Property. Firm foundations support increasing complaints

Transcription

1 Case studies Examples of how Ombudsman Services: Property has resolved complaints Statistics Find out how and why complainants contacted us Page 3 6 Major complaint types Page 4 5 The future of Ombudsman Services: Property Page 8 Page 3, 4, 6 and 8 Property Sector report 2011 At Ombudsman Services: Property we resolve complaints from consumers about chartered surveying companies, surveyors, estate agents, residential managing agents, letting agents and other property professionals. Appointed by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) as the ombudsman for chartered surveyors, we are also approved by the Offi ce of Fair Trading (OFT) as an estate agents redress scheme Lewis Shand Smith, Chief Ombudsman for Firm foundations support increasing complaints investigated significantly more complaints during 2010/11 compared to the previous year. The service has focused on expanding its property team and developing its practice for dealing with the increasing number and complexity of cases. Lead Property Ombudsman Gillian Fleming explains more. We didn t expect such a big increase in complaints, primarily because of the continuing diffi culties in the housing market and the fact that a good deal of our work concerns property professionals involved in house purchases, says Gillian. Between April 2010 and March 2011, accepted 465 cases for investigation, 56 per cent more than the previous year. Gillian believes several factors have caused the increase. One reason is the recession. People are still fi nding life tough fi nancially and many of the property cases we look at concern high value issues, which means people are more motivated to pursue a complaint. We have dealt with a considerable number of people who have come to us too early in the complaint process, or discovered their property company isn t signed up to our service, suggesting we are well signposted. We expanded our remit to take on residential managing complaints in November This, coupled with a wider awareness of our service and greater coverage, has had a real impact on complaint numbers in the past year. In response to the increasing volume of cases, has expanded its team of investigation offi cers. Continued on page 2

2 2 We are an adaptable organisation and this is reflected in the changes we have made to our processes, our reports and our approach Gillian Fleming, lead Property Ombudsman Firm foundations support increasing complaints Continued from page 1 Property cases are usually more time-consuming than the other complaints we handle (energy and communications) because they tend to involve complicated issues and a lot of information needs to be considered against the relevant guidance and legal background, Gillian continues. When complaint numbers increase, even slightly, this can have a signifi cant impact on our business. We have therefore trained more staff so we have the fl exibility to cope with more cases. The complexity of property complaints has continued to be a challenge and something that Ombudsman Services: Property has addressed by developing expertise across the business and introducing a new approach to reports. We have worked with the enquiry team the fi rst point of contact for consumers to improve their knowledge so that they understand the complexity of property complaints. This allows them to explain to a consumer, in simple terms, why we may or may not be able to take their dispute further. This is fundamental when dealing with residential managing agent complaints as the obligations of leaseholders, landlords and managing agents can be very complicated and can differ greatly. We have simplifi ed the reports we produce by cutting out long, over-complicated explanations; focusing on the main elements of a complaint and our reasons for reaching a particular resolution. The new style reports are successful because if companies or complainants challenge the report, it is not necessarily because they can t or don t understand it. This clarity is refl ected in the representations we now receive. They more often concentrate on matters which are central to reaching a resolution. Developments at Ombudsman Services: Property during 2010/11 were not just a reaction to the rise in complaint numbers but had been planned to prepare the service for future growth. There is a trend towards many different property services being offered by one company and this is likely to intensify, says Gillian. Consumers benefi t from a single point of contact, which is why we have developed our expertise and positioned ourselves so we can take on complaints about a range of property services when the need arises. We have continued to develop relations with other organisations in the property market so that we are aware of the other advisory or dispute resolution services available and we can direct consumers appropriately. We have regular meetings to share our experience of complaints, give feedback and ensure there is a consistent understanding of common issues. We attended property and consumer events during 2010/11 to ensure our service which had recently been rebranded was visible to those who may need to use it. We have also given presentations about our insights from complaints. In September 2010 members of the ombudsman team went to Edinburgh to discuss legislation and talk about standards of complaint handling. The law is different in Scotland. Some legislation that applies in England and Wales doesn t always apply in Scotland and we want to show that we understand different standards. Consumers and companies need to have confi dence in our service; that the decisions we reach are done fairly and with suffi cient expertise. aims to offer a comprehensive service to its participating companies and their customers. We are an adaptable organisation and this is refl ected in the changes we have made to our processes, our reports and our approach, adds Gillian.

