The complaint that arrives twice
A client at a gated community emails the provider complaining that an officer was asleep at his post on two nights and that a garden gate was left unlocked. The branch manager investigates informally, speaks to the officer, and decides the complaint is 'probably exaggerated' because the officer denies it. He takes no further action and does not record the complaint. Three weeks later the client escalates the same complaint to PSIRA, adding that the provider never responded. PSIRA notifies the provider and requests a response within a stated period. The branch manager now wants to reply that the matter was 'resolved internally at the time' and that the client is 'a difficult customer'. The director asks you how to handle the regulator's request.
1. Identify the failures in how the original complaint was handled and explain why they matter now.
Read the worked answer
The failures are cumulative:
- No record. The complaint was never logged, so there is no contemporaneous evidence of what was alleged, when, or what was done. The provider now has only memory and the client's account.
- Investigation was not impartial. The branch manager spoke only to the officer and accepted a denial. There was no check of the occurrence book, no review of any camera footage, no interview of other officers on shift, and no inspection of the garden gate.
- No response to the client. A complaint left unanswered is itself a service failure and is the reason the client escalated.
- No corrective action. Even if the allegation were partly unfounded, the unlocked gate and sleeping allegation warranted preventive steps.
These matter now because the regulator will judge the provider on the quality of its complaint handling as much as on the original incident. A provider that cannot show a record, an investigation and a response looks like a provider that does not take complaints seriously.
2. Draft the substance of the response to the regulator's request. What must it contain, and what should be avoided?
Read the worked answer
The response should be factual, dated, and cooperative:
- Acknowledge receipt of the notification and state the date of the response.
- Set out the chronology as far as it can be established: when the client's email arrived, who received it, what was done, and the fact that no written record was kept.
- Concede the handling failure plainly - the complaint was not logged and the client was not given a written response. Do not dress this up.
- Describe the investigation now conducted: occurrence book entries for the two nights, any footage reviewed, interviews with the officers on shift, and inspection of the garden gate.
- State the corrective action: complaint register introduced, written response issued to the client, refresher instruction on post duties, and a supervisory check on the gate.
- Avoid: characterising the client as 'difficult', claiming the matter was 'resolved internally' when no record exists, and blaming the officer without evidence.
A candid account with demonstrable corrective action is far stronger than a defensive one that the regulator can test against the client's version.