2.1 Introduction 

The Intake Team operate in accordance with the wider principles of the LGSCO - 'How we work'

The team will address three key questions about every enquiry:

• is it a matter that might be for the LGSCO (rather than another body)?
• is it premature? and
• is the complaint ready for the Assessment Team?

Intake will also: 

• Robustly filter out all misdirected, incomplete and incomprehensible contacts
• Identify and screen out most premature complaints
• Make enquires to BinJs regarding prematurity
• Respond to OCS messages from complainants where appropriate
• Handle the majority of re-submitted complaints 
• Seek consent to handle complaints from anyone other than the person affected (PA)
• Process joint working referrals from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
• Manage expectations about the role of the LGSCO
• Forward complaints to Assessment
• Enter new complaint details onto ECHO where necessary to comply with a reasonable adjustment access request

Intake will not:

• Provide an update and enquiry service about continuing complaints that are elsewhere in the LGSCO process.
• Have personal caseloads.
• Engage in protracted conversation with complainants via the OCS messaging service
• Refer premature complaints to the BinJ, other than in a few exceptional cases.

2.2 Delegated Authority

The team has delegated authority to decide whether a complaint is premature.

They also have the authority to accept complaints orally and to override the need for complaints to be made in writing.

2.3 Outputs from the Intake Team

The possible outcomes to any new enquiries are:

• Premature – complaints that are clearly premature based on the evidence presented by, the complainant or received following enquiries with the BINJ
• Non LGSCO – complaints that are ‘not for us’ eg consumer complaints for trading standards, utility complaints, or complaints that are for other ombudsman schemes, such as FOS.
• An Incomplete enquiry – complaints where we do not have enough information to continue and where we cannot get it from a single outbound call.
• A Viable enquiry – complaints that may be ‘for us’, are not obviously premature, and have enough information to continue to the next stage.

2.3.1 Premature complaints

For complaints via the OCS or post, the advisor will judge prematurity based on the information supplied by the complainant.

Where prematurity is clear, the advisor will send a premature decision letter and factsheets to the complainant confirming the complaint is premature.

For telephone enquiries, the advisor will explore whether the complaint is premature. If the complaint is clearly premature, the advisor will make a formal decision and advise the caller to contact the BinJ directly. Where a case record is created, the advisor will send a premature decision letter and a factsheet to the caller as confirmation

2.3.1.1 Premature referrals to the BinJ

Intake will not refer premature complaints to the BinJ for the PA other than in a few exceptional cases. For example, where the complainant cannot make the complaint to the BinJ or where there would be merit in our referring it on their behalf. 

2.3.2 ‘Non LGSCO’ complaints

Intake will assess each enquiry to consider whether it is for the LGSCO or whether it is a misdirected enquiry regarding a body that is not within jurisdiction.

Where the matter is not for us (e.g. complaints that are entirely for other Ombudsman schemes, such as PHSO or HOS,) then a basic signposting service will be offered to the complainant.

See also: Section 2.4 - Signposting

2.3.3 ‘Incomplete Enquiries’

Where the complaint is missing key information or not enough evidence has been presented to reach a decision on prematurity, an advisor will attempt to gather this.

2.3.3.1 Outbound contacts

The advisor can send a message via the OCS or make a single outbound call to the complainant.

If the call is not successful, the advisor will, wherever possible, send the complainant a ‘please phone’ message/letter asking the complainant to contact us. Full notes will be made on the case of what information is required. The complaint will be closed on ECHO as ‘insufficient information to proceed and PA advised’ 

When the complainant contacts us to provide the necessary information, the advisor dealing with the contact will re-open the case and treat it accordingly.

2.3.3.2 Premature enquiries

The advisor may also consider making an enquiry directly to the BinJ if it is felt that the prematurity of the complaint is unclear. 

The advisor will send an email to the BinJ asking it to confirm if the complaint has concluded the complaints process.  The advisor will include the complaint information presented by the complainant and ask the BinJ to respond within 5 working days.  A further period of 1 working day will be given if the response needs to be chased.  If no response is received at this point, the complaint should be formally referred to the BinJ.

Advisors will process any response accordingly, confirming their decision to both the complainant and the BinJ.

The enquiry should not be made to the BinJ with only partial or incomplete information, nor if the intention is to simply to gain a greater understanding of the complaint itself.  This should always be sought from the complainant in the first instance.

