Agenda item

To present a draft updated Customer Feedback Policy for the Council and seek feedback from the Committee (report of the Assistant Director – Governance (Monitoring Officer) enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Governance (Monitoring Officer) which sought feedback on a draft updated Customer Feedback Policy for the Council.

The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer introduced the report and the following main points were highlighted:

• The Customer Feedback Policy was new to South Holland;
• A draft document had been fully reviewed, updated and was to be aligned across the partnership, and in so doing, provided a framework for the handling of complaints;
• The policy provided a clear definition of what constituted a complaint how complaints would be addressed, and options for corrective action;
• Adoption of the policy ensured that the Council complied with the requirements of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) and would facilitate service improvements;
• The draft Customer Feedback Policy was at Appendix 1; and
• A diagram which presented the complaints process was at Appendix 2.

Members considered the report and made the following comments:

• Members queried whether a process was in place to identify any training needs or required changes to procedures following the conclusion of a complaint,.

• Members queried the number of complaints received each month and asked how this compared with data for the last five years.
  • The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer confirmed the receipt of 63 complaints at stage 1 for the year. The comparative data would be investigated and circulated to members after the meeting.

• Members asked for details of the service areas which received the most complaints.
  • The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer  responded that a significant area of complaints were received regarding Neighbourhood Waste and Planning.

• Members referred to the complaints journey on Appendix 1 and queried the onward journey where a response had not been provided to the customer within 20 days. The journey currently ended with ‘record reason for delay’.
  • The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer responded that whilst the complaint handling process continued throughout, the recording of the ‘reason for delay’ served to inform the complaints clinic of the reason for the overdue response. This complied with good governance and prepared the council for any challenge from the LGSCO.

• Members queried whether the complaints process would be used when a customer disagreed with the response provided following a freedom of information (FOI) request.
  • The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer responded that:
    • The complaints process could only be utilised where the issue in question was not dealt with under any other existing process. For example, Planning decision challenges were subject to a specific process and therefore the complaints process would not be appropriate; and
    • The FOI act compelled organisations to have a legal process in place to deal with any challenges to provided information, and this mechanism was utilised regularly.

• Members queried whether adequate resources were in place to respond to FOI requests within timescales.
  • The Group Information Manager and Data Protection Officer responded that the Information Governance team was adequately resourced. The team directed complaints to service managers where responsibility was held for the investigation of the complaint and provision of the response. The resource burden was therefore shared across departments as applicable.

• The Assistant Director – Wellbeing and Community Leadership concluded that, whilst the interpretation of and dealing with a complaint could be challenging, ultimately the process provided a good opportunity for learning and development. The ownership and oversight of the process increased the understanding of customers’ needs and helped to create improvements and efficiencies.

AGREED:

a)    That following consideration of the draft Customer Feedback Policy at Appendix 1, the policy be noted and recommended to Cabinet for approval; and

b)    That the Policy Development Panel be presented with an update on the Customer Feedback Policy, one year from its adoption at Cabinet.