MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL

 

STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP AND CORPORATE SERVICES OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

 

9^TH JULY 2013

 

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF POLICY AND COMMUNICATIONS

 

Report prepared by Sam Bailey

 

 

1.                    REVIEW OF COMPLAINTS QUARTER 4, JANUARY-MARCH 2013;  ANNUAL REVIEW OF COMPLAINTS 1^ST APRIL 2012-31^ST MARCH 2013

 

1.1                 Issue for Decision

 

1.1.1            To consider the Council’s performance in dealing with complaints during January-March 2013.

1.1.2            To consider the Council’s performance in dealing with complaints for the year 1^st April 2012-31^st March 2013.

 

1.2                 Recommendation of the Head of Policy & Communications

 

1.2.1            It is recommended that:

 

a)    The Committee notes the performance in relation to complaints and agrees action as appropriate.

 

b)    The Committee notes the compliments received by teams and individual officers within the Council.

 

1.3                 Reasons for Recommendation

 

1.3.1            In order to ensure that complaints are being dealt with effectively and within corporate timescales it is important that a monitoring mechanism is in place.

 

1.3.2            Details of the complaints received broken down by service area, timeliness and category can be found at Appendix A. Complaints have been categorised, but many complaints will be about more than one element (e.g. both policy and staff attitude).

 

1.4                 Quarter 4 Performance

 

1.4.1            During the period January-March 2013, 58 Stage 1 complaints were closed, of which 56 (97%) were responded to in time. In terms of complaints closed on time, performance improved 2% compared to Quarter 3 (95%), however there were less complaints overall. Two complaints were responded to outside of target time this quarter.

 

1.4.2            Of the complaints responded to outside the target time, one was about Benefits and one was about Revenues. The complaint for Revenues was responded to out of time because it was initially assigned to the wrong person. Both complaints were only responded to two days outside of target time. The relevant departments have been reminded to keep customers updated with the progress of their complaint if it is expected that it may take longer than target time.

 

1.4.3            The overall amount of complaints received by the council decreased by 43% this quarter compared to quarter 3. This trend was not comparable to the 11/12 financial year, as complaint numbers remained fairly static throughout that year.

 

1.4.4            There were no services with particularly high numbers of complaints this quarter.

                                                                                          

1.4.5            The services which dealt with the highest number of complaints were:

·      Housing Services (11)

·      Environmental Enforcement (8)

·      Parking Services (8)

·      Development Management (7)

 

1.4.6            Housing Services received the most complaints this quarter (11) of which, two were about service, two were about policy, three were about staff, two were about time taken, one was about lack of contact and one was about discrimination. This is a decrease in complaints since the last quarter, when they received fourteen.

 

·       In the complaint about discrimination, the complainant claimed that they had been discriminated against because they were asked about their immigration status. The complainant was informed that it was not discriminatory as information about immigration status is required from everyone, regardless of ethnicity, as part of the process of registering for social housing

·       The complaints relating to staff were all minor issues during face face encounters in the Gateway. None of the complaints regarding this were upheld. It is worth noting that often in thesesituations, people present themselves to the Housing team at the point of crisis (e.g. homelessness) or in difficult situations(e.g. overcrowding), and if they don’t get the result they wanted, often their only recourse is to complain

 

1.4.7            Environmental Enforcement received eight complaints this quarter. This is nearly a 50% decrease in complaints about this service since last quarter. The reason for this was that there has been disruption to the Litter Enforcement operations as our contractor, XFOR, was taken over by Kingdom Security. Of these complaints, two were about policy and six were about staff.

 

1.4.8            Of the six complaints about staff were about Litter Enforcement Officers. In all of these incidents, footage from CCTV bodycams was reviewed by a manager in the Environmental Enforcement team. From this footage, five incidents found no staff wrongdoing and the complaint was not upheld. In the final one of these incidents, the complaint was upheld as the council accepted that the member of staff complained about could have handled the situation better. This has now been identified as a development need by their manager. Despite the complaint being upheld, the littering fine was not cancelled. This is because the complaint was about the manner in which the officer handled the situation, and despite the council accepting the situation could have been handled better the offence of littering still took place so the fine was issued correctly.

 

1.4.9            Parking Services received eight complaints this quarter. This is the same amount as quarter 3. Of these complaints, two were about service, two were about policy and four were about staff. There were no trends in the complaints for this service.

1.4.10         Development Management received seven complaints. This is a decrease of two complaints compared to the previous quarter. Of these complaints, one was about service, one was about policy, two were about staff, one was about time taken and two were about lack of contact. There were no trends in the complaints for this service.

