|
Previous chapter | Next chapter | Contents
page |
|
Chapter 5
Guiding principles for reviewing complaints
|
| |
5.1
The principles set out below are aimed mainly at reviewers who can investigate individual
complaints. But you can adapt them to cover reviewers who look only at systems. You should
apply the principles whatever type of arrangements you have (for example, whether you have
a full-time reviewer backed by support staff, or one person working part time).
Setting up the arrangements
The aims of your complaints review arrangements
5.2
When deciding on the aims of your arrangements, you should take into account the needs of
your users. You should, if possible, discuss and agree the aims with:
 | other people in your organisation; |
| other organisations the reviewer will cover; |
| representative user organisations; and |
| the reviewer. |
The aims should be written into the reviewer's contract
and advertised.
Appointing a reviewer
5.3
When appointing a reviewer you should:
| make sure that your contract with the reviewer takes into
account the requirements of employment law; |
| have fair and open recruitment procedures and advertise
those procedures; |
| set out the length of the appointment in the contract; and |
| make sure that any rules about reappointment at the end of
the contract do not put pressure on the reviewer. |
5.4
The contract should make clear the circumstances under which the reviewer's appointment
may be terminated. The reviewer's appointment should not usually be terminated before the
date given in the contract, other than on proven grounds of incapacity or misconduct.
The reviewer's role
5.5
To make sure that reviewers' actions and decisions are widely accepted, they should
establish their credentials with both the public and the organisations they are reviewing.
They should do this through the openness of their procedures and the quality of their
investigations. Their contracts should specifically allow them the power to criticise the
service concerned.
5.6
Reviewers should respect confidentiality. But they should also be free to communicate
responsibly with the press and, at the end of an investigation, to publish reports of
their work. They should let the relevant public service know what action they plan to
take, but they should not have to ask permission before taking action. They should not try
to use the media to provide a solution.
5.7
You should arrange for the reviewer and their staff to receive whatever training they
need, including how to deal with the media.
The reviewer's range of powers
5.8
A reviewer usually covers the whole of a service (for example, the Immigration and
Nationality Directorate's Complaints Audit Committee or the Driver and Vehicle Licensing
Agency's Independent Mediator). It is best for consistency and public awareness if each
organisation has a single point of contact for its review arrangements. But there is no
reason why a local office of a large government agency should not recruit a reviewer
simply to review complaints or complaints-handling procedures in that office. If there are
several local reviewers within a service, you will need to take steps to make sure their
approaches and procedures are consistent.
The reviewer's knowledge of the service
5.9
For some complaints about public services, reviewers will need only a general knowledge of
the service and users' relationship with it. You may feel it a positive advantage to have
an outsider's view of your organisation rather than specialist knowledge. But other
complaints may involve details for which the reviewer will need specialist knowledge or
experience. |
About half of the 45 staff in the Adjudicator's Office have been moved there after working
in parts of the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise and the Contributions Agency. They
bring with them a specialist knowledge of different parts of these organisations. The rest
of the staff were recruited from outside the Civil Service, and have brought with them
other skills and a different viewpoint - for example, accountants, barristers, solicitors,
people with commercial and business experience and other advice workers.Contact: Mike Savage, The Adjudicator's Office. Phone: 020 7 930
2292.
|
| Resources
5.10
All public services face restrictions on resources, but reviewers should have enough funds
for the job they are expected to do. You will need to decide on the level of funding
needed to set up, advertise and maintain effective review arrangements.
5.11
You should consider the costs of the review arrangements as a way of reducing the costs of
not handling complaints effectively (in terms of staff time and resources) and of failing
to learn the lessons from complaints. One way of keeping costs down might be for
neighbouring public services to set up a joint review scheme.
5.12
Most, if not all, reviewers will be funded by the service they review. Their contract
should make clear that these funding arrangements in no way affect their independence.
