106 | The nature kindergarten in Holeby. 18/04183 Suspicion of systematic violation of the collective agreement was the reason why a doctor complained to the Ombudsman. The doctor was of the opinion that the hospital he had worked at had used foreign labour for unlawful overtime and paid wages that were not in accordance with the collective agreement. The doctor had already attempted to involve the union but had been turned down. A collective agreement between the Region running the hospital on one side and the union on the other is an agreement between management and labour. Only the Region is within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Therefore, the Ombudsman could solely address one of the parties of the collective agreement, and for that reason he declined to consider the case. Generally, the Ombudsman holds back on con­ sidering complaints about matters which are based on agreements made between the public and the private sectors – for example agree­ ments made between management and labour. 18/02589 A prisoner complained that staff had used force against him by using handcuffs. The prisoner was well aware that he could complain to the Department of Prisons and Probation but he still wrote directly to the Ombudsman. This was because the Department returned all his letters unopened to the prison, according to the prisoner. One of the staff members at the Ombudsman institution telephoned the Department of Prisons and Probation and asked if this was true. The Department replied that this was not correct. Therefore, the Ombudsman sent the prisoner’s complaint on to the Department of Prisons and Probation in order for the Department to consider the complaint. In general, the Ombudsman’s case processing is in writing. But the staff members at the Om­ budsman institution can also choose to clarify matters over the telephone if this makes things easier in the present situation. 18/00724 ‘The fact is that I personally believe that Sweden is going to have a problem when it comes to the way the interpretation of the law is being twisted and turned.’ This is how a woman started off her e-mail in Swedish to the Ombudsman. The e-mail was about authorities’ use of forcible means and coercion. However, since the enquiry did not concern Danish authorities but conditions in Sweden, the Ombudsman declined to consider the matter. The Ombudsman can only consider complaints about Danish authorities. 17/03494 A general housing association on Amager (a part of the City of Copenhagen) wanted to build 58 new residences in an existing housing branch in­ stead of establishing a branch with its own finances. This was approved by the municipality. A tenants’ association wrote to the Ministry of Transport, Building and Housing and pointed out that the municipality’s approval was in contravention of the Act on Social Housing. The Transport, Construction and Housing Authority replied on the Ministry’s behalf and declined to consider the case. The tenants’ association subsequently complained to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman was of the opinion that the Transport, Construction and Housing Authority should look at the case again. Hence, he sent the case back to the Authority. The Transport, Construction and Housing Authority reassessed the case and determined that a decision had been made in contravention of the Act on Social Housing. The Authority wished to point this out to the municipality. When the Ombudsman receives a complaint, he sometimes initiates a more detailed case investigation. In other instances, the Ombuds­ man merely asks the authority to look at the case once again and for example give the citi­ zen more detailed grounds for the decision.