Although many trainers may choose to seek accreditation from a third party as an endorsement for the courses they are delivering; it has been found that the Respondent’s company has chosen an organisation that is not a recognised NLP Professional Body, and that the Professional Body has accredited this course without knowledge of the NLP industry.
The Professional Body confirmed that they received three training certificates for the unqualified trainer in support of his knowledge and experience to run Respondent companies NLP courses. Two of the NLP training certificates are from a recognised training company and demonstrate that the unqualified trainer has qualified as an NLP Practitioner and NLP Master Practitioner (albeit on a course run by his mother). The unqualified trainer has not provided a certificate to demonstrate that he is qualified as an NLP trainer or NLP master trainer. The third certificate is an accreditation certificate (not a qualification) from a coaching and mentoring Professional Body.
The Ombudsman Service has confirmed that the Accredited Senior Coach certificate from a coaching and mentoring Professional Body is not a training certificate and does not meet the recognised NLP globally agreed certification structure for trainers of NLP courses.
The Ombudsman Service recommends that the Professional Body that is not a recognised NLP Professional Body but a complementary medical professional body reviews the NHS website for CAMs and the relevant House of Lords report.
The Ombudsman Service recommends that the Professional Body that is not a recognised NLP Professional Body understands and documents how their decision to accredit an NLP course (as a Professional Body not recognised by the NLP industry) has impacted these students. These qualifications have been deemed to be meaningless within the NLP Professional Bodies and industry; as the students are unable to use the qualification to gain meaningful employment or assignments.