3 Sector report 3 Types of new contacts received During 2010/11 16 per cent of new contacts related to complaints that could be considered by Ombudsman Services: Property the same as the previous year. The majority of new contacts (66 per cent) related to complaints that could not be accepted by the service at that time. About 16 per cent were general enquiries or literature requests. Complaints about participating companies accounted for approximately half of new contacts, but 69 per cent of these could not be accepted. This may be because the consumer contacted Ombudsman Services: Property too early in the complaints process and had not given the company adequate opportunity to resolve the complaint. 37% Company complaint, outside our terms of reference 16% Company complaint, inside our terms of reference 29% Non company complaint 16% General enquiry/ literature request 1% Non company enquiry Less than 1% Company enquiry This year we successfully managed a significant increase in property complaints and have looked at how we can deal with complaints about a range of property professionals, in the UK and abroad Lewis Shand Smith, Chief Ombudsman for Fact: Methods that contacts used Calls Written contacts A total of 5,843 contacts (new and follow up) were made to Ombudsman Services: Property during 2010/11, compared to 4,158 contacts the previous year. This is an average of 23 contacts per working day. Performance against our key performance indicators (KPIs) Calls answered in less than two minutes Target more than 80% Average 95% Calls answered in less than fi ve minutes Target more than 95% Average 99% Written correspondence responded to in less than ten working days Target 100% Average 99% Reports issued within six weeks Target more than 90% Average 76% Reports issued within eight weeks Target more than 90% Average 80% Reports issued after eight weeks Target less than 1% Average 5% Like the previous year, the majority of contacts (74 per cent) were made by telephone 39 per cent were new call contacts and the remaining 61 per cent were follow up calls, where a consumer may ring regarding an ongoing enquiry or complaint. From a participating company We have been signed up to for the last 15 months and have been impressed with the work undertaken. The investigation offi cer s report of a complaint is communicated in a short form which indicates briefl y the problem and desired resolution. This is often in sharp contrast to the origins of the complaint where we have diffi culties in identifying what the complaint is. The report has much value. The events are carefully analysed and reasons for The majority of written contacts made (76 per cent) were from new contacts. Of these, 57 per cent were s, 43 per cent were letters and less than one per cent were faxes. the conclusions reached are given. The fi nal decision is clear and concise in setting out what is required of us. Sometimes the report and the response enable us to identify shortcomings in our service. While we would prefer not to hear from, except regarding the annual subscription fee, there are many positive aspects of being signed up to the service. Gerry Fox FRICS FIRPM, Head of Compliance, Peverel Property Management Case study Residential property management The company was the managing agent for the development where the complainant had a leasehold property. The complainant said that the company s gardening contractor was failing to keep the garden in a satisfactory condition, or carry out the contracted number of visits to maintain the garden. The company explained that it had investigated reported concerns but believed that the gardening was being carried out to an appropriate standard. On reviewing the information, Ombudsman Services: Property concluded that the company had raised the concerns with the contractor, carried out a number of site visits and made reasonable attempts to provide an explanation to the complainant. The company had also proposed tendering for a new contractor or allowing the occupiers to take over the maintenance themselves if they remained unhappy. However, the company had not told the complainant about its complaints handling procedure and there had not always been timely and detailed responses to the complainant s correspondence. Nor had the company advised that concerns about the level of service it provided needed to be taken up with the freeholder. The company was therefore required to make an award in recognition of these shortcomings.

