Guidance note on managing unreasonable complainant behaviour
Introduction
In a minority of cases people pursue their complaints in a way which is unreasonable. They may behave unacceptably, or be unreasonably persistent in their contacts and submission of information. This can impede the investigation of their complaint (or the complaints by others) and can have significant resource issues for organisations. These actions can occur either while their complaint is being investigated, or once an organisation has concluded the complaint investigation.
This guidance note aims to help local authorities and other bodies within the LGO's jurisdiction develop a proportionate approach when responding to unreasonable complainant behaviour, based on the LGO's view of good practice in dealing with these complainants.
We hope it will be helpful to both officers and councillors. It should be read in conjunction with our general guidance on Running a complaints system.
Back to top
Definition
This guidance covers 'unreasonable complainant behaviour', which may include one or two isolated incidents, as well as 'unreasonably persistent behaviour', which is usually an accumulation of incidents or behaviour over a longer period.
For us, unreasonable and unreasonably persistent complainants are those complainants who, because of the nature or frequency of their contacts with an organisation, hinder the organisation's consideration of their, or other people’s, complaints.
We differentiate between 'persistent' complainants and 'unreasonably persistent' complainants. People bringing complaints to the LGO are 'persistent' because they feel the organisation has not dealt with their complaint properly and are not prepared to leave the matter there. The fact that approximately 26% of the complaints we investigate conclude either by report or by local settlement indicates that this persistence is frequently justified. And almost all complainants see themselves as pursuing justified complaints.
For example, criticising a complaints procedure when the standards set out are not met is not unreasonable. If complaints procedures are operating properly, then responding to expressions of dissatisfaction and requests for information should not cause organisations particular problems.
However, some complainants may have justified complaints but may pursue them in inappropriate ways. Others may pursue complaints which appear to have no substance or which have already been investigated and determined. Their contacts with organisations may be amicable but still place very heavy demands on staff time, or they may be very emotionally charged and distressing for all involved.
Very occasionally, complainants also act deceitfully by forging documents, making covert recordings of meetings, adopting false identities, and so on. Such behaviour is unacceptable and managing it can become a distraction from consideration of the original substance of the complaint.
Situations can escalate, and in a few cases complainants become abusive, offensive, threatening or otherwise behave unacceptably. In response an organisation may have to restrict access to their premises or staff, in accord with its own procedures for protecting their staff from harassment and harm.
Back to top
Why have a policy?
Organisations want to deal with complainants in ways that are open, fair and proportionate. A considered, policy-led approach helps staff to understand clearly what is expected of them, what options for action are available, and who can authorise these actions. A policy that can be shared with complainants if they start to behave unreasonably can assist in managing their expectations and their behaviour, as far as possible, while the substance of their complaint is addressed.
Back to top
Examples of unreasonable actions and behaviours
These are some of the actions and behaviours which organisations often find problematic, and which come to the LGO's attention. Single incidents may be unacceptable, but more often the difficulty is caused by unreasonably persistent behaviour that is time consuming to manage and interferes with proper consideration of the complaint.
- Refusing to specify the grounds of a complaint, despite offers of assistance.
- Refusing to co-operate with the complaints investigation process.
- Refusing to accept that certain issues are not within the scope of a complaints procedure.
- Insisting on the complaint being dealt with in ways which are incompatible with the adopted complaints procedure or with good practice.
- Making unjustified complaints about staff who are trying to deal with the issues, and seeking to have them replaced.
- Changing the basis of the complaint as the investigation proceeds.
- Denying or changing statements made at an earlier stage.
- Introducing trivial or irrelevant new information at a late stage.
- Raising numerous, detailed but unimportant questions; insisting that they are answered.
- Covertly recording meetings and conversations.
- Submitting falsified documents from themselves or others.
- Adopting a 'scatter gun' approach: pursuing parallel complaints on the same issue with a variety of other organisations.
- Making excessive demands on the time and resources of staff with lengthy telephone calls, emails to numerous council staff, or detailed letters every few days, and expecting immediate responses.
- Submitting repeat complaints with minor additions/variations that the complainant insists make these 'new' complaints.
- Refusing to accept the decision; repeatedly arguing points with no new evidence.
