imminent challenges including our new claims management jurisdiction in January.”

A spokesman for LeO described Mr Brack as “an experienced leader with a reputation for overseeing dynamic change and managing complex stakeholder relationships”.

Before heading the Olympic Lottery Distributor, Mr Brack was director of policy at the organisation for four years, following on from 10 years as director of policy at the Millennium Commission.

Mr Brack commented: “I’m keen to hit the ground running to help and support the organisation, and all of its stakeholders, through the challenges and opportunities we face over the next few months.”

A spokesman for the National Audit Office said the audit of LeO’s accounts was still going on and no decision had been taken as to whether or not they would be qualified.

Tags: , , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Do not fear robot lawyers – fear robot clients

Pulat Yunusov

Tech is famous for its shorter and shorter hype cycles. Robot lawyers were all over the twitters only a few months ago and now people actually yell at you for even mentioning the thing. Of course, robot lawyers should not even have surfaced in the first place because no one is remotely close to building them. Lawyers should not fear for their livelihoods. But there is something that is much more important than robot lawyers. It’s robot clients. Or at least the proliferation of machines, automated transactions, and standardized processes where lawyers once controlled the terrain.

September 20th, 2016