4 4 2010/11 sees high ris Total contacts received 5,843 During 2010/11 the complaints considered can be broken down as: 59% Valuations/Surveys 23% Property management 9% Residential sales 4% Professional advice 1% Auction 4% Other Case study Surveying When the complainants moved into their new home they noticed that there was a large crack in the chimney visible from street level. A builder inspected the chimney and told them that the chimney crack was long standing. In the Home Report, the company had made no comment about a crack in the chimney and reported that it required no immediate action or repair. Ombudsman Services: Property considered that the Contacts received in 2009/10 4,158 Contacts received in 2008/09 3,214 crack was present and visible at the time of the survey and indicated that there was a problem with the chimney stack. It determined that the problem ought to have been reported by the company and the complainants advised to seek estimates for repair. The costs would have then been included in their negotiations to reduce the price of the property. required the company to make a fi nancial award to meet the repair costs. However it did not require the company to cover associated internal work, which was later found necessary, because that would not have been visible at the inspection or to a builder. Lead Property Ombudsman Gillian Fleming gives an overview of the general issues considered by Ombudsman Services: Property and the types of complaints accepted for investigation during 2010/11. The majority of the complaints taken on by during 2010/11 were about surveys and/or valuations. Complaints about property management (23 per cent) and residential sales (9 per cent) make up the top three major complaint types. Workload The increase in work from 260 investigations to 465 was the major feature of last year. New work and a change in the mix of complaints was anticipated, but the extent of increased demand was not expected. Service standards Our terms of reference set out the benchmarks against which we reach decisions. We assess a complaint using relevant law and best practice to ensure that both a consumer and a company know what is routinely expected. When we identify shortcomings or other defi ciencies we may make recommendations for the company to change its processes. This helps to raise standards within the profession in a transparent way, driven by consumers as well as professionals. We may make an award if the relevant standard of service has not been met. A fi nancial award is made in nearly half of our cases. However, an award may not be enough for the consumer, who can only see that something has gone wrong and that they are out of pocket. As reported last year, making a direct connection between the two is not always straightforward, especially in surveying complaints. Letting and managing agents In the lettings sector, a landlord may pay a fee of around 10 per cent of rental for management services, yet expectations of service are high. The regularity of inspections should form part of the agreement but an agent may not be in a position to quickly identify that a property has been damaged or that a tenant has left. Any loss sustained by a landlord may not, wholly or in part, be attributed to lack of action by the agent. Even where the timetable for inspections may have slipped it does not follow automatically that the whole management agent fee should be forfeit. We look at the agreement, the fee and the surrounding events to reach an award that is fair. Complaints about managing agents mainly relate to the amount of service charges and the quality of services provided, such as gardening and cleaning. The events may span a considerable time period, but getting to the point of considering a complaint can take a good deal of work. The arrangements can vary considerably and the relative responsibilities between freeholders, leaseholders and managing agents will generally be different for almost every complaint. Many leaseholders do not understand the limitations of what can and cannot be done without the consent or instruction of other people or what a managing agent has been contracted to do.

