Who We Are
We are a small group of people just like anybody. and just like anybody we have all experiened unfair challenges at some time which was mainly down to the beuracracy on the nanny state governmentr in which we live.
Pen pushers and red tape has been replaced by people and maxchines making decisions and opinions.
This site exists to address the challenges people face with unseen and unchallenged processes.
Enquiring World is a platform to ask questions, demand transparency, and verify institutional claims.
It involves holding power accountable through scrutiny of complaint systems and tracing funding in public services.
What accountability looks like
Accountability is not hatred of government.
It is the refusal to be treated like a statistic.
It is the insistence that decisions are explainable, reviewable, and consistent. It is the expectation that evidence matters. It is the belief that authority should survive scrutiny - and that if it cannot, authority must change.
Most people will meet the state at some point: when they need a home, a service, a permit, a benefit, a school place, a medical appointment, a police response, a prison visit, a probation requirement, a court form, a fine, a debt notice. The question is not whether you will meet the system. The question is whether, when you do, you will be heard.
Enquiring World aims to ask the questions that bureaucracy hopes you won’t.
Not to tear society down, but to keep it honest and prevent injustice from hiding.
Stay Informed
Get updates when we publish something new
What we Publish
Enquiring World publishes answers to our enquiries, not rumours. We make enquiries every week, but we do not publish everything we look into, and we do not publish claims we cannot prove. Our rule is simple: if we can’t see the physical evidence, we don’t run it. Evidence usually means paperwork—official letters, case files, contracts, invoices, emails, policies, recordings, audit trails, disclosures, and other records that can be independently checked.
We are not aiming to expose genuine human error or one-off mistakes. If an organisation admits a mistake, explains what happened, and takes real steps to fix it, we move on. Quiet change beats public theatre, and those who put it right do not get splashed across our pages. We publish when the opposite happens: when evidence mounts, harm continues, and the department or organisation refuses to acknowledge what is plainly in front of them. Too often the response is delay, denial, or a nonchalant shrug—sometimes wrapped in arrogance, sometimes hidden behind process, sometimes buried in silence.
That is when scrutiny becomes necessary, because accountability should not depend on who has the loudest voice or the biggest budget. When we publish, we focus on verifiable facts, not labels. We share documents where lawful, summarise what the records show, and make clear what is confirmed and what is still disputed. We offer a right of reply and publish responses where possible, but we will not print spin as fact. We also avoid unnecessary personal detail: we redact where appropriate and prioritise the public interest over clickbait. Our aim is to correct the record, protect ordinary people, and force institutions to act like they are being watched—because they are. If you see a story on this website, it is not because we wanted a fight; it is because quiet correction was offered and refused.