5.13
You need to allow for a short-term increase in complaints once you have set up the
complaints review arrangements and your users become aware of them. And you should be
ready to provide the necessary resources for the reviewer. In the longer term, as your
systems improve as a result of complaints, and if the workload of the reviewer reduces,
you may be able to reduce your funding.
Access
Access to reviewers
5.14
You should clearly define, with the reviewer, whose complaints the reviewer will deal
with. If this is not clear, it may lead to confusion and disappointment. In general,
complaints will come from users who feel they have received a poor service. But you will
need to consider whether to include, for example, users' relatives and representatives.
Those who are entitled to complain should be able to approach the reviewer direct without
having to get approval from your service. Users should not have to pay to use the review
arrangements. Even a small charge may put some people off making a complaint.
|
The services of the Independent Complaints Reviewer to HM Land Registry are free. Users or
their representatives can complain by contacting her office direct if they are not
satisfied with the way the Land Registry has dealt with their complaint.Contact: Andrew Robertson, Assistant to the Independent Complaints
Reviewer. Phone: 020 7 583 1172.
|
| 5.15
Reviewers should usually make sure that your service has investigated a complaint before
they look at it themselves. They should ask users who have not yet gone through your
internal complaints procedures to do so, but may also give them advice. This may involve
explaining what your internal complaints procedures are, and how someone should go about
making a complaint. It may also involve telling users about other sources of help (for
example, Citizens Advice Bureaux). |
The Adjudicator's Office do not investigate a complaint until the user has been through
the relevant organisation's internal complaints system. Before they investigate a
complaint, they make sure that the organisation has the chance to sort out the problem at
a senior level. If a senior manager has not had this opportunity the Adjudicator's Office
refer the complaint to that manager to deal with. The Adjudicator's Office make sure that
the user knows they can come back to them if they are not happy with the reply they get
from the organisation. If someone goes to the Adjudicator's Office with a complaint or
question about an organisation other than the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise or the
Contributions Agency, they try to help these people and give them information about where
they should go to get things sorted out.Contact:
Mike Savage, The Adjudicator's Office. Phone: 020 7 930 2292.
|
| Publicity
5.16
Both your service and the reviewer should advertise the review arrangements. Information
should include clear advice on how to contact the reviewer, and in what circumstances, and
the reviewer's role and responsibilities. |
After the Independent Complaints Advisor (ICA) for the Driving Standards Agency was first
appointed in 1994, information for the public about how to contact the ICA was included in
leaflets about complaints procedures. But it soon became clear that users needed to know
much more about the role of the ICA. As a result, the ICA produced a separate leaflet
explaining all procedures and exactly what the ICA could and could not do. This leaflet is
available free from all Driving Standards Agency offices.Contact: Bob Jarvis, Customer Service Manager, The Driving
Standards Agency. Phone: 0115 901 2511.
|
| Features of the review
Independence
5.17
The public should see reviewers as independent.
Otherwise, people will be slow to approach them and will have little faith in their
investigation. Once you have decided on your reviewer's role and powers, the reviewer
should be free to run their affairs and investigate complaints and complaints procedures
without pressure from you.
Conciliation
5.18
Review and conciliation are separate processes, but each offers a useful way of sorting
out complaints. You should consider whether your reviewer should be able to conciliate in
some cases between the two sides in a complaint. If so, your procedures should allow for
conciliation to be clearly separated from decision-making. Or you may want to allow the
reviewer to refer suitable cases to an outside conciliator or mediator. |
The Independent Case Examiner for the Child Support Agency will, if necessary, contact the
person who has complained to confirm the main points of the complaint and find out what
remedy they feel would be most suitable. This information then provides the basis for
discussion and, if possible, conciliation with the Child Support Agency. Evidence so far
has shown that there is a great deal of scope to sort out complaints as quickly and
efficiently as possible in this way. The conciliation process also offers the Child
Support Agency a good opportunity to improve its communication with users and identify
improvements in its internal complaints procedure.Contact: Roger Matthewman, The Independent Case Examiner's Office.