5 Sector report 5 e in property complaints Reasons for accepting a complaint 2010/11 55% Unresolved after eight weeks 32% Final response from company 13% Ombudsman s discretion Nor are leaseholders generally aware of when a tribunal may be better placed to assist with the resolution they seek. We will refer people elsewhere as is appropriate. Estate agents An estate agent s fees and terms of business should be set out in writing to a client before undertaking work. That does not prevent complaints about fees or whether the service merits the fee charged. Potential sellers who are considering a percentage fee arrangement should satisfy themselves as to the likely fee and the service being offered before agreeing to those terms. A novel aspect raised in the year was about enforceability in the absence of notifi ed rights of cancellation. These apply to contracts between a consumer and a trader (here an estate agent) entered into during the visit of the trader to a consumer s home. The key point is the precise location where a contract is agreed and therefore whether information had to include cancellations rights. As business may be agreed in the course of a property appraisal, estate agents should consider including such rights in their standard terms of business and making a record of when and where a client agrees. Scotland The law and the ways in which properties are bought, sold and managed in Scotland are different from the rest of the United Kingdom. In December 2008 a requirement for a home report on properties for sale in Scotland was introduced. The seller of the property commissions the home report, which includes a property questionnaire completed by the seller, an energy report and a single survey, which includes a valuation. The home report is available to potential purchasers and the purchaser of a property has a right to rely on its contents. This introduced a signifi cant change into the property market, the ramifi cations of which are now becoming apparent in the complaints we receive. A consumer s legal advisor will often bring a complaint to us. This is not necessary and may incur extra costs. Potential buyers who have not gone on to purchase because of an error in the home report have complained about wasted time. We have also received complaints from sellers that are fi nding it diffi cult to sell a property because the single survey highlights the potential for signifi cant expenditure. The single survey element of the home report was designed to alert potential purchasers to the condition of the property. However, the categorisation of repairs is the main issue, particularly the differences between urgent repairs where an estimate is required, an estimate is advised or where no immediate action is required. A revised homebuyer service report was introduced in 2010, which has a similar rating system for the condition of a property. Most of the complaints we receive are about the rating, most commonly that the rating did not refl ect the extent of the problem. We have to apply the usual tests about whether there was suffi cient evidence visible which could and should have led a surveyor to reach a different rating. A difference in rating can have a signifi cant impact on the behaviour of a purchaser but may not be directly relevant to the market value of the property, which would be the usual measure of loss applied by a court. In Scotland, historically, properties were advertised with offers sought over an amount which might bear little relation to the ultimate purchase price. The asking price now more usually relates to the valuation in a single survey, but competitive bids will be sought for a popular property. Considering the impact of any shortcoming on market value in those circumstances involves a careful analysis of what average buyers involved in the process would have done had they been aware of the true condition of the property. Clearly a structural or other signifi cant problem is likely to affect a potential buyer. Building surveys Building surveys have no set format, although there is guidance to surveyors. Their purpose is a more detailed examination. The complaints we receive have generally related to the way a report is set out there is a lot of content but the advice or recommendations for action is not always clear. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) plan to review its advice and the formatting of building surveys, which is welcome. Outcomes In reviewing the last year, even though the average fi nancial award is signifi cantly less, the range of awards has not changed. Each case is decided on its own merits and we have made very large awards where the complainant has been clearly disadvantaged. The majority of awards are up to 250 because the service has not been adequate or there are other defi ciencies in relation to the standards required. Those awards, together with any recommendations, demonstrate how our service makes a difference. Participating companies should be given a reasonable opportunity to resolve a dispute. Companies have eight weeks to respond to a complaint, after which consumers can refer complaints to Ombudsman Services. Sometimes a company may provide a fi nal response, stating its fi nal position and that it will no longer be considering the complaint. On some occasions, Ombudsman Services can accept complaints that are outside its terms of reference at the discretion of the ombudsman. For example, a complainant may contact the service outside of the required time limits and still have their case accepted if it was not possible for them to get in touch sooner (eg because of serious illness). In line with previous years, the main reason for accepting a complaint in 2010/11 was because eight weeks had passed without resolution. Almost a third of complaints were accepted because the company had issued its fi nal response and a small percentage (13 per cent) were accepted at the ombudsman s discretion.