2.3.4 ‘Viable Enquiries’

Intake will only transfer ‘viable enquiries’ to Assessment. A ‘viable enquiry’ is a complaint that contains enough information to enable it to be processed at the next stage. This means that no complaint will go to Assessment from Intake unless, as a minimum, it contains:

• enough contact details to get in touch with the complainant (name and either: phone number, email or postal address – ideally all of these)
• a ‘reason for contacting the LGSCO’ showing the complaint ‘may be for us’. The reason is recorded directly in the ‘Initial Information’ screen on ECHO 
• Consent from the PA where applicable 
• a BinJ, and
• an assigned top-level complaint category (and wherever possible a second level category).

2.3.4.1 Re-Submissions

Intake will only accept re-submissions of premature complaints when either:

• the BinJ’s complaints process is complete, and the complainant can tell us the result of that process, or
• sufficient time has elapsed with no reasonable progress made towards resolving the complaint. The complainant’s own failure or refusal to cooperate with the BinJ’s complaints process will not be an acceptable reason to accept re-submission.

With regard to resubmitted complaints, if the complainant:

• Contacts Intake with a final response then – regardless of who took the premature decision – the advisor will resubmit the complaint and send it to Assessment
• Contacts Intake and Assessment took the original decision but there is no final response - then the advisor will set a task for the Team Coordinator or provide the relevant telephone number
• Contacts Assessment directly because they took the original premature decision - then Assessment should treat the complaint as resubmitted.

2.3.4.2 Complaints that are perceived to be urgent

Intake should not send complaints to Assessment based on a complaint's perceived urgency. The LGSCO is not an emergency service and often a BinJ is usually in the best position to help resolve a complaint.

Advisors have the discretion to decide whether a complainant needs help and can assist them to make their complaint to the BinJ. They may also seek advice from the embedded investigator if they are unsure about any issues. 

However, there may be exceptional circumstances whereby the advisor considers there is merit in an Assessment investigator making further enquiries. The advisor can then send the complaint to Assessment but there needs to be a full explanation on the case as to the reasons why.

2.3.5 Additional Contact

OCS users will have the option to upload further information as they wish to support their case.

Incidental material sent by the complainant or the BinJ will be added to the case record but may not be responded to unless it fulfils the criteria for any other action.

Intake will strongly discourage complainants from sending unsolicited documents by post. In addition, we will make it clear that we will not usually return any correspondence and that no original or valuable documents should be sent to us unless specified.

Intake may receive calls relating to cases that are with Assessment or Investigation. Advisors are generally unable to assist in these circumstances and the caller should be asked to send a message through their OCS account if they have one, this includes unallocated cases. Or to redial and contact the case owner directly.

Following a recommendation from our external reviewer and based on the Highway Code which makes clear it is not acceptable, we should ensure telephone discussions with complainants do not take place while they are driving vehicles. Even using hands-free equipment is likely to distract attention and it is far safer not to use any type of telephone when driving or riding. So, we should not be party to telephone discussions in those conditions, regardless of our or the complainant's personal view on the matter.

Most telephone conversations we are likely to have (both casework and non-casework) require concentration by both parties. We should therefore end calls where we believe the person is driving or riding, and politely ask the caller to call back when convenient and safe to do so. Where a caller persists, we should feel confident to bring the call to an end as this is our decision to make.

2.4 Signposting

We do not offer a general advice service for the public and we will only provide a limited signposting service for callers who are ‘not for us’.  

Intake will provide complainants with the contact details for the most frequently signposted organisations. In all other cases, advisors will signpost complainants to Gov.uk and Citizen’s Advice to continue their complaint elsewhere. Standard auto texts are available to provide this advice by post or message.

2.5 Dealing with representatives

Intake may receive complaints from people acting on behalf of the PA. These persons may be nominated representatives, advocate services, solicitors or MPs.

Advisors will where possible discuss with the representative whether the PA has capacity to provide consent and send consent forms The question of consent and capacity should always be asked but if the PA cannot do so then the case can go to AT with a task for ATC to make them aware of the consent issue. 

2.5.1 Advocates and representatives

The advisor should deal with the advocate or representative directly unless otherwise specified.

If the advisor is sending a complaint to the body in jurisdiction as premature or making an enquiry about the status of the complaint, then consent from the PA must be in place beforehand.

2.5.2 Solicitors

The service that the LGSCO provide is free and accessible therefore it is not deemed necessary for a person to present a complaint to us via a solicitor.

If the Ombudsman was to uphold a complaint, it is unlikely that the solicitor’s fees will be included in any recommended remedy, unless there were exceptional circumstances.

2.5.3 MPs

MPs often refer complaints to the LGSCO on behalf of their constituents. Unless otherwise specified, we will deal directly with the PA and send copies of the correspondence with a covering letter to the MP.