CHAPTER 6 | how the Ombudsman helped people

Helping to resolve complaints in a systematic fashion

The philosophy of best practice complaint handling to which the Ombudsman's office is committed is in line with good dispute resolution principles. These principles stress that an agency should generally be given the first opportunity to consider a complaint and resolve it. Complaints can then be addressed at their source directly with the agency. Often this speeds the process of complaint resolution. By handling complaints directly, agencies are better placed to learn from their mistakes, to clarify any public misunderstanding about the agency's policies and practices, and to rebuild trust with their clients.

'… assisting complainants to use an agency's internal complaint-handling process …'

Ombudsman staff will often suggest that a complainant first raise a matter with the agency concerned. In fact, the majority of complaints and inquiries to the Ombudsman are handled in this way. This process is specifically recognised in s 6(1A) of the Ombudsman Act 1976, which gives the Ombudsman the authority to decline to investigate a complaint that has not yet been raised with the relevant agency. We see this as an important function of the office—to explain to people why they should first go to the agency, to provide advice on how to approach the agency, and to invite them to approach us again if they remain dissatisfied with the agency's response to their complaint.

The principle of assisting complainants to use an agency's internal complaint-handling process is viable only if the Ombudsman's office can have confidence in that process. Ombudsman staff work with complaint-handling areas within agencies to ensure that complaints are handled seamlessly and professionally. For example, we have an ongoing arrangement with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) internal complaint-handling unit, ATO Complaints, that it will accept a referral from the Ombudsman's office with the agreement of a complainant who has not previously contacted the ATO. This avoids the need for a complainant who has first contacted our office to repeat the details of their complaint to the ATO. ATO Complaints or the relevant ATO business line will then seek to resolve the matter and advise the complainant directly of the outcome and any remedy. An example is provided in the Prompt and courteous response case study.

The referral of complaints is also an in-built aspect of the legislation for handling complaints about the AFP. This process allows for the conciliation of relatively minor complaints—a quick and effective way of resolving such complaints, as the Improvements to policies case study illustrates.

In 2004–05, the Ombudsman will examine how well the complaint referral function is working. This function was partly addressed by the 2004 Client Satisfaction Survey (discussed in the 'Performance report' and 'Challenges' chapters of this report). Two issues were assessed: the extent to which complainants took our advice to complain directly to the relevant agency; and their satisfaction level upon doing so. The survey results suggest that most complainants followed our suggestions and pursued their complaints with the agency concerned. Disappointingly, the level of satisfaction among complainants with agency complaint handling was lower than we would hope. The latter issue is something we are able to address if the complainant returns to this office after contacting the agency. The Ombudsman will also take up the issue, possibly by an own motion investigation on the performance of agency complaint-handling units.