6 6 Informally and formally resolved complaints Forms issued and returned 2010/ complaint forms were issued 428 complaint forms were returned Forms issued Forms returned If a complaint can be considered by, the service will issue a complaint form for the complainant to sign and return. The complaint form gives the participating company permission to release any information it holds on the customer. Of the 465 complaint forms issued in 2010/11, 92 per cent were returned. This is a similar percentage to the previous year when 280 complaint forms were issued and 93 per cent were returned. The average number of complaint forms issued each month was 39. The majority of forms were issued in the second quarter of the fi nancial year (26 per cent) and the fewest forms were issued in the third quarter (24 per cent). The majority of returned complaint forms are accepted and the case is resolved, either informally or formally. A small percentage of complaint forms are withdrawn if the complainant has been able to resolve the dispute within days of contacting the service, or if, when looking at the evidence, it is discovered the complaint is outside s jurisdiction % Formally resolved complaints 1% Informally resolved complaints Two new business processes have been introduced this year; one enables complaints to be dealt with early and informally and the other streamlines the formal investigation process. The change means that statistics relating to provisional conclusions and further representations, included in previous annual reports, are no longer relevant. This section therefore focuses on complaints that were dealt with informally and formally. During 2010/11 approximately 1 per cent of property cases were resolved through mutually acceptable settlements (MAS). The remainder went through to formal investigation, where a case fi le is requested from the participating company and an investigation offi cer issues a report. It is expected that the number of informally resolved cases will rise as the process becomes embedded. Case study Home buying The complainant purchased a property that the estate agent had marketed. The complainant said they later discovered that the parking available at the front of the property was in fact a public highway. The complainant also stated they were not Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Awards and breakdown 2010/11 resolved approximately 260 cases during 2010/11; 59 per cent of resolutions included a fi nancial award and 36 per cent of these also included a non-fi nancial award. A non-fi nancial award may include an apology, an explanation, a service or some practical action to be provided by the participating company. During 2010/11, fi nancial awards ranged between 20 and almost 13,000. The most common fi nancial award was under 100 and the average was around 900. In 31 per cent of cases, no action was required of the participating company. informed that a cellar, which fl oods, existed at the property. The estate agent explained the area belonged to the property and could be used for parking. It provided a copy of the title plan to show this. The company also explained that it had not been informed about the cellar by the vendor. The cellar s entrance was through a trap door in an understairs cupboard, which was obscured by stored items ,000 1,000 2,000 2,001 3,000 3,001 4,000 4,001 5,000 5,001 and over considered that the available title plan for the property showed ownership with restrictive covenants. However, the complainant was referred to the seller so they could have queried this during pre contract enquiries. Ombudsman Services: Property also decided that if the vendor had not mentioned the cellar to the estate agent and it was not obvious, the agent would be unable to include this in the particulars. Those particulars were agreed by the seller. In addition, the complainant s surveyor was advised about the cellar so the complainant would have known it existed prior to being committed to purchase. As there were delays in responding to the complainant, the estate agent was required to apologise and make a fi nancial award

7 Sector report 7 Customer satisfaction survey Executive summary Carried out by DJS Research Ltd This is the third year in which Ombudsman Services: Property has commissioned independent customer satisfaction research and the second year in which enquirers have been surveyed. The research was carried out by DJS Research Ltd, an independent research agency experienced in conducting customer satisfaction research projects for a range of different organisations. The results will be used by Ombudsman Services: Property to measure customer service levels and prioritise improvements for the future. This executive summary sets out some of the headline findings from the 2011 study. Research method The research was undertaken with completed complainants from 2010 and enquirers from early Customers were invited by letter to take part in the survey by post or via a web survey. A total of 251 who had been through the entire complaint process were selected and 94 replied (37 per cent response rate). A total of 112 who had made an initial enquiry, and whose complaint had not been formally accepted, were selected and 10 replied (9 per cent response rate). Results for enquirers need to be treated with caution due to the low numbers of responses. Customer problems and initial contact Customers were asked to identify which company they had a problem with and what the nature of the problem was. Around three in four of the complainant group and half the enquirer group had a problem with a chartered surveying fi rm or surveyor and the remainder with an estate or letting agent. A range of problems were presented by both groups, including the homebuyers survey valuation, a building survey, a mortgage valuation, home conditions survey, professional advice and poor