Poor Complaints-Handling Behaviour

Why complaints handling is important

Complaints handling is itself part of the service provided. How a complaint is handled can be as significant as the issue that gave rise to it.

Poor complaints handling can:

• Delay resolution unnecessarily
• Increase frustration and distress
• Obscure or minimise legitimate concerns
• Undermine trust in the process

Common poor complaints-handling behaviours

Consumers may encounter one or more of the following behaviours when complaints are not handled appropriately:

• Refusal to accept responsibility, even where errors are evident
• Ignoring or selectively responding to factual questions
• Misrepresentation of events or correspondence
• Shifting blame onto the client or third parties without evidence
• Over-reliance on procedure instead of addressing substance
• Downplaying impact by minimising delay, cost, or consequence

Power imbalances in complaints

Complaints processes often involve power imbalance. The provider controls internal information, timelines, and decision-making, while the consumer relies on the honesty and competence of the response.

Poor handling may also include:

• Avoidance by senior staff
• Failure to explain decisions clearly
• Use of legal or technical language to discourage challenge

What poor handling may indicate

Poor complaints-handling behaviour does not automatically prove misconduct. However, it may indicate:

• Lack of accountability
• Inadequate internal oversight
• Reluctance to acknowledge error
• Risk of continued obstruction

These indicators may justify escalation beyond the provider’s internal process.

Normalising escalation

Escalation is not a failure and is not a personal attack. It is a proportionate response when complaints are not handled competently or in good faith.

Recognising poor complaints handling allows consumers to make informed decisions about next steps, including external review where appropriate.