As part of our commitment to the Housing Ombudsman complaint code and improving our complaint handling, we advised the board of directors in July 2022 that we would be creating a new customer complaints forum.
Following the group’s first meeting in March, we can update you on the progress of this group, along with the first set of results on their findings.
The purpose of the forum is to review closed complaint cases quarterly, ensuring that we follow the expectations of the Housing Ombudsman complaint code and they are dealt with sympathetically and with fair resolutions.
The forum consists of four customers, with the aim to grow the group to six during the course of this year. They have been together for the last five months, meeting regularly to agree on their roles and responsibilities whilst ensuring there is no conflict with the work of our scrutiny team.
The forum is provided with ten anonymised complaint cases that have gone through our complaints process and are now closed.
The group will agree on five cases and receive fuller details, including all the notes, correspondence, outcomes, and learnings. They are then required to individually score and assess our handling of those complaints.
What are the results?
The forum has reviewed its first set of complaints and given feedback. The table below shows the average score of the group in each area.
| Area of review | Score (out of 5) |
|---|---|
| Quality of notes | 3.3 |
| Correct correspondence | 3.5 |
| Timescales | 3.7 |
| Chronology of events | 3.8 |
| The outcome | 3.8 |
| Fairness in the handling of complaint | 3.6 |
| Putting things right | 3.7 |
What did we do well?
- Clear concise notes
- Easy to follow
- Dealt with fairly
- Flexible in approach
- Handled swiftly and sensitively
- Pleased with generosity of compensation
- Lovely case to review
Where could we improve
- No communication
- No notes
- Response time unacceptable
- Spelling needs to improve
- Hard to follow
Summary and next steps
These are the first set of results from the group, providing valuable impartial feedback. Our top performing complaint scored 132 points (out of an available 140), the poorest complaint scoring 52 points.
The feedback has been shared with the case managers and their managers to recognise where we have managed and dealt with it well whilst ensuring additional support and training is delivered for the staff where we fell short.
A log of agreed actions has been created and will be reviewed at the next quarterly forum. Once the group are satisfied the action has been completed, they will approve its sign off.