Phone: 0151 801 8805.
|
| Good administrative
practice
5.19
It is up to you to decide the day-to-day running of your reviewer's business. But all
reviewers should aim to follow standard, good administrative practice. This means:
| replying to complaints as quickly as possible, with a full
and proper investigation; |
| developing a proper system for recording and monitoring
the progress of complaints; |
| providing proper training for staff in investigative
procedures; and |
| meeting published targets for acknowledging and replying
to letters, and the various stages of the investigation.
|
|
The Independent Complaints Advisor (ICA) for the Driving Standards Agency has a target of
25 working days to complete an investigative report. If for any reason they cannot meet
this target, the ICA must tell the person who has complained the reasons for the delay.Contact: Bob Jarvis, Customer Service Manager, The Driving
Standards Agency. Phone: 0115 901 2511.
|
| 5.20
Good administrative practice also involves:
| a system for making sure that complaints are handled in confidence; and |
| a quality control check for the procedures followed and the final reply to the person
who has complained. |
|
The Independent Complaints Reviewer for HM Land Registry has agreed standards of service
for completing the various stages of investigations. She has also set up a system to track
the progress of all complaints made to her office. The Independent Complaints Reviewer
will carry out a yearly survey of those who have used her services to find out:
| whether they have been satisfied with the way their
complaint has been dealt with; and |
| their views on how the service could be improved. |
Contact: Andrew Robertson, Assistant to the Independent
Complaints Reviewer. Phone: 020 7 583 1172.
|
| 5.21
You will also need to develop a system to find out how people who have registered
complaints feel their complaint has been handled.
|
In 1997 to 1998 the office of the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) for the Child Support
Agency sent a customer satisfaction questionnaire to everyone who complained. Users did
not have to put their names on the questionnaires, but many people chose to include their
name and address. The ICE considered each questionnaire returned and sent a reply if
further points needed explaining and if there was a name and address to write to.Contact: Roger Matthewman, The Independent Case Examiner's Office.
Phone: 0151 801 8805.
|
| 5.22
Each reviewer should have their own internal complaints procedure for anyone who is not
happy with the way they have handled a complaint.
|
If someone is not satisfied with the quality of service the Adjudicator's Office have
provided, they should let the Adjudicator know. She will look into the matter and reply in
writing within seven days of receiving the complaint. This information is published in the
Adjudicator's Office Annual Report and is also included in their How to complain
about... leaflets.Contact: Mike Savage,
The Adjudicator's Office. Phone: 020 7 930 2292.
|
| 5.23
Reviewers should develop 'fast-track' procedures for certain investigations. |
The Adjudicator's Office generally aim to investigate complaints on a first come, first
served basis. But they sometimes need to speed up an investigation, for example:
| if there is soon to be a hearing with an appeal group -
for example, a VAT tribunal - or before a court - for example, a bankruptcy hearing; |
| if the person who has complained asks them to - for
example, if the user would otherwise suffer financially because they are ill or elderly;
and |
| if one of the organisations asks them to - for example,
if a long investigation could interfere with their duties. |
Contact: Mike Savage, The Adjudicator's Office. Phone:
020 7 930 2292.
|
| Investigations
The reviewer's right of access to staff and papers
5.24
There may be legal restrictions on who can see certain types of information. But in
general reviewers should get the views of staff involved in the complaint, including those
who have handled it, and should have access to relevant papers. Reviewers will need to
make sure that any views or papers given to them in confidence are kept confidential.
There should be very few cases where you need to refuse the reviewer access because of
confidentiality. |
The Independent Complaints Reviewer has the right to full access to any Land Registry
documents and information she considers necessary to enable her to investigate a complaint
fully. She can also interview Land Registry staff if she considers it necessary.Contact: Andrew Robertson, Assistant to the Independent Complaints
Reviewer. Phone: 020 7 583 1172.
|
| Investigations without a
complaint
5.25
You should consider whether the organisations that the reviewer covers should be allowed
to ask the reviewer to investigate specific incidents or actions, even if they are not
raised as formal complaints by a member of the public.
