A continued call for extra staff was made by the island’s independent officials going to the bat on the public’s behalf, the Ombudsman of Bermuda’s latest annual report showed.

The office has requested that its six-strong team get two extra employees to fulfil its mandate, to “improve the quality of casework and strengthen public confidence in institutions”.

Michael DeSilva reported a total of 277 cases handled by the office in 2025 — 52 of which had been carried over from previous years.

He highlighted several, including “a professional, whose application for a practising certificate was rejected without adequate reasons and whose follow-up e-mails vanished into an inactive inbox; a government oversight board that had effectively ceased to function because its chair was not calling meetings; a land tax error that had persisted for years, ultimately resulting in credits of more than $5,000 for the resident when finally corrected; and a person living with mental health difficulties who needed not just a referral, but a hand to help complete the form”.

However, Mr DeSilva cited his interview with The Royal Gazette at the end of last year, when he stated that the office took on more annual complaints than comparable bodies such as the Human Rights Commission, the Information Commissioner’s Office and the Privacy Commissioner’s Office, “all of which have larger teams”.

The Ombudsman said: “The question of resources continues to be one that I cannot avoid addressing. We submitted a business case in prior years for two additional posts and that request was not approved.”

He noted that the office began 2025 short of an executive assistant, with an additional departure that February of an investigations officer leaving its permanent staffing one-third down.

Two new officers joined the office in the fourth quarter.

Mr DeSilva added: “The case for additional capacity is not made in the interest of institutional expansion.

“It is made in the interest of the people who wait longer than they should for their cases to be resolved. We will continue to make it.”

The Bermuda Police Service accounted for the top number of cases last year, at 19, followed by the Bermuda Hospitals Board and the Department of Planning, at 12 each. Magistrates’ Court accounted for ten cases.

However, the Ombudsman emphasised that authorities with a higher volume of public interaction had “a higher volume of service users and, consequently, tend to have a high volume of complaints and enquiries made”.

There were 47 complaints carried into 2026, down from 51 outstanding from 2024, 62 for 2023 and 96 for 2022.

The annual report stated: “We will continue to monitor and address the backlog with the intention of further decreasing this number in the next reporting year.”

One case, raised in July 2025 in the House of Assembly, faulted the Department of Marine and Ports for a series of blunders that mistakenly deprived a fishing family of their moorings.

The report described the other highlighted cases for 2025, including:

• A family that had complained to a government agency regarding the condition of a rental property they occupied who were unsatisfied with the response.

At the heart of the dispute was a disagreement between the family and the agency over responsibility for the state of the property, which had been affected by the family’s “well documented hoarding behaviours”. The agency had referred the family for support, which was declined. No maladministration was found.

• A resident’s land tax exemption for seniors had been incorrectly applied to an apartment rather than the main house in which she and her husband resided.

Despite repeatedly contacting the Office of the Tax Commissioner over several years to have the error corrected, the resident continued to receive incorrect bills. The Ombudsman guided the resident on how to submit a formal objection. After a review by the OTC, it was corrected and the resident was given credits of more than $5,000.

• A person with mental health difficulties had challenges dealing with a government department and was uncomfortable navigating the internal channels to formally raise his concerns. He was subsequently linked with a social worker at the Department of Health.

• A Bermudian medical professional, who was trained in Europe, applied to a local authority for a practising certificate. Her application was rejected because her educational qualifications did not meet the registration requirements, but the letter of rejection did not provide specific reasons.

When the applicant sought clarification, her e-mails and follow-ups went unanswered. The authority addressed its communication failures and explained its decisions.

Last year marked the twentieth anniversary for the Office of the Ombudsman.

Download PDF File

Ombudsman 2025

• To view the report in full, see Related Media