 

1.4.11         Twelve Stage 2 complaints were processed this quarter. Eleven of these were responded to on time, representing 92% of the total. The stage 2 complaint that was answered outside of target time was about Revenues. The reason for it being answered outside of target time was that the council was awaiting clarification from the complainant about what they wanted investigating in the stage 2 complaint. Of the stage two complaints; two were about Development Management, two were about Environmental Health, two were about Housing Services, two were about Planning Enforcement, one was about Economic Development, one was about the Hazlitt, one was about Revenues and one was about Waste Collection.

 

1.4.12         One complaint was about safety. This complaint was about Revenues. This complaint was about Bailiffs coming round in the early hours of the morning, leading to the complainant fearing for their safety. The council contacted the Bailiffs, and the Bailiffs confirmed that they had not sent anyone around on the days or times the complainant had alleged.

 

1.4.13         Two complaints were primarily about alleged discrimination or about unfair disadvantage for people with protected characteristics:

·      One of these complaints was about Housing Services. The detail of this complaint is mentioned in paragraph 1.4.6

·      The other complaint was about Benefits. The complainant said they felt that the reason their housing and council tax benefit was suspended was due to an officer visiting their home, and alleged that the officer was racist. The complainant did not supply any further information as to why they suspected this, or give any further information about the officer’s behaviour. The response to the complaint explained that the actual reason that benefit had been stopped was that post had been returned to the post office as undeliverable for this address as the addressee had gone away. The complainant was reminded that residency at the property is a primary condition of being entitled to housing benefit. The response also assured the complainant that the decision to suspend benefit was not prompted by the officer the complainant complained about. The letter asked for further details about the officer’s behaviour for the council to properly investigate, however no further details were received

 

1.4.14         A breakdown of complaints satisfaction surveys can be found in Appendix B. 54 surveys were sent out and thirteen (24%) were returned. One respondent returned a survey without filling in the section on satisfaction of complaint handling (8%). Three respondents were very satisfied or satisfied (25%). One respondent was neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (8%). Eight were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied (66%).

 

1.4.15         The complaints satisfaction survey includes a space for comments. Five respondents made comments this quarter:

 

·         One respondent stated ‘Stage 2 to follow’. A stage two was duly carried out and has now been closed

·         One respondent stated that they would be replying by separate letter, as although their complaint had been replied to promptly, it did not address the concerns they had raised. A stage two investigation of this complaint is under way

·         One respondent did not fill in the survey but used the comments box to re-iterate his complaint, and said that his complaint was not addressed. The complaint was about the way in which a letter was worded that had been written to the complainant. However in the complaint response there was an apology for the manner in which the letter was written and assurances were made that future letters would be more carefully reviewed before being sent out

·         One respondent informed us that the complaint was resolved as a parking ticket was rescinded; but that we had not fully addressed all issues within the complaint and that the complainant was happy to discuss the issue further. An attempt was made to contact the complainant to discuss the issues, but this was not successful

·         One complainant claimed that we did not answer the complaint on time, however records show this was not the case

1.4.16         One very dissatisfied complainant said that we had not answered their complaint within ten working days, however records show that this was not the case.

 

1.4.17         There was one complaint received from an unreasonable or unreasonably persistent complainant this quarter.

 

1.4.18         Many compliments have also been received by the Council this quarter. These compliments have been received in a number of different formats, including the council’s Twitter and Facebook pages:

 

·      The refuse crews received many compliments including:

o   One thanking them for assisting a customer to pull her bin back into place, and offering to do it in the future for her

o   The refuse crews received four compliments about working out in icy conditions and getting the job done

·      Waste management received a compliment thanking them for getting a customer’s garden bin out to them efficiently

·      Waste management received a compliment about how quickly they reacted to a fly tipping report

·      One member of staff in the Contact Centre; and three members of staff from the Gateway all received compliments for their excellent customer service while assisting members of the public

·      Customer Services received a compliment about their land charge search service being efficient and an impressive service

·      The council Twitter feed was thanked twice for responding quickly to enquiries using this service. The Twitter feed is run by the communications department

·      Planning Enforcement received a thank you card from a resident thanking them for closing down an industrial unit. It said ‘Thank you, it has made such a difference! Particularly regarding the amount of traffic up and down our lane…I have lived here for more than 30 years now and it now reminds me of many years ago when it was a peaceful country lane’

