Agenda Item No :
London Borough of Camden / Ward: AllReport title: Annual Report on Camden’s complaint procedures – 2005/2006 (LA/2006/63)
Report of: Director of Law and Administration
For submission to:
THE EXECUTIVE / Date:
13 September 2006
Summary of report:
This report analyses the formal complaints received by the Council during the 2005/2006 financial year. During this period the Council received 2,417 complaints under its formal complaint procedure (of which 30 were under the children and young persons’ procedure),
The Local Government Ombudsman received 224 new complaints against Camden during the period. He issued decisions on 228 complaints overall, including some cases referred to him in a previous year.
The report analyses these complaints by department, response performance, ethnicity and disability of the complainants and compensation paid. It comments separately on those complaints received from children and young people and from the Local Government Ombudsman.
The Executive will receive the report as part of its regular monitoring of service performance with reference to client/customer service. A separate statutory report covering the former social services adult and childcare services is available on request from Phill Sowter, Head of Customer Services and Complaints (Adults and Children’s) (0207 974 6097)
Local Government Act 1972 – Access to information
Documents used in compiling this report:
Submissions from various council departments.
Letter from Local Government Ombudsman (April 2006)
Contact officer(s):
Peter Swingler
Central Complaints Unit, Town Hall, Judd Street, London WC1H 9JE
Phone: (0207) 974 5644
E-Mail:
Recommendation:
The Executive is recommended to note the report
Signed by the Director of Law and Administration ......
Date……………………………………………….
1.Summary of complaints performance
1.1This report provides a snap shot of those complaints that have entered the formal
Complaint process. The Council is required to receive such information as part of its performance monitoring responsibilities. Complaints are only a small part of the process of providing a service and obtaining customer feedback. The overwhelming majority of the contact from service users is in the manner of a request for service or an initial defect report. A formal complaint will only arise if the initial contact has failed to deliver the desired service. Camden’s corporate complaint procedure mirrors the 3 stage process commonly used in nearly all comparable local authorities. The first two stages are dealt with in the service departments and the third stage centrally. The special statutory complaint procedures within the former social services department (children and adult social care) also follow a 3 stage process, albeit with slightly different time scales and procedural requirements.
1.2A primary object of Camden’s corporate complaint procedures is to provide an
open, accessible and accountable process that can offer an early resolution of
disatisfaction with council services. A further objective is to protect the Council
from receiving any final reports of maladministration and injustice from the Local
Government Ombudsman, which can be costly and time consuming. Managers
and staff are encouraged to recognise service failures, learn the lessons from
complaints to improve service delivery and to follow the Ombudsman’s guidance
on ‘Remedies’ when dealing with a formal complaint. The aim is to move
progressively towards a culture of improving the experience for customers. This
report therefore provides not only quantitative but also qualitative commentary on
the formal complaints that have been processed, including information on the
customer’s experience of the process.
1.3The year was a productive but demanding one for complaints staff.The key outcomes were:
For the first time in recent years, the total number of complaints against Camden fell (by 1%) when compared to the last municipal year figure (i.e. to 2,417 from 2,438 in 2004/2005);
The total amount of compensation paid out in 2005/2006 was £76,306, an increase of £18,143 (31%) on the previous year.
The ‘target zero’ was achieved for the fourth successive year, namely there were no Final Reports of maladministration and injustice issued against Camden by the Local Government Ombudsman.
The number of new complaints received by the Local Government Ombudsman against Camden fell 13% from 258 in 2004/2005 to 224 in 2005/2006. The number of Ombudsman complaints on which decisions were issued in 2005/2006 increased marginally to 228 as compared with 215 the previous year, as a result of him reaching decisions on older cases.
The Council came close to (84%) but did not achieve the 90% target for adherence to the 15 working day time scale for replies to Stage 1 complaints.
in January 2006 Camden successfully retained the British Standards Institute (BSi) accreditation for its complaint scheme for the sixth consecutive year. This covers the entire complaint handling process within Camden.
2. Camden's formal complaints: Performance statistics
2.1 The 2,438 formal complaints registered in 2004/2005 decreased by 1% to 2,417
in 2005/2006.(complaints from children and young people decreased from 45 to
30 for the same period).
2.2 This report analyses complaints on the former departmental basis, to provide a
year on year comparison, given that the new departments only came into
operation half way through the municipal year. From 1 April 2006 data has been
retained on the new departmental structures, such as for Children Schools and
Families and Housing and Adult Care. Next year’s report will reflect this
change.
2.3 Figure 1 on Appendix A shows complaints by department and by Stages 1, 2
and 3 of the procedure. Most departments received about the same number
of complaints as previously. However, there were slight increases in housing
and social services and slight reductions in environment and leisure
complaints.The number of Stage 2 complaints decreased slightly, but there was
an increase in Stage 3 complaints. Some cases (8) were special appeals
taken straight to Stage 3, such as Discetionary Housing Payments (DHPs)
appeals and appeals against ad hoc disposal decisions. The volume of Stage 3
complaints this year necessitated placing six cases out to external investigators.
