Agenda item

5.1  Members gave consideration to the Annual Report of the Council’s Complaints and Members’ Enquiries Service.  It was noted that this item came to the Scrutiny Panel annually.

5.2  The Chair welcomed for this item:

  Bruce Devile, Head of Governance and Business Intelligence (BD)

  Cllr Rebecca Rennison, Cabinet Member for Finance and Housing     Needs

5.3  Members asked for an explanation of the increase in the number of  Ombudsmans’ investigations which had been upheld and whether there were any underlying trends associated with them.

5.4  BD explained that the numbers here were small and the changes not significant.  Often the Ombudsman will agree with the Council but still find fault so it is not always an accurate measure.  Generally though they had not raised any issues and they had not felt the need to visit.  The Council promptly supplied them with whatever they requested and so the relationship overall was a good one.  On common issues, often this related to complicated cases where they would find fault with one small part of the process.

5.5  Members noted that the average response time for Members’ Enquiries had jumped to 15.5 days and expressed a concern that a many might be significantly over this.  One Member stated that on one case over one month a holding response had been sent to her but not to the complainant and this needed to be addressed.  BD stated that the lag related to the more complicated cases relating to benefits and Housing Needs because these take much longer.  Members also asked that they be kept informed when a case is likely to take a longer time so that the complainants’ expectations can be managed.

5.6  With ref to point 3.7 of the report (p.51) Members asked why the volume of complaints on Street scene and Housing Needs had increased so much.  BD replied that this related to varying quality and performance of schemes.  When an issue arises there is usually a flurry of complaints e.g.  the cycle super highway or the ‘no left turn’ onto Richmond Rd.  Cllr Rennison added that Members need to be aware that the Complaints Service is not responsible for the service complained about but rather the complaints process.  Much work was ongoing with the Housing Team for example on the learning from complaints.

5.7  Members asked if there was guidance on the best way to present Members Enquiries.  BD replied that they get c.2000 enquiries a year and very rarely do they need to refer back to the Member as the information provided is generally sufficient to properly investigate.

5.8  A Member stated that Cllrs were being used as a mailbox for complaints to MPs and suggested that Scrutiny Panel request the MPs to forward emails to the members enquiries email address and cc the relevant Cllrs.  Cllr Rennison cautioned that MPs do this to make sure Cllrs are held accountable.  BD added that the same complaint will be made to a range of people simultaneously and this was always a challenge to sort out. 

5.9  Members asked about the volume of complaints on Housing Assessments and the Council being accused of not meeting its statutory requirements.  BD replied that 50% of the complaints were on housing and 50% of these was on repairs and the balance on Housing Management and Asset Management. He stated that this was no higher than other similar councils and Hackney had 20,000 tenants.  He added that the Service was looking at how it can better use the data available so services are made aware earlier about what might be going wrong.

5.10  A Member commented that in his view the service was excellent and with helpful briefings being provided they were able to offer better guidance to residents. 

5.11  The Chair thanked BD for his report and for attendance.