HM Courts and Tribunals Service

4Mr A complains HMCTS failed to address his complaint that it sent his claims documents to the wrong address. He says HMCTS also failed to respond to two emails enquiries he made in May and June 2022 in relation to the incorrect address it has recorded on its records for him.

5He says the failure to respond has caused him considerable distress and inconvenience. As well as causing him headaches.

6As an outcome he is seeking a financial remedy.

7On 27 January 2022 Mr A issued a County Court claim and gave HMCTS a specific address for service. On 29 March HMCTS sent at least one of Mr A’s claim documents to the wrong address, not the service address Mr A provided.

8On 30 April Mr A emailed HMCTS raising concerns that documents have gone to the wrong address. On 15 May Mr A emailed again, asking about his claim and the address being used. On 17 May Mr A sent a further email, which HMCTS later treated as a formal complaint.

9On 6 June Mr A HMCTS sent its first complaint response. On 9 June and 13 June Mr A sent more emails, still seeking clarity about the address and his case. On 15 June HMCTS sent its response, accepting the address error, explaining how it happened, correcting it, and apologising.

Failure to address complaint 12. Mr A complains HMCTS failed to address his complaint that it sent his claims documents to the wrong address.

13The HMCTS complaints policy says it aims to take the right approach to try to resolve complaints. It should: • Apologise if the customer is unhappy with the service • Apologise if a mistake has been made; don’t blame others • Make sure that the reply is factually accurate • Do not try to hide mistakes • Check that you have answered all the points raised • Give an explanation if you feel the complaint is not upheld • Give a decision on whether or not an ex gratia is being offered and why • Give an assurance that measures have been taken to improve future service

14The Complaint Standards say how we expect an organisation to complete a thorough, proportionate and balanced look into the issues raised in a complaint. It gives service users fair and open answers to their questions based on the facts and takes full accountability for mistakes identified.

15In HMCTS’s complaint response letters, we can see it accepts that some of Mr A’s claim documents were sent to the wrong address. They say this happened because, when the claim was first input, staff missed the separate service address he had provided. As a result, the system initially produced a notice of issue using his other/registered address, and that document was printed and sent out.

16HMCTS say they later corrected the address on their system, but they did not cancel the original print run, so the first notice still went to the wrong address. In its letter dated 15 June 2022, HMCTS apologised for this error and confirmed that all future correspondence would be sent to the right address.

17Mr A said HMCTS had failed to properly address his concern that it sent his claim documents to the wrong address, despite him having given a specific address for service. He says they have not adequately recognised or remedied the impact of that mistake. Based on the evidence provided it appears HMCTS has addressed this issue in line with its complaints policy which says it should not try to hide mistakes and check it has answered all the points raised.

18As we say above, HMCTS has done this in its response by explaining the reasons why the issue happened initially and how the documents were sent again to the wrong address. It appears HMCTS has provided a thorough, proportionate and balanced consideration of this point, in line with the Complaint Standards.

19We understand how frustrating this issue has been for Mr A, clearly the issue of the court documents being sent to the wrong address would be distressing, and we recognise how inconvenient this would be for him to have to chase and resolve.

20As an outcome of bringing the complaint to our service, Mr A is solely seeking a financial remedy to recognise the impact the issue caused him.

21We have considered the Complaint Standards outline how we expect organisations to openly identify instances where things have gone wrong, or where services have had an unfair impact, and take responsibility for these. They make sure colleagues can offer a range of ways to put things right for the service user. They should give sincere and meaningful apologies that reflect the impact experienced.

22In its response to Mr A dated 15 June, HMCTS has apologised for this error and confirmed that all future correspondence would be sent to the right address. HMCTS has also explained the reasons for this error and the actions taken to prevent it from happening again. Overall this action appears to be in line with the Complaint Standards, as HMCTS has identified the reason for the issue and apologised for this.

23For completeness we have considered Mr A’s request for a financial remedy against the PHSO’s guidance on financial remedy, which explains ‘A case will generally be level one if we consider the person affected has experienced a low impact injustice such as annoyance, frustration, worry or inconvenience, typically arising from a single (one-off) incidence of maladministration or service failure, where the effect on the person complaining is of short duration, and where there are no other adverse effects or ongoing wider impact. We will usually consider an apology to be an appropriate remedy for these cases’.

24We are satisfied the distress caused by the incorrect postal address is likely to have resulted from a one-off instance of maladministration. We accept that this caused him inconvenience and frustration for a relatively short duration and consider there were no other adverse effects or impacts. Therefore, we consider the apology already provided by the HMCTS is an appropriate remedy in this case. We recognise Mr A will be disappointed with our decision and trust he will find the explanations above helpful.

Failure to respond to emails 25. Mr A says HMCTS also failed to respond to two emails enquiries he made in May and June 2022 in relation to the incorrect address it has recorded on its records for him.

26The HMCTS complaints policy explains when an issue