·      A long letter of thanks was sent regarding the help received from the Environmental Enforcement team for helping to improve the life of a resident’s son. The letter thanked the members of staff for being able to completely turn the life around of the person’s son. The son had numerous physical and mental health problems that resulted in him living in a state of squalor. The team came in and helped to improve the home environment of this resident, dramatically improving their quality of life

·      Housing Options received thanks from Social Services for being extremely helpful in supporting their families

·      Councillors wished to register compliments for Officers in the following areas:

o  The parks team in general for their dedication to their work, and the Communications team for arranging the parks photography competition

o  Environmental Enforcement for their fast response to a lighting problem one of their residents had spotted

o  The street cleaning team for all their dedication to clearing the snow from the High Street during the snow in January

o  Waste Management for being very helpful when arranging litter clean ups in the community

o  The Planning Enforcement team for promptly following up on a complaint of a tree being cut down

 

1.5                 Review of Complaints 1^st April 2012-31^st March 2013

1.5.1             A breakdown of complaints from the previous year, including timeliness and category, is included in Appendix C. During the year the Council received 450 Stage 1 complaints, 425 (94%) of which were closed within ten working days. The percentage of complaints closed on time for the previous three years, as well as this year, can be seen in the table below:

 

Year	% Closed on time	Number of Complaints
2012/2013	94	450
2011/2012	89	408
2010/2011	90	292
2009/2010	96	284

 

The number of complaints to the council has increased year on year. The council saw a 9.3% increase in complaints in 2012/2013 than in 2011/2012; and received 36% more complaints in 2012/2013 than 2009/2010.

1.5.2             However, despite the number of complaints being received increasing, performance in closing complaints on time has increased compared to the two previous years.

1.5.3             The services with the highest amount of complaints (30+) during this year were:

 

Service	Complaints
Waste Collection	76
Housing Services	55
Economic Development	52
Environmental Enforcement	49
Parking Services	47
Development Management	40

 

1.5.4             Some of the services that have received the highest numbers of complaints have the highest levels of contact with our residents. For example:

·        Revenues received 28 complaints this year, however they deal with around 67,500 council tax accounts in the borough. This represents 0.04% of account holders complaining over the year

·        Parking Services received 47 complaints this year, however they also deal with large numbers of residents. There were 1036 resident parking permit applications received by the Council last year and 987 visitor permits; demonstrating the high rate of contact with Maidstone residents

·        Waste Collection received the highest number of complaints this year, but this service have a very high weekly contact rate with our residents. Waste Collection made 7,918,768 collections this year, representing 0.0001% of collections resulting in a complaint

1.5.5            The services who answered complaints outside of target time were:

Service	Out of time complaints
Housing Services	8
Development Management	5
Economic Development	4
Environmental Health	2
Revenues	2
Parking Services	1
Parks & Leisure	1
Planning Enforcement	1
Benefits	1

 

 

1.5.6            A breakdown of complaints satisfaction surveys for the year can be found in Appendix D. 318 surveys were sent out and 109surveys were received back (33%). Overall 39% of respondents were Satisfied or Very Satisfied, 9% were Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied and 48% were Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied. Four surveys (4%) were received that did not have the satisfaction section filled in. The only service with a satisfaction rate lower than the Council’s average (with at least 10 responses) was parking services. Parking services had 54% of respondents Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied, 23% Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied, 15% Satisfied or Very Satisfied and one respondent did not fill in the satisfaction section (8%)

1.5.7            There was a total of 61 Stage 2 complaints this year, of which 52 (85%) were closed on time. This represents both a drop in performance in closing complaints on time compared to last year (87% were closed on time in 11/12) and an increase in Stage 2 complaints (47 were received last year). A table detailing the stage 2 complaints by service can be seen below:

Service	Stage 2 Complaints
Housing Services	12
Development Management	11
Waste Collection	9
Revenues	7
Economic Development	4
Building Control	3
Environmental Health	3
Planning Enforcement	3
Hazlitt	2
Parks & Leisure	2
Environmental Enforcement	2
Parking Services	1
Spatial Planning	1
Benefits	1

 

1.5.8            Trends and Action Taken

1.5.9            Some services have faced particular issues resulting in large numbers of complaints during the past year:

·           Waste collection received a large number of complaints regarding the quality of, and then the withdrawal of garden waste sacks. This was addressed by the introduction of garden waste bins, and complaints eventually tailed off as residents got used to the new system