Results
Decisions
5.26
Reviewers should tell you and the person who has complained their decisions or
recommendations direct. It should not be left to you to decide whether to pass on the
information. |
After investigating a complaint, the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) for the Child Support
Agency (CSA) will send a full report to the person who has complained. (She will also
enclose a copy for that person's MP if they have been involved.) The CSA also receives a
copy of the report. The ICE's office monitors the progress of each recommendation made and
the action taken by the CSA to deal with it.Contact:
Roger Matthewman, The Independent Case Examiner's Office. Phone: 0151 801 8805.
|
| 5.27
To give your users confidence in your review arrangements, you should accept the
reviewer's decisions and act on their recommendations unless you feel there are very
special circumstances. In that case, you should make public your reasons for rejecting a
decision.
Influencing public service practice and policy
5.28
Reviewers should aim to influence and improve complaints handling in public services. They
should try to spot:
| trends in complaints referred to them; |
| repeated service failures; and |
| weaknesses in organisations' complaints procedures. |
5.29
There should be a formal system for reviewers to pass comments and recommendations to
senior managers in the service who can take the necessary corrective action. |
The Adjudicator's Office feeds back to the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise and the
Contributions Agency the experience they gain from investigating complaints. This helps
improve the quality of service these organisations provide. The Adjudicator's Office
produces quarterly reports for each of the organisations, which summarise complaint cases
they believe show good or bad practice. These reports are sent to senior managers and
complaints handlers in the organisations who are encouraged to show them to other members
of staff.Contact: Mike Savage, The
Adjudicator's Office. Phone: 020 7 930 2292.
|
| 5.30
Reviewers cannot have authority over Government and public service policies or laws which
affect the way services are run. But you may find it helpful to ask your reviewer to
comment on the effects of your policy because of their work and experience.
The ombudsmen
5.31
Reviewers should make clear in their published information and to those who send a
complaint to them the options that are available for further review by a statutory
ombudsman. |
The Adjudicator's Office explain in their How to complain about... leaflets,
and in their annual reports, that if someone is not happy with the Office's decision or
the way they have handled a complaint, people have the right to ask a Member of Parliament
to consider putting their complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. The Adjudicator's
Office publications also make clear that the Adjudicator will not look at complaints that
have been investigated by the Parliamentary Ombudsman, or which the Ombudsman is
investigating.The Parliamentary Ombudsman
says in his leaflet, The Parliamentary Ombudsman - Can he help you?:
| usually, before you complain to him the Ombudsman
expects you first to have put your complaint to the department or body concerned... using
their internal complaints procedure and any complaints adjudicators appointed. |
Here, 'any complaints adjudicators appointed' would
include the Adjudicator's Office.
Contact: Mike Savage, The Adjudicator's Office. Phone:
020 7 930 2292.
|
| Reporting
5.32
Reviewers should report on their performance to:
| users of the services they cover; |
| the service that funds them; and |
| the organisations they cover. |
5.33
This will involve:
| providing formal reports at agreed times; |
| having audited accounts; and |
| publishing an annual report. |
|
The Adjudicator's Office publishes an annual report. The report for 1997 was the Office's
fourth. This report included:
|
| Independent Review
Checklist
| Area of concern |
Your current position |
Action you need to take |
| Deciding whether you
need independent review arrangements |
| The nature of your organisation and the needs of your
users |
|
|
| Setting up independent
review arrangements |
| Agreeing aims |
|
|
| Defining how users will gain access to review
arrangements |
|
|
| Naming the review arrangements |
|
|
| Advertising the review arrangements to staff and users |
|
|
| Publishing the reviewer's findings |
|
|
|
