Purpose of the complaints system

The main purpose of a complaints system is to allow members of the public to seek redress where there is no suitable alternative way of doing so. Complaints systems in public bodies should also support people to raise issues of significant public interest. This supports effective scrutiny of local services.

This is supported by the definition of a complaint set out in the Complaint Handling Code which says complaints should be about matters “affecting an individual or group of individuals” (Complaint Handling Code, paragraph 1.4).

The complaints process is not an appropriate route for people to raise concerns about the actions of an organisation where they are not directly affected, or where there is little to no wider public interest in considering the issues raised. There are other, more appropriate routes for providing feedback or raising concerns in these circumstances. For example, locally elected representatives.

Recommended definition

Local authorities may wish to include the following definition of a person who may complain within local complaints policies under the Code:

“Any member of the public, including a child, who claims to have been negatively impacted as a result of the actions of the authority, may make a complaint. The same applies if they are raising issues which relate to matters of significant public interest.

A member of the public includes people acting on behalf of a business, or a voluntary or charitable organisation.  Members of the public do not have to be resident in the authority’s area to raise a complaint.”

We refer to these as 'individuals' or 'members of the public' throughout the Code and accompanying guides, as well as 'complainants'.

Considering negative impact

Members of the public, particularly those who are vulnerable, may not be able to express how they have been impacted by the actions of the organisation. Organisations should adopt a common-sense approach when considering complaints where an individual has not explained how they have been impacted.

Only complaints from people where there has been no direct impact should be rejected. However, organisations should consider whether there are issues of significant public interest which should be considered.

Significant public interest

Members of the public should be encouraged to raise issues of public interest with locally elected representatives in the first instance. This is because they are often best placed to raise these matters through local scrutiny processes. However, elected representatives may sometimes lack the capacity or ability to take the matter forward on their behalf.

In reaching a view on whether a complaint relates to an issue of significant public interest, organisations may consider the following:

• Matters relating to significant adverse impacts on the local area or environment;
• Matters which may adversely impact a wider group of people, some of whom may be vulnerable.

Organisations may develop their own understanding of matters of significant public interest based on local circumstances.

Representatives and consent

Members of the public may have someone raise a complaint on their behalf. Having a representative can be helpful for many people, not just for people who experience difficulties in communicating. A representative could be a friend or family member or a professional such as an advocate or solicitor. Organisations should ensure a representative has consent or other lawful basis for acting on another individual’s behalf, such as Lasting Power of Attorney.

Organisations should not place restrictions on the actions of representatives unless there are good reasons for doing so. For example, if a person wants to attend a meeting with a friend or family member for support there is no reason for an organisation to prevent that person from speaking in the meeting without good reason.

Representatives should be expected to act with the best interests of the complainant in mind. Our guidance on managing unreasonable actions contains information about how an organisation can respond to concerns about the actions of a representative.

Groups of people who may not raise a complaint

Local authorities may wish to exclude the following from the complaints process:

• Complaints made on behalf of another public body (e.g. parish council, NHS Trust, government department) – The complaints process is not normally an appropriate route to resolve disputes between public bodies. However, members of other public bodies may raise complaints in a personal capacity or on behalf of an individual or group of individuals.
• Complaints from local councillors or Members of Parliament (MPs) about issues of wider public interest – These matters are best addressed through local “member enquiry” processes. Where these processes do not exist, the complaint process should be used instead. Local councillors and MPs may be signposted to the Ombudsman if the issue cannot be resolved to their satisfaction through the local “member enquiry” process.
• Anonymous complaints – It is not possible for local authorities to consider the impact on the individual raising the complaint nor identify whether there are any conflicts of interest or other ongoing action such as appeals or court action etc.

Member enquiries

Elected representatives (e.g. MPs and local councillors) will contact organisations to raise issues on behalf of individual constituents as well as raising issues affecting the local area they represent.

Organisations will normally deal with these contacts as “member enquiries”.

Where an elected representative raises an issue on behalf of an individual, the organisation may respond under the “member enquiry” process. If the issue raised includes an expression of dissatisfaction, the organisation should provide the elected representative with details of the complaints process in its response. This allows individuals and elected representatives to make an informed decision about whether to raise a complaint.

Elected representatives can raise complaints on behalf individual constituents. It is for each organisation to decide how to deal with these. Organisations may decide that it is reasonable for elected representatives to raise issues through the “member enquiry” process first before making a complaint. This mirrors the approach set out in the Code in relation to service requests where organisations are expected to be given a chance to resolve issues through normal service delivery before a complaint is made.

Where an elected representative raises issues affecting the wider area they represent or a large number of constituents, the organisation may decide to deal with this solely as a “member enquiry” before signposting to the Ombudsman. This allows organisations to make efficient use of their resources, whist providing elected representatives with a route to raise concerns should the organisation be unable to resolve these.

Rejecting a complaint

If an organisation rejects a complaint because it decides the person is not someone who can complain, they should explain their reasons briefly in writing (either by letter or e-mail) and signpost them to the Ombudsman.

Organisations should use our recommended wording for signposting as this contains important information about the limits on our ability to consider complaints. This will allow individuals to make an informed choice about whether to pursue their complaint.