Reasons to prevent contact for customer survey

The request was partially successful.

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

In your Interim Casework Policy and Guidance: Section 3 - Case Assessment on p9 you state that:

"Any decision letter declining a case for investigation at the case assessment stage (with the exception of withdrawn cases) should remind the complainant about the possibility of being contacted as part of the customer survey and of the possibility of opting out of the survey."

The following wording should be used.

"We use an external research company to find out what our customers think. If you would prefer us not to pass your contact details on to them please call 0300 061 4222 or email us at [email address]"

You then state that:

"The only circumstances in which this wording should not be used is if the case has been noted as 'not to be contacted for research' (this will be indicated on the 'case closure' screen on Visualfiles). Please note that this functionality is intended to be used when the complainant expresses a desire not to be contacted for research. It should only be used in other exceptional circumstances following agreement with line management (for example, if the complainant has specifically asked not to be contacted by telephone or where relevant restrictions have been put in place under the unreasonable behaviour policy. Any case where this functionality has been used should have reasons noted in the free text field under the 'not to be contacted for research' button on the 'case closure' screen."

After reading this I checked my own decision letter not to investigate and the wording regarding the external research company was not included. I also checked the decision letter following the review and once again the external research company information was missing. It would appear that the 'functionality' to prevent contact by the external research company has been applied in my case. I did not specifically ask to removed from this option and as far as I know I was not subject to the 'unreasonable behaviour policy'

1. Can you tell me what other reasons PHSO might use to prevent complainant access to the customer survey?

2. Can you explain how a complainant can access the information stored on the Visualfiles where the reasons would be noted in the 'free text field' on the case closure screen? I have made several DPA requests and have never been provided with this information.

3. Can you tell me how many people have been denied access to the customer survey due to the application of the 'unreasonable behaviour policy' in the last year (or shorter time if funds don't allow)?

4. Can you tell me how many people have been denied access to the customer survey due to other reasons in the last year (or shorter)?

Yours faithfully,

Della Reynolds.

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear Ms Reynolds

Thank you for your email of 19 April 2014 about our customer satisfaction survey (FDC-189308).

I have considered your questions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and answer them in turn below.

‘1. Can you tell me what other reasons PHSO might use to prevent complainant access to the customer survey?’

Customers are removed from the customer survey sample:

-If they have requested not to be contacted

-If they have requested not to be contacted by telephone

-If a customer has had an unreasonable behaviour policy applied to their case at the time of producing the customer survey sample

-If we do not hold a telephone number for the customer

-If we have had no contact with the customer through the process because they have a representative

-If, at their request, the customer has raised any communication issues with us as a result of a disability or impairment

‘2. Can you explain how a complainant can access the information stored on the Visualfiles where the reasons would be noted in the 'free text field' on the case closure screen? I have made several DPA requests and have never been provided with this information.’

Any information noted in the ‘free text field’ on Visualfiles would be contained in the ‘case history’ document we provide when we respond to case related information requests.

‘3. Can you tell me how many people have been denied access to the customer survey due to the application of the 'unreasonable behaviour policy' in the last year (or shorter time if funds don't allow)?’

We do not hold this information. The survey sample is an automated report which removes individuals who have the policy applied. Therefore we do not have a snapshot in time of who was excluded.

I should add that the 'unreasonable behaviour policy' is rarely applied and it is something we would look to avoid wherever possible. We would warn someone about their behaviour first and tell them that if it continues we may have to invoke the policy. Only if the behaviour continues would we apply the policy. That a warning was issued and/or the policy applied would be evident from the Visualfiles case history.

‘4. Can you tell me how many people have been denied access to the customer survey due to other reasons in the last year (or shorter)?’

We do not hold this information. We remove people who fall into the categories listed in question 1 from the customer survey sample and do not store information about who was removed.

I hope that this information is helpful. If you are unhappy with my decision, you can ask for a review by email to: [email address]

If you still have concerns after that, you can ask the Information Commissioner’s Office to look into your case. Their contact details are available on their website at: www.ico.org.uk

Yours sincerely

Luke Whiting
Head of FOI/DP

show quoted sections

Dear Luke Whiting,

As is usually the case, your answer simply raises more questions. I am sorry to be a pain but your response does not match my experience, so one of us must be in error.

Firstly, I did not fall into any of the categories stated for removal from the customer survey yet both my initial assessment and review closure letters failed to give me information about contact from IFF. That can only lead me to believe that there must be another reason which you have not listed, or was it just an error on both occasions?

If a person is denied access to the customer survey this is stored on your computer system in the visualfiles and yet your software does not allow you to calculate the number who fall into this category. How do you carry out quality assurance when you have no data?

One of the key issues with your customer survey procedure seems to be the necessity to carry this out over the telephone, with IFF contacting the complainant rather than the other way round. In the modern age there should be multiple facilities including on-line access available to everyone, or it could be argued that PHSO are discriminating against the disabled, those who require a representative and those without a telephone. If the complainant contacted IFF directly then you wouldn't need to do any 'screening' and as you say it is only a very small number who fall into the 'unreasonable behaviour' category, so they would hardly skew the results.

There must be a reason why PHSO take the time and effort to monitor access to the customer survey.

Yours sincerely,

Della Reynolds

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

If they have requested not to be contacted by telephone....

(But state that they would be perfectly happy to be contacted by this great little invention - called email).

.....Because contacting people by email might mean that the customers actual comments would be on record.

And obviously we can't have that...