Putting things right: complaints and learning from DWP - the ...

communications failings between them. It is not
just things that fall between the gaps, however,
but people themselves. In Mrs M’s case (page 57)
problems arose after the death of her husband
because Jobcentre Plus had not ensured that
Coroners’ Offices provided the correct information
about bereavement benefit. Consequently, Mrs M
fell through a gap in the system and missed the
opportunity to claim over a thousand pounds to
which she would have been entitled. As a result of
our recommendations she received an apology, an
amount equivalent to the bereavement allowance
lost plus interest, and £100 compensation.
I continue to see a number of cases where a
complaint to my Office could have been avoided
had DWP recognised their mistake, apologised
and put it right sooner. In Mr T’s case (page 79) the
Child Support Agency’s handling of his complaint
was atrocious. They failed to reply to some
correspondence, the answers they did give were
not always complete, and they provided a very
poor service over the telephone. What had started
as a relatively simple problem became much more
complicated because they failed to ‘put it right’ at
the earliest opportunity. Mr T has now received an
apology and compensation of £450 as a result of
our investigation and recommendations.
As the above cases suggest, local resolution should
be the most efficient way to secure an appropriate
outcome. It also provides DWP with opportunities
to find out and learn from what, if anything, they
have done wrong, and to put things right. I consider
that DWP themselves or their Independent Case
Examiner (ICE) should in most instances be given
an opportunity to respond first. Therefore, after
a preliminary assessment, I continue to refer the
majority of complaints I receive about DWP back to
them or to ICE so they have a chance to respond.
My Office is the final stage of the complaints
process for government departments and a range
of other public bodies. Complaints can only be
referred to me by a Member of the House of
Commons, and my investigations are carried out
in private.
I publish anonymised digests of selected cases such
as this from time to time to give all public bodies
in my jurisdiction the opportunity to learn and
improve their services.
This is the first to focus solely on one department.
I have focused on DWP primarily because of their
importance and the impact of their work.
I have chosen to publish this digest now, in part
because it is two years since I published my
Principles of Good Administration, which codified
certain Principles developed by this Office since
its inception in 1967; and also because I consider
this is an opportune time to reflect on the way
a particular government department, DWP, have
embedded those Principles.
I hope that this digest will encourage DWP to
continue to engage positively with my Office in
seeking ways to improve the service they provide
to citizens. I welcome the positive response that I
have had from DWP and have summarised the key
points of their response in Learning for the future
(page 93).
Finally, I hope that this digest will give the
interested reader an insight into the types of
issues I investigate and how I go about my
investigative work.
Ann Abraham
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
March 2009
6 Putting things right: complaints and learning from DWP | March 2009