·           Economic development received a large number of complaints regarding falls on the High Street as a result of the High Street regeneration works. Although the works were rigorously assessed, by both internal and external organisations, and found to be safe; the main part of paving that was attributable to most of the falls was re-laid in tarmac. This provided contrast, thus reducing falls. Complaints about this dropped following the changes

·           Parking services received complaints in Q1 regarding the way parking permits were charged for on a yearly cycle, therefore if someone was to buy their permit near the end of the cycle it may only be valid for a few months before it would need to be renewed. Parking Services waive fees for applications for permits if they are received six weeks before the end of the yearly cycle. This problem will be considered when Parking Services consider introducing virtual permits

·           Housing Services received a large number of complaints asking why complainants had been on the housing list for a long time, asking about reasons behind changes to points allocations or asking why others had been housed ahead of them. The housing allocation scheme has now been changed from a points based system to a banded system. It is hoped this new system will provide more clarity and transparency to the process of housing allocations, as well as managing peoples’ expectations better. The expectation is that there may be a spike in complaints about the new system in Quarter 1 of 2013-2014, with complaints reducing once residents get used to the new system

 

1.5.10         The other services that have had high numbers of complaints tend to be the ones who are most customer facing. They each have particular reasons why they have higher levels of complaints:

·         Environmental Enforcement and Parking Services are both enforcement operations, involving in issuing fines to the public

o   In the case of Parking Services, often complainants will have exhausted their appeals and were seeking a justified complaint to overturn their fine

o   Parking Services also received complaints during Q1 about the way residents parking permits run on a yearly cycle, meaning some people buy a permit at the full price yet it is valid for only a few months

o   For Environmental Enforcement there is no appeals process (apart from going to court), so complainants often complain about their fine to try and get it overturned

·         Of the complaints regarding staff conduct for Environmental Enforcement regarding Litter Enforcement Officers, bodycamera footage was reviewed by a manager and in all but two cases staff were found to have behaved professionally, courteously and within the Council’s codes of conduct. One case was referred to XFOR, the contractor for our Litter Enforcement Officers, and in one case some areas were identified for professional development for a Litter Enforcement Officer as a result of viewing the bodycamera footage. However it should be noted that no fines were repealed as a result of these complaints, as the complaints did not mitigate the fact the complainant had littered

·         Development Management received a large number of complaints this year. Many of these complaints were from complainants who had exhausted the appeals process for planning and were seeking action through the complaints system or were unhappy with the outcome of a planning decision. Development Management received 16 such complaints this year, representing 40% of all the complaints received for this service

1.5.11         Overall, services have had a strong performance in answering complaints this year. All services but one have had an in time response rate of at least 88%. The one service that had an in time response rate of lower than this is Environmental Health at 60% (2 out of time). Both of the complaints responded to out of time were during Quarter 2 of 2012-2013. In one of the complaints for Environmental Health the complainant was kept up to date with the progress of the complaint and was informed that the department were waiting to interview the Officer the complaint was concerned with. This department only received five complaints over the course of the year, resulting in two out of time complaints producing a low figure for complaints responded to in time.

1.5.12         The services that received the most Stage 2 complaints corresponded approximately with those services who received the most Stage 1 complaints.

1.5.13         There were fifteen complaints primarily about discrimination or alleged discrimination. After investigation, 11 (73%) of these complaints have been found to be without grounds. There were a few cases where the complaint was upheld and action was taken, listed below:

 

·         One customer complained the kiosks in the Gateway were too low high for a customer in a wheelchair, particularly when entering PINs. The height of one machine has now been reduced and the customer has been updated

·         One customer complained to Parks and Leisure about the lack of parking for blue badge holders by the lake, especially as members of the fishing and model boat clubs could park there. The response highlighted disabled bays connected to the lake by a DDA compliant footpath, and states that club members are now requested to park in another areas

·         One customer complained that they had been informed a hearing loop system was installed at Maidstone Leisure Centre when in fact it wasn’t. Leisure centre staff were reminded of the fact the Leisure Centre does not have a hearing aid loop system. Since this complaint a feasibility study has been carried out for installing a hearing loop system, and the Leisure Centre is in the process of procuring one

·         One customer complained about an inappropriate attitude and unprofessional language used by a member of staff at the Leisure Centre when dealing with their disabled child. The member of staff was interviewed about this situation, and has received further training to prevent this happening again in the future

1.5.14         We have applied our current unreasonable and unreasonably persistent complainants policy to five individuals this year. We have had six complaints from two of these complainants throughout the year. The Council is in the process of updating this policy. Further details of this can be found in paragraph 1.5.17.

