4. Post Review correspondence

Investigators should pass any post review correspondence from the complainant to the reviewer who made the decision; they should not deal with this themselves. Correspondence about remedies should go to the Team Coordinator. Investigators should not get involved in telephone calls or other contact once a review request has been rejected or the case has been reviewed and the decision upheld. If a complainant is persistent the Investigator should tell the manager, who will decide what action to take.

Having issued a review response using the standard text around no future contact, reviewers should carefully consider whether any further response is likely to be helpful, or more likely to continue an unproductive dialogue. In rare circumstances, new information can bring the review decision into question. In this case the reviewer should decide what action needs to be taken, which could include re-opening the case.

If the reviewer decided there is nothing more we can say they should politely, but firmly, close the correspondence down. Standard letter ‘No Further Contact’ can be used and if necessary Factsheet G7 ‘Complainant Behaviour;’ should be sent. Any further correspondence should be checked, but not acknowledged or, unless absolutely necessary, responded to. Reviewers should be familiar with the email blocking policy. If the complainant sends in a service complaint about the review or the ‘No further contact’ decision’ it should not be acknowledged, but an ECHO task set for the Director of Intake and Assessment or Director of Investigation so they can decide whether to respond.

• Potential Pre-Action Protocols (PAP) or judicial reviews should be dealt with by the original Investigator in consultation with their manager in accordance with the Legal Manual. This is because the original Investigator is best placed to deal with specific points raised. If the Investigator’s Line Manager is not available the person who did any review can deal with the PAP/Judicial review.