Food Standards Agency
Thursday 28 August 2008
Safer food better business banner
AZ-Directory
What's NewRSS
What is RSS?Tuesday 13 September 2005
This note records information on complaints received by the Food Standards Agency in 2002 - 2003
1. The Agency's complaints procedure covers any written or oral expression of dissatisfaction with the service provided by the Agency. These do not need to be 'formal' complaints. They will generally cover instances where the Agency has failed administratively or has taken inappropriate action. The complaints process does not cover disagreements about the Agency's policies.
2. The Agency's complaints procedure is published on the FSA website. Initially, the relevant FSA Division will try to resolve any complaint against them. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the response, they may lodge a complaint with the Agency's Complaints Co-ordinator. If the Complaints Co-ordinator fails to satisfy them, the complainant can ask for their complaint to be referred to the Chief Executive. If they are still dissatisfied with the Chief Executive's reply, the complainant may ask any MP to refer the issue to the UK Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (the Ombudsman).
3. The total number of recorded complaints received by the Agency during the year 2002/03 was 12. This compares with 15 recorded for 2001/02. Of these, 6 were resolved internally by Divisions, 4 were dealt with by the Agency's Complaints Co-ordinator and 2 were referred to the Chief Executive.
4. Categorisation of the 12 recorded complaints, on the same basis as last year, gives the following breakdown:
Category A:
No fault, where complaint turned out to be unfounded.
6 cases in total; all of these were successfully resolved after corresponding with the individual complainants and closed out.
Category B:
Minor oversights and processing delays.
5 cases in total; all were resolved after full explanations were given.
Category C:
Complex and novel issues, which caused a delay or other problem.
No cases;
Category D:
Other.
1 case; this involved alleged unfair comments made about a company's management by a Veterinary Meat Hygiene Adviser. The complaint
was upheld by the relevant Division and remedial action was taken.
5. The 12 recorded complaints originated from a range of sources. There were 6 from industry/businesses, 3 from non-government organisations (NGOs), 1 from an MP and 2 from members of the public.
Back to topFind out what our other sites have to offer