1.5.15         Potential Future Issues & Future Plans

1.5.16         Looking forward to the next financial year, there are four services that may see increases in complaints:

 

·         Benefits may see an increase in complaints for quarter 1 2013/2014 as changes to council tax benefit come into place. The complaints are anticipated to spike in late April/early May as the first month’s bills go out under the new scheme

·         Revenues may see a rise in complaints in quarter 1 2013/2014, as people may complain about rises in their council tax bills. The council is raising its council tax portion by 1.9%. However the level of increase in total Council Tax is not completely under the control of the council as some bills may increase more than others due to variations in rises in Parish Precepts

·         Quarter 2 in 2013/2014 may see a rise in complaints for Waste Management. This is because the contract will be changing, and there is the potential for some limited disruption for the first month or so as new arrangements come into place

·         Quarter 1 in 2013/2014 may see an increase in complaints for Housing Services. This is because a new housing allocation scheme came into place on 1^st April 2013, and the first bidding cycles under the new system will have taken place by the end of the quarter. It is expected there may be some complaints while people get used to the new system

·         The Contact Centre and Gateway may see an increase in complaints for the first two quarters of the year. This may be due to increased levels of contact leading to longer delays in speaking to an advisor because of several recent changes:

o   The welfare reforms meaning some people have started being eligible for council tax for the first time. As summons start being sent out the Contact Centre and Gateway will receive higher levels of contact.

o   The new website and automated switchboard may generate complaints due to teething problems or people being unfamiliar with the new systems

o   Increased levels of contact once the new waste collection contract comes into place- people reporting missed bins or wanting to know when their new collection day is
 

1.5.17         The current guidance for dealing with vexatious and persistent complainants is in the process of being replaced with an Unreasonable and Unreasonably Persistent Complainants Policy. The revised policy has been to the Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and the next steps will be to consult on it with the public and then for Cabinet to make a decision.

 

1.6                 Alternative Action and why not Recommended

 

1.6.1            The Council could choose not to monitor complaints handling but this would impact on the Council’s ability to use complaints as a business improvement tool.

 

1.7                 Impact on Corporate Objectives

 

1.7.1            Customer service is a core value and one of the Council’s priorities is Corporate and Customer Excellence. Management of complaints is critical to the success of this objective.

 

1.8                 Risk Management

 

1.8.1      Failure to manage complaints in a robust fashion represents a service, financial and reputational risk to the Council. Regular reports are produced for CLT and also presented to the Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Monitoring is carried out by the Research and Performance Officer.

 

1.9                 Other Implications

1.      Financial	x
2.           Staffing
3.           Legal
4.           Equality Impact Needs Assessment	x
5.           Environmental/Sustainable Development
6.           Community Safety
7.           Human Rights Act
8.           Procurement
9.           Asset Management

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.9.1            Financial Implications (Quarter 4 Only)

 

On the recommendation of the Local Government Ombudsman, the council paid a complainant £500 due to a delay in dealing with a tree enforcement issue. The complainant chose not to accept this payment, however.

 

               Financial Implications (April 1^st 2012-31^st  March 2013)
              

              

Payment	Quarter	Amount (£)
Two customers offered money to cover parking tickets	1	Tickets were not sent in so no refund given
Ex gratia payment of £100 by planning department	1	100 -although offer of payment was refused
A business complaining about impacts of works on the High Street was referred to insurers	1	Referred to insurers
A business complaining about impacts of works on the High Street was referred to the Valuation Office Agency to determine whether business tax rebates could be granted	1	Possible council tax rebate
A lady injured on the High Street was granted compensation for damaged clothing by the contractor	1	Referred to contractor
Three courts summons fees were withdrawn by revenues	1	180
Parking waived a £10 administration fee	1	10
Planning made an error in applying a light test in relation to a planning application; £300 was paid to the applicant in compensation on the recommendation of the LGO	3	300
£500 compensation due to a delay in dealing with a tree enforcement issue	4	500- although complainant did not take the payment
Total		590

 

1.10              Appendices

 

Appendix A – Q4 Complaints Categorisation and Timeliness

Appendix B - Complaints Satisfaction Surveys Q4

Appendix C- Complaints Timeliness and Categorisation 2012-2013

Appendix D- Complaints Satisfaction Surveys 2012-2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IS THIS A KEY DECISION REPORT? X     Yes                                               No     If yes, when did it first appear in the Forward Plan?   …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..     This is a Key Decision because: ………………………………………………………………………..   …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….       Wards/Parishes affected: …………………………………………………………………………………..   ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..