customer service. The problems tended to relate to information given that impacted on the purchasing decision for property. Poor information/advice could potentially lead to clients losing a great deal of money in their decision. Satisfaction with initial enquiry Complainants and enquirers were asked to rate how satisfi ed they were with various aspects of the service they had received when they fi rst contacted. The results were positive, with the majority satisfi ed with the speed of the initial response on the phone, staff spoken to, explanation/advice given, written response and explanation about the powers of the ombudsman. Enquirers survey In the 2011 research the majority of enquirers had spoken to a member of staff at some point during the course of their enquiry. As in previous years, satisfaction levels were high, with the majority satisfi ed with their friendliness, helpfulness, knowledge and reliability. When asked which body had done most to resolve their enquiry six in nine said it had been Ombudsman Services: Property. This proportion is similar to Ombudsman Services: Energy and Ombudsman Services: Communications. Enquirers were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with a number of statements about Ombudsman Services: Property s role in their enquiry. Views were mixed regarding the extent to which had given good explanations and managed to make a difference at this early stage, with about half feeling positive and a half negative. Clearly cannot help in all cases. The survey went on to gather enquirers overall level of satisfaction with. Most respondents indicated they were satisfi ed (nine in ten) and three were very satisfi ed. Finally, we asked enquirers how their experience had impacted on their likelihood to use and recommend in the future. The clear majority said they would recommend Ombudsman Services: Property and be likely to go back to in the future. Complainants survey Complainants were asked to rate how satisfi ed they had been with various aspects of the investigation offi cer. Around half were satisfi ed with their friendliness, helpfulness, knowledge, reliability, understanding and ability to deal with the problem. However, there was some active dissatisfaction with knowledge (around one in fi ve very dissatisfi ed), understanding of the problem (around one in four very dissatisfi ed) and ability to deal with the problem (around one in four very dissatisfi ed). Concerning the provision of information during the complaint, nearly half were satisfi ed with the clarity of information received during the process, timeliness of information and the extent to which information was readily given. However, around four in ten were dissatisfi ed with the comprehensiveness of information. When asked about the provisional conclusion report, satisfaction levels were low. The majority were dissatisfi ed with the logic of its recommendations, accuracy of content, use of evidence and the extent to which they were fair and reasonable. Just over half were satisfi ed with the readability. Two thirds were dissatisfi ed with the report s recommendations, with more than half very dissatisfi ed. The process Complainants were asked to rate various aspects of the Ombudsman Services: Property process. The majority were satisfi ed with the explanation at the beginning. However, views were mixed on the extent to which they were kept updated and ease of access to investigation offi cers. There was active dissatisfaction with effi ciency and speed of the process, with around half or more dissatisfi ed. The majority expected their case to last one to two months but most cases lasted three or more months; around one in four lasted seven months or longer. Final result Many (around two thirds) felt the report was completely or on balance against them, in line with previous years. This did not change even after further representations were made. This is unlike Ombudsman Services: Energy and Ombudsman Services: Communications where typically most feel the report fi nds in their favour. In addition, most were seeking a fi nancial award (for around three in four this was most important to them) and indeed most received a fi nancial award. This suggests that it was the actual scale of the fi nancial award that they felt was not in their favour, as most received just 100 to 500, although around a third received more than 1,000. Many were complaining about poor information/advice which could potentially have led to a costly purchasing mistake far in excess of a few hundred or thousand pounds. Overall satisfaction levels remain low. Around two in three were dissatisfi ed with s handling of their complaint. Around one in two would not recommend the service and would not be likely to use it again. As a result, around two in three felt their confi dence in dealing with property professionals had decreased. The fact that most feel the report does not fi nd in their favour (possibly because of the scale of fi nancial award) impacts on these poor levels of satisfaction. These levels cannot be attributed entirely to satisfaction with the customer service, as they are likely to be strongly infl uenced by dissatisfaction with the result not going in their favour. is different to Ombudsman Services: Energy and Ombudsman Services: Communications in that the fi nancial implications of complaints are often much larger as they relate to expensive purchasing decisions. There remains a key issue with regards to complainants perceptions of what recompense to expect (ie the scale of fi nancial award they can expect from the complaint and what can actually be delivered). This should be looked at and either expectations could be managed more tightly from the beginning of the claim, or the scale of fi nancial award be increased to be more in line with the fi nancial losses incurred by the complainant as a result of the problem.