2.4 Figure 2 on Appendix A shows, for each department, the percentage of
complaints answered within the agreed time limit. The time limits are Stage 1: 15
working days, Stage 2: 20 working days and Stage 3: 25 working days.
2.5 Departments will be urged again to meet the 90% target for Stage 1 replies, given
the target was not met this year. The aggregate performance also masks a wide
variety of performance, in that the volume of complaints in Housing (which
achieved 87%) has uplifted overall performance. It should be noted that Camden’s
target is a high one – other Councils (e.g. Brent) accept a lower percentage target
(85%) against the same time limits.
Type of complaint
2.6Housing services continue to account for the highest individual number of
complaints. The greatest numbers were about repairs 297 (Stage 1) and 74 (Stage
2). Although this appears to be a relatively high number of complaints, Camden
manage approximately 23,000 tenancies and are responsible for repairs in all, so
when taken into context this is actually a relatively small figure. The next highest
category was housing management issues, including neighbour nuisance and
related issues (223 Stage 1 and 85 Stage 2 complaints). Again, considering the
number of properties managed (approximately 32,000 including leasehold
properties), this is a relatively small number of complaints. Although Stage 1
complaints rose in 2005/2006, Stage 2 and Stage 3 and Local Government
Ombudsman cases about housing management declined and relatively few
complaints in the above categories progressed to Stage 2. This would indicate that
although more people made complaints at Stage 1 of the procedure, more
complaints were resolved at the first Stage. The Housing and Adult Care Services
department will continue to work to reduce the number of complaints progressing to
the higher stages. Several service areas have implemented new administrative
arrangements to improve the way complaints are responded to, which will hopefully
improve performance further in the coming year.
2.7Most Environment department complaints at Stage 1 were about parking matters. The Development Control service received the second highest volume. Others related to highways, environmental health and waste management services.
2.8For the Education department, the largest single group of complaints were about special education needs, followed by the Early Years and Sure Start services, and Student Finance complaints, although the total numbers of complaints was low.
2.9For the former Leisure Services, a number of complaints were about the allocation of personal computers not registered with the Learning Centre, and the blocking off of certain websites (to protect children).
2.10 The majority of complaints for the Finance department were about Council Tax
and business rates matters. The blaze at the Hemel Hempstead oil depot early in
2006 destroyed the benefits service computer servers and caused a four week
delay in replying to correspondence. This increased the number of benefit
complaints this year.
2.11 Most Law and Administration department complaints were about the registrars
service, although the number involved was quite low.
Learning lessons from complaints
2.12The Central Complaint Unit works with service areas to use complaints to inform
and improve service delivery. Examples are used within the complaints training.
Departmental management teams (DMTs) receive quarterly monitoring reports
from their quality team. In some cases digests of complaints are produced to identify patterns and offer model remedies, with the aim of resolving more complaints at stage 1. Reports are set up and run from the Council’s complaint handling software to show trends. These can provide service against service and district against district comparisons. For example such reports are prepared for the housing management and repairs services. The monitoring reports have also influenced the way that service areas have been called in for scrutiny, such as housing repairs and parking.
Valuing Diversity
2.13 The Council provides complaint leaflets for adults, children, those with learning
difficulties, and versions in Cantonese, Bengali and Gujerati. We continued to
advertise and promote access into the scheme by disabled people. Access is
provided through Braille, Minicom, cassette tape,TypeTalk and a BSL (British Sign
Language) video. Translations were provided for an Italian speaking resident.
Appendix C summarises the ethnicity of all formal complaints received during the
2005/2006 period. The percentage of ethnicity information available rose from
77% in 2004/2005 to 80% in 2005/2006. The returns on Appendix C suggest that
groups are generally accessing the scheme in line with the Census, excepting the
White British, Irish and White Other combined are less than may be expected
(57% compared to Census figure of 72% of population). Of the minority
communities, there are fewer complaints from the Bangladeshi community (3%)
than the Census might suggest (6%). The data suggests persons with a disability
are accessing the scheme broadly in line (20%) with expected levels, with most
(11%) accessing the scheme about housing matters.
2.14The uptake by gender was 47% female, 51% male and 2% couples and
organisations.
2.15 Appendix D provides some comment on equality complaints and issues.
Outcomes and Categories
2.16 Figure 3 on Appendix A shows the outcomes for complaints by stage and service.
2.17The Council has adopted a series of corporate categories which are used to
classify the type of formal complaints that are made each year. Most complaints
move to the formal stage after an initial service request because the individual feels
they have had a poor service or a mistake has been made, or because there has
been a failure to give any service. Typical comments made are:
“I am disatisfied because the repair is still not finished and no one will give a date
when it will be finished” and
“The problem has not been solved yet and it is taking too long to sort it out”
2.18A category analysis of all formal complaints shows the following pattern
Corporate category Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Poor service/mistake 58% 49% 43%
Failure to give service 16% 24% 25%
Staff Conduct 9% 8% 9%
Other 9% 11% 11%
Delay 2.5% 2% 3%
Misleading information 2% 2% 3%
Poor Consultation 2.5% 3% 4%
Equalities issues 1% 1% 2%
Vexatious and Repetitious Complainants
2.19Eight complainants were rejected for being repetitious and vexatious.Six related to
housing matters that had exhausted the Council’s procedure, one of whom is a
vexatious litigant. One other person was sending repetitious and derogatory
communications against a number of Council staff. This resulted in a decision to
block his emails.The Local Government Ombudsman subsequently dismissed his
appeal against the Council’s decision to treat him as repetitious and vexatious.
