Agenda item

This report provides an overview of corporate complaints received by the Council during the period April 2014 to March 2015.

The report before the Scrutiny Committee provided an overview of corporate complaints received by the council during the period April 2014 to March 2015.

Councillor Pavey (Deputy Leader) in introducing the report emphasised the importance of complaints as a feedback opportunity and responsiveness indicator and felt the report would benefit from the inclusion of more case studies to demonstrate the human side. He was pleased to report consistent improvement in the speed of resolution with a high percentage resolved within 20 days. Councillor Pavey regretted the number of complaints about staff and customer services and drew attention to the list of planned improvements. Cathy Tyson (Head of Policy and Scrutiny) outlined the investigation process which aimed to seek remedy rapidly and was pleased to report that in the final quarter, 100% had been resolved within the target deadline. Cathy Tyson acknowledged concern about poor customer service, the need for clear correspondence and action plans were being compiled together with a corporate programme to reinforce standards.

The Chair expressed concern at the relatively high number of complaints fully or partly upheld at first stage and also at final stage and requested more information on cases where maladministration had been found, to aid understanding. Members questioned the possible reasons behind findings of poor customer care, the extent to which it was attributable to a lack of training or low staff morale and whether there were patterns between services. Members also questioned the response times and heard that most were resolvable within the 20 days target and questioned whether straightforward cases where the council was at fault were accepted and apologies issued at an early stage. Members requested justification for the view expressed in the report that customers resorted to the complaints process as a means of having a negative decision reviewed. They also questioned what action was being taken to compensate cases where homeless families have been kept in bed and breakfast accommodation longer than the maximum six weeks. Concern was also expressed at complaints over Veolia staff behaviour suggesting the need for independent audit. Members agreed on the need for improved communication with the public.

Councillor Pavey expressed a preference for fewer number of complaints but with a higher number upheld and Cathy Tyson added that the complaints where it had been found that policy and procedure had not been properly explained were avoidable. Councillor Pavey also questioned how it was possible to accurately benchmark complaints when they came in a variety of forms. Cathy Tyson advised that the council took part in London wide comparisons and reminded the committee that the Complaints Team was small, with no staff based in departments allowing for a corporate grip on the numbers.

Concern was also expressed at the length of time taken to complete repairs and questioned why this was the case especially for urgent cases involving residents’ safety. They suggested that staff should be more empathetic and less judgemental of complainants. Additionally, it was put that there was a democratic deficiency with many residents not aware of the role of the council. A change in terminology from customers to residents was suggested to help bring about an attitudinal change.

Councillor Pavey acknowledged that a lot of work was required beyond the scope of the report involving the whole workforce, not forgetting hard to reach groups who had not complained. Cathy Tyson advised that the use of the investigation standard was stressed to lead to a better standard of outcome. Encouraging more complaints and using comment cards would also assist, with the vulnerable helped by advocates.  It was recognised that the compensation level at stage 1 should be higher and action was being taken to address this.

RESOLVED:

(i)         that the council’s performance in managing and resolving complaints be noted;

(ii)        that the actions being taken to improve response times to complaints and reduce the number of complaints which escalate to the final review stage be noted;

(iii)       that a progress report be submitted in six months’ time.