Back to top
Your policy on managing unreasonable complaint behaviour
This should include:
- examples of the main kinds of 'trigger' actions/behaviours which may cause the policy to be invoked (see above)
- a list of the options for action open to the organisation
- information about the decision-making process: who decides
- whether the policy will be applied to a complainant
- what restrictions will be placed on contacts and for how long
- whether restrictions can be lifted or should continue
- details of complainants’ rights of review/appeal against
- a decision to invoke the policy and/or
- any particular restrictions applied
- guidance on the nature of the records to be kept
- what information is given to complainants when the policy is applied
- advice about who is your organisation is to be informed that contact with a named complainant is being restricted and why
- links with other organisational policies.
Consider whether your policy in this area properly aligns with your policies on such matters as equal opportunities, health and safety, staff welfare, harassment, codes of conduct for staff, disciplinary procedures, the complaints policy, Freedom of Information requests, and so on.
Back to top
Considerations prior to taking action under the policy
If your consideration of the complaint is concluded you have the option of ending all communication with the complainant on the issue and, where appropriate, referring the complainant to the Ombudsman.
If the complaint is still under consideration, steps may be necessary to manage the complainant's behaviour.
The decision to designate someone's behaviour as unreasonable, and restrict their access to you, could have serious consequences for the individual. So you should be satisfied that:
- the complaint is being or has been investigated properly
- any decision reached on it is the right one
- communications with the complainant have been adequate, and
- the complainant is not now providing any significant new information that might affect the organisation’s view on the complaint.
When it is necessary to designate the complainant as behaving unreasonably, some of the following steps may assist.
- Offering the complainant a meeting with an officer of appropriate seniority to explore scope for resolution of the complaint and explain why their current behaviour is seen as unreasonable.
- Sharing your policy with the complainant and warning them that restrictive actions may need to be applied if their behaviour continues.
- Setting up a strategy meeting to agree a cross-departmental approach.
- Designating a key officer to co-ordinate the organisation’s response(s).
- Helping them to find a suitable independent advocate, especially if the complainant has different needs.
Back to top
Options for action
Any actions taken should be proportionate to the nature and frequency of the complainant’s current contacts. The following options may be suitable, taking the complainant's behaviour and circumstances into account. The objective is to manage the complainant’s unreasonable behaviour in such a way that their complaint can brought to a conclusion briskly, without further distractions. Options include:
- Placing limits on the number and duration of contacts with staff per week or month.
- Offering a restricted time slot for necessary calls.
- Limiting the complainant to one medium of contact (telephone, letter, email etc).
- Requiring the complainant to communicate only with one named member of staff.
- Requiring any personal contacts to take place in the presence of a witness, and in a suitable location.
- Refusing to register and process further complaints about the same matter.
Where a decision on the complaint has been made, you can inform the complainant that future correspondence will be read and placed on the file but not acknowledged, unless it contains material new information. A designated officer should be identified who will read future correspondence.
Back to top
Operating the policy
If a decision is taken to apply restricted access, write to the complainant with a copy of the policy to explain:
- why the decision has been taken
- what it means for his or her contacts with the organisation
- how long any restrictions will last, and
- what the complainant can do to have the decision reviewed.
Keep adequate records to show:
- when a decision is taken not to apply the policy when a member of staff asks for this to be done, or
- when a decision is taken make an exception to the policy once it has been applied, or
- when a decision is taken not to put a further complaint from such a complainant through its complaints procedure for any reason, and
- when a decision is taken not to respond to further correspondence, make sure any further letters, faxes or emails from the complainant are checked to pick up any significant new information.
When complaints about new issues are made these should be treated on their merits. You should reconsider whether any restrictions previously applied are still appropriate and necessary.
Back to top
Reviewing decisions to restrict access
When imposing a restriction on access, you should have specified a review date. Restrictions should be lifted and relationships returned to normal unless there are good grounds to extend the restrictions.
You should inform the complainant of the outcome of your review. If restrictions are to continue, explain your reasons and state when the restrictions will next be reviewed.
Back to top
Referring complainants to the LGO
Relations between organisations and complainants sometimes break down badly while complaints are under investigation and there is little prospect of achieving a satisfactory outcome. In such circumstances there may be nothing to gain from following through all stages of the organisation’s complaints procedure. In these circumstances, the LGO may exceptionally be prepared to consider complaints before complaints procedures have been exhausted, if the request is made by both sides to the dispute.
A complainant who has been treated as behaving unreasonably may make a complaint to the LGO about it. The LGO is unlikely to be critical of the organisation’s action if it can show that it acted proportionately and in accordance with its adopted policy.
Our own internal policy on the management of unreasonable complainant behaviour is available separately (see 'downloads' box on the right).
Back to top
Date Updated: 17/08/11