The consequences of poor complaint handling
There are significant costs associated with failure to deal adequately with a complaint
At MPS, we have been often called on to assist members when a complaint has been referred for independent review. We have found that many of these cases could have been resolved at local level if more care had been taken in investigating the complaint and in drafting the letter of response.
Although it can be tempting to deal brusquely with complaints that you feel have no foundation, or to respond defensively, this is likely to inflame rather than resolve the problem. There are significant costs associated with failure to deal adequately with a complaint.
1. More work
This is inevitable when a complaint is referred for independent review. At the very least, you will have to furnish the reviewing body’s investigators with copies of relevant records and witness statements.
If the independent reviewers find that more could have been done to achieve resolution at the local level, they will usually refer the complaint back to the service provider. The work entailed in reaching resolution will then have been effectively doubled.
2. Damage to reputation
Most complainants will tell their friends, family and acquaintances about their experience, and if they feel they have not been treated fairly they are likely to voice their concerns to a wider audience. Some may even get the local press to cover the story (and, occasionally, this can be picked up by the national press).
The Ombudsmen in all four jurisdictions of the United Kingdom have the power to name individuals in their published reports in exceptional circumstances. It is a matter for their discretion to determine what constitutes an exceptional circumstance, but Ann Abraham, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman for England, has made it clear that she has no hesitation in exercising this power if she believes it appropriate.
3. Escalation
have found that poor complaint handling itself constituted maladministration or service failure leading to an injustice or hardship for the complainant, even in cases in which I did not uphold the original complaint
On investigation, a fair proportion of complaints turn out to be groundless. The complainants in these cases are far more likely to accept this conclusion if they are confident that the complaint was investigated thoroughly and fairly. If, however, the complaint is handled poorly, this in itself becomes a reason for further complaint.
“In many of the complaints investigated by my Office, I have found that poor complaint handling itself constituted maladministration or service failure leading to an injustice or hardship for the complainant, even in cases in which I did not uphold the original complaint.” (Ann Abraham, Principles of Good Complaint Handling, p. 3)
4. GMC referral
Dissatisfied complainants may refer their concerns to the GMC, as will the Ombudsman if his/her investigation of a complaint raises concerns about a doctor’s performance.
5. Litigation
Although not the commonest route to litigation, complaints do sometimes lead to civil claims, particularly if the complainant feels that the complaint process has been neither transparent nor fair.