The other person was sending voluminous and largely irrelevant emails about
European, Government and Camden policy.
3. The children and young persons complaint scheme
3.1 Appendix G provides a summary of the 30 children and young people complaints.
The summary also includes the ‘statutory’ Children Act complaints dealt with by the
former Social Services department. The statutory and non statutory processes are
being aligned this year through the Housing and Adult Care service.
3.2 All complaints were at Stage 1. They were resolved by an explanation of the
Council’s position. Three complaints were part upheld (one about housing repairs,
one about electronic systems and one about play scheme facilities). The social
services care complaint in two parts was also upheld.
3.3 The subjects were housing management (4); rehousing (4), play centres (4)
Environmental issues such as recycling (2), road safety (2), highways (2), libraries
(2), social services (2), and one complaint in each of the following areas: benefits;
school meals; education policy and eservices. Four complaints related to non
Camden services and were forwarded to the appropriate organisation.
3.4 The Central Complaints Unit continued its outreach campaign of visits to schools
and play centres. Staff attended five centres at Samuel Lithgow; Fortune Green,
Caversham Transitions; Regents Park Project and Haverstock. The Unit also
presented at the Childrens Fund Centre (for Learning Difficulties) and the City
and Islington College. The Unit supplied an article for the ‘Camden Fever
newsletter’ and sent material to the Kingsway College to increase awareness of the
scheme.
3.5 The Advocacy Services and Representations Procedure Regulations 2004
imposed a duty on social services staff to provide an advocacy service to
children and young people. To date, 39 cases have been supported by ‘Voice’,
a voluntary organisation acting on Camden’s behalf.
4. External Accreditation
4.1 In January 2006 the BSi approved for the sixth year running Camden’s
accreditation for its entire complaint management system, a unique record for a
local authority. The accreditation will be at full ISO level from 2007.
5 Local Government Ombudsman
5.1 During 2005/2006 the Local Government Ombudsman issued no Final Report of
Maladministration against Camden. This performance maintains Camden in the
best performing list of London Councils, having received no such ruling in the last
four years. By comparison, over the last four years no less than 21 London
authorites have received maladministration reports as follows: Southwark (42);
Lambeth (18), Tower Hamlets (11), Lewisham (11), Islington (8), Westminster (7),
Hackney (5), Ealing (5), Waltham Forest (5), Bromley (3), Merton (2), Sutton (2)
Barnet (2) and one each for Harrow, Hammersmith and Fulham, Enfield, Hounslow,
Newham, Haringey, Redbridge, Greenwich and Kingston upon Thames.
5.2 A three year analysis for Camden prepared by the Ombudsman is attached as
Appendix E. The total number of complaints against Camden in all categories on
which decisions were issued in 2005/2006 rose to 228 compared to 215 in
2004/2005, but new complaints made against Camden fell 13% (from 258 to
224. Figure 4 on Appendix A gives a comparative analysis.
5.3 A total of 67 cases decided at stage 3 of Camden’s complaint procedure went on
to appeal to the Ombudsman and were decided in 2005/2006. In 19 cases the
continuing problems after the Stage 3 investigation (such as ongoing repair
works) resulted in additional compensation being paid by way of local settlement
decisions. In one case the Ombudsman felt the Council had initially wrongly
decided that planning permission was not required for a roof extension. The
Council agreed in that case to a local settlement of the complaint involving a ‘time
and trouble’ compensation payment of £250 and repayment of the complainants’s
legal fees of £7,286.
5.4 Appendix E shows that most Ombudsman complaints (44%) were about
housing. Other categories were highways including parking (23%),
planning (9%), Council tax (5%), social services (5%), education (4%),
housing benefit (2%) and all other categories (8%).
6. Compensation
6.1 The amount of compensation paid to complainants during 2005/2006 under the
complaint procedure and through the Local Government Ombudsman was
£76,306. This was met from departmental budgets. Overall the sum is 31% higher
than the previous year. The increase is attributable to the increased sums
recommended in the Ombudsman’s published guidance on ‘Remedies’ and some
individually high repayments made for legal and professional fees incurred by some
complainants. The Ombudsman’s level of compensation awarded nationally
increased from £1.1 M in 2004/2005 to £1.67 M in 2005/2006, an increase of 51%.
6.2 A breakdown of compensation awarded in 2005/2006 compared with 2004/2005 is
shown in Appendix B.
- Customer Satisfaction with complaints handling
7.1Customer satisfaction is monitored by the despatch of a survey form to complainants after each stage of the complaint procedure. The number of forms which are returned is generally low – only 16% were returned this year. The form asks about satisfaction with the handling of the complaint, and also about the outcome. Appendix F provides a summary by department.
7.2The results shown that satisfaction with the complaint process rose to 41% (good