Learning from complaints

Individual learning from Stage 1 and 2 complaints

What went wrong?

What did we learn?

What did we change?

We sent an arrears letter relating to service charges to a resident in temporary accommodation.   They were unhappy because they felt we hadn’t provided sufficient information on what service charges are covered by Universal Credit and what is the responsibility of the resident

The information we give at sign up was not clear

Improved the information at sign up that makes clear what is and is not covered by Universal Credit.

A customer who had suffered a leak from a flat above them was issued with de-humidifiers to help to dry out the property. The customer complained that this was having a financial impact on the household, especially during times of high utility costs.

That the use of dehumidifiers had a financial impact on residents, especially when they are used over an extended time

An improvement to the service to ensure where dehumidifiers are required, reimbursement of the cost of running dehumidifiers is automatically considered.

A customer of the Safe and Sound service had suffered a fall and had waited in excess of 3 hours for ambulance to arrive. Their advocate was concerned that the elderly vulnerable person was left alone to wait for the ambulance.

Although waiting times for ambulances are outside of the control of SCH, we would not want a vulnerable resident left alone for an extended period of time.

A new process has been put in place where if the wait for an ambulance is likely to take longer than 2 hours, Safe and Sound officers will attend and carry out a welfare check ensuring the customer is left comfortable (for example ensure the environment is suitable, open windows if too hot, and provide appropriate hydration.)

A customer who had moved into a property offered as a result of a homeless acceptance. The customer moved into the property but felt that the property was not suitable due to the location.

Conversations with the Housing Options Officer took place via text message, messages and these were misinterpreted and therefore no Review of suitability was carried out.

Introduced a new process to ensure that any approach by a customer for a review of any homeless decision, the customer will receive a formal letter confirming receipt of the request and what is required from them to progress the Review.

A customer complained about the Do It Yourself Shared Ownership Scheme process and information

The information available within the application pack didn’t provide all the eligibility criteria for the scheme

The application pack was reviewed, and more detailed information about the eligibility criteria for the scheme was made clearer and became an important part of the application.

A customer complained following an overpayment of rent, for which we provided incorrect advice on next steps

The advice we provided could have led to financial detriment for the residents

Change of process to ensure additional checks are in place when overpayments are flagged on SCH systems.

A customer complained that repeat repairs to a boiler were not identified as linked

Our ability to highlight when a boiler may need a replacement is limited

A process has been created in the Contact Centre whereby multiple visits for the same issue trigger a notice to repairs

A customer complained their garage repair had taken too long

Garage repairs that require Asbestos works had an overly complex process

The process was amended to help reduce the wait time for customers

A customer complained that the follow on works after an inspection hadn’t been completed or had taken too long to complete

Monitoring of follow on works could be enhanced

Diarising of works improved, reporting of follow on work improved.  

A customer had to repeatedly report the same repair issue

Monitoring of follow on works and customer communication could be enhanced

Diarising of works improved, reporting of follow on work improved, record keeping being reviewed.

A process has been created in the Contact Centre whereby multiple visits for the same issue trigger a notice to repairs.

A service user complained that SCH didn’t support them when they needed to make a personal injury claim

When the case is complex it would be beneficial to have a better handover to SMBC

Service areas have agreed a new process for such circumstances.

A customer complained that the follow on works after a sprinkler activation were slow and unclear

Initial response to the incident was robust, however follow on actions could be improved

A new process has been put in place and the recovery phase of an incident now sits with the Customer Experience Team

Learning from HOS determinations

What went wrong?

What did we learn?

What did we change?

We prioritised the needs of the customer over the need to complete a gas service on time.

That we need to ensure gas services are undertaken in line with building safety legislation, considering not just the need of the customer, but all customers living nearby

New Gas Safety process established which ensures legal action is instigated earlier in the process.

Took too long to resolve issues with the roof and associated leaks

That the process in place for roof repairs could be improved

New roof works process created and improved monitoring of work in progress, monthly report regarding repeat contact to the Contact Centre created and utilised.

There were missed opportunities to resolve ongoing issues with leaks which had  a significant impact on the customer and confusion with complaint handling

That repeat requests for repairs should be identified as an indicator of a service delivery issue, that identifying one point of contact for customers is important when handling complaints

An action plan has been put in place to address these issues