Food Standards Agency
Friday 3 July 2009
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's NewRSS
What is RSS?Listen
Listen to this siteTuesday 27 August 2002
This note records information on complaints received by the Food Standards Agency during the year 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002 inclusive.
Introduction
1. This note records information on complaints received by the Food Standards Agency during the year 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002 inclusive. The Board have requested that this type of information is published annually on the Agency’s website as well as in the Agency’s Annual Report. Details of how to complain about any aspect of our service can be found in our Complaints Procedure.
2. Usually a Division will initially seek to resolve the complaint. If the complainant is not satisfied the complaint is referred to the Agency’s Complaints Co-ordinator. After that the complaint may be referred to the Chief Executive. A complainant may also ask any MP to refer the issue to the UK Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (PCA), also known as the ‘Ombudsman’.
3. The complaints procedure covers incidents where the Agency has failed administratively or has taken inappropriate action. It does not cover disagreements or disputes about the Agency’s policies.
Complaints Received During the Year
4. The total recorded number of complaints received during 2001/02 was 15. Of these, 10 were resolved internally by Divisions, 4 had involvement or were progressed as far as the Agency’s Complaints Co-ordinator / Chief Executive and one was addressed specifically to the Chairman. There were no complaints referred to the PCA.
5. Categorising the 15 recorded complaints gives the following breakdown:
Category A:
No fault, where complaint turned out to be unfounded
6 cases in total; these were all resolved after corresponding with complainants.
Category B:
Minor oversights and processing delays
7 cases in total; one was dealt with by the Complaints Co-ordinator, all others were resolved after explanations were provided.
Category C:
Complex and novel issues, which caused a delay or other problem
1 case; the complainant had made a financial claim against the Agency which took some time to resolve. After investigation a letter of explanation was sent rejecting the claim.
Category D:
Other
1 case; involving accidental unauthorised entry during sampling was resolved by the Chief Executive apologising on behalf of the Agency.
6. The 15 complaints came from a variety of sources. There were 3 from industry, 4 from local authorities, 3 from non-government organisations (NGOs), 3 from members of the general public, and 2 from MPs.
Back to topFind out what our other sites have to offer