Getting the best from complaints - PDF

 informing the complainant that if he still does not cooperate with the advice given,
any further correspondence that does not present significant new matters or new
information will not necessarily be acknowledged, but will be kept on file.

Any new complaints from people who come under this policy should be treated on their
individual merits.

In extreme cases, the local authority may consider the following actions:

 Referring the complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman before the
complaints procedure has been exhausted (see Annex 3); or

 Advising the complainant that it cannot assist further and informing them of their
right to approach the Local Government Ombudsman.

The distinction between the two options above is that early referral to the Local
Government Ombudsman is a positive action that can only be undertaken in agreement
between the local authority and the complainant. This is therefore the less likely option
with persistent complainants.

Option 2 may arise where the local authority does not agree with the complainant that
the complaints are substantively valid and the two parties disagree on the way forward.
This is more likely with a persistent complainant. Should the local authority take this
option, it should not contact the Local Government Ombudsman directly, but should
indicate to the complainant that he may make this approach. The local authority should
confirm to the complainant that it is not responding to the complaint further.

The Local Government Ombudsman is likely to apply the test of reasonableness over the
local authority’s response in a similar manner to an early referral and will have a range of
options open to him.

Getting the Best from Complaints 47

ANNEX 5

GUIDANCE ON UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOUR

It is anticipated that this guidance should only apply to a very small number of
complainants. It covers the possible escalation of a situation between the local authority
and a complainant from unreasonably persistent behaviour to unacceptable behaviour.

Dealing with complainants

When local authorities are committed to dealing with all complaints fairly and impartially
and to providing a high quality service to those who complain, they will not normally limit
the contact complainants have with their offices. However, the authority should not
expect their staff to tolerate behaviour by complainants which is unacceptable. The local
authority should take action to protect staff from that behaviour, including that which is
abusive, offensive or threatening.

When the authority considers that a complainant’s behaviour is unacceptable it should
tell him why it finds his behaviour unreasonable and ask him to change it. If the
unacceptable behaviour continues, the authority may wish to take action to restrict the
complainant’s contact with its offices. In all cases, the local authority should write to tell
the complainant what action it is taking and the duration of that action. The authority
should also tell the complainant how he can challenge the decision if he disagrees with it
(which may be through approaching the Local Government Ombudsman rather than any
procedure provided by the local authority itself).

Restricting access

The decision to restrict access to its offices should be taken by the Complaints Manager
in consultation with colleagues. Any restrictions imposed should be appropriate and
proportionate. The options the authority is most likely to consider are:

 requesting contact in a particular form (for example, letters only);
 requiring contact to take place with a named officer;
 restricting any telephone calls to be specified days and times;
 asking the complainant to enter into an agreement about his conduct; and
 applying its policy on unreasonably persistent complainants.

The Complaints Manager should record the option selected and inform the authority’s
senior management of the action being taken. The local authority may wish to set a time
limit on the duration of any restrictions applied to the complainant.

The local authority may also invite the complainant to appeal this decision to the senior
management. This will ensure that there is an avenue for consideration of the
restrictions.

Terminating contact

Where a complainant continues to behave in a way which is unacceptable, the local
authority may decide to terminate contact with the complainant and discontinue any
investigation into the complaint.

Where the behaviour is so extreme that it threatens the immediate safety and welfare of
staff, the authority should consider other options, for example reporting the matter to the

Getting the Best from Complaints 48

Police or taking legal action. In such cases, the authority may not give the complainant
prior warning of that action.

In following this guidance, the Complaints Manager should refer to the Mental Capacity
Act and all relevant human rights based legislation.

Getting the Best from Complaints 49

APPENDIX A

THE NEW PROCEDURE FOR CHILDREN ACT 1989 COMPLAINTS

Stage 1 – Local Resolution

Complainant brings concerns to the attention of the person providing the services locally. The
local authority should consider mediation and conflict resolution at this stage and at all other
stages. The local authority should make an initial attempt to resolve matters within 10 working

days (unless an extension is agreed.)


If not resolved – or if there is agreement

for investigation


Stage 2 – Investigation

The local authority should provide an investigation that produces a report and an adjudication
within 25 working days (or within the extended period of 65 working days).


If not resolved


Stage 3 – Review Panel

A panel of 3 independent people should meet to consider the complaint and produce
recommendations.


If not resolved



Referral to Local Government Ombudsman (note that complainant can approach the Local
Government Ombudsman at any stage).

Getting the Best from Complaints 50

APPENDIX B

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Complaints Working Group

Dilip Agarwal Commission for Social Care Inspection
Steve Carney Commission for Social Care Inspection
Dory Dickson National Children’s Homes
Kathryn Dowse Local Government Ombudsman
Tim Hind Local Government Association
Jack Kellett Office of the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman
Stephen Lowe Age Concern
Peter MacMahon Local Government Ombudsman
Tom McAteer Southwark Social Services
Phill Sowter Association of Directors of Social Services
Colin Vyvyan National Assembly for Wales
Meg Woollam National Complaints Officers’ Group

Thanks also to:

Jacqui Butler Independent Consultant
Dr Roger Morgan OBE Commission for Social Care Inspection
Ken Scott London Borough of Brent

Getting the Best from Complaints 51