8 8 From a participating company Over the last 12 months, we have dealt with on a number of cases. In all these cases the service has been timely and the decisions considered fair and proportionate. We consider the service provided is a good demonstration of the merits of alternative dispute resolution. Rob Mead BSc MRICS Registered Valuer, Technical Director, Connells Survey & Valuation Ltd Sector liaison panel The member board has been replaced with a sector liaison panel (SLP) to streamline and augment advice to the service. As well as retaining a number of independent members, the SLP now has a broader panel of representatives than its predecessor to offer a better means of communicating with the industry as a whole. pushing the boundaries Since June 2007, Ombudsman Services: Property has grown from a company that specialises in surveying disputes to one which handles complaints about a range of property services. It is now looking to refi ne its processes and expand beyond the UK borders. Statutory regulation is unlikely to be extended within the sector but voluntary schemes often require some form of dispute resolution, says lead Property Ombudsman Gillian Fleming. During 2010/11 the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) sought to establish voluntary regulation in Europe and we welcomed the opportunity to operate at international level. We ve always had the provision to offer materials in different languages and a translation service, and we have expertise in a range of property complaints. One consideration was how we would assess a complaint elsewhere in Europe where the legal or regulatory environment might be very different, but we have made arrangements to liaise with the RICS representatives overseas and to access the RICS library of legislation and other documents as needed. We will review how this works. It is a very interesting and exciting development for us, which mirrors developments in technology and globalisation in the property sector, adds Gillian. Another area that will create further opportunity for Ombudsman Services: Property relates to valuers, as the RICS registration scheme requires them to provide access to alternative dispute resolution. Most valuers will already be working for companies but any individual in practice can join our service, says Gillian. Internally, has been gearing up for change in its processes. The organisation plans to incorporate a three-stage investigation process which has already proved successful for the other schemes (Energy and Communications) that Ombudsman Services operates. Gillian, who will remain involved at the fi nal decision stage of the process, says: This should be of real benefi t to complainants and participating companies. Relevant new information or evidence is often produced in response to our investigation report. We will now have an opportunity to review our proposals before the fi nal outcome is determined. The new process should also help us to improve turnaround times and focus on reaching a resolution at the early stages of our investigation process; something we have already begun to address with our new, shorter reports. There will be a much stronger focus on auditing quality and on our capacity to improve what we do over the next 12 months. It is an advisory panel that identifi es emerging trends and issues and promotes effective complaint handling in the sector, says Chief Ombudsman Lewis Shand Smith. It is of mutual benefi t that we have a forum to discuss concerns, information, ideas and proposals from both sides. Separate panels have been set up for property, energy and communications. The SLPs will all meet at least bi-annually to give feedback on the proposed business plan and annual report. Sue Jackson, Relationship Manager, adds: SLP meetings should give us a clear insight into the industries we work with. We will be able to discuss issues with a good cross-section of companies and gain knowledge from industry experts, which we can use to inform our staff. We will also continue to benefi t from the perspective the independent members offer. Ombudsman Services has amended its terms of reference and articles of association to refl ect this and other changes to its governance. Case study Property auction The complainant entered two bicycles into an auction. The complainant said they indicated to the auction company what sum of money they expected for the bicycles because of offers they had previously rejected. The accepted bids were for a lower amount. The auction company said that no reserve price had been set and the auction entry form did not have the relevant section completed. The company explained that the entry fee and commission charges were set out in the terms of consignment and had to be deducted. The balance was then payable to the complainant. As a gesture of goodwill, the fi rm had already refunded the entry fee. accepted that the complainant had not clearly set a reserve price and so the bicycles were sold to the highest bidder. It was satisfi ed the company had applied its fees appropriately. However, it was noted that the complainant did not receive a copy of the auction entry form and some of their contacts were not responded to. A fi nancial award was required for these shortfalls in customer service. PO Box 1021, Warrington WA4 9FE Telephone: or Facsimile: or enquiries@os-property.org Website: Designed by sunnythinking.com Printed on nine lives recycled paper The Ombudsman Service Limited 2011 Produced by the communications team at Ombudsman Services Ombudsman Services would like to thank Catherine Hand for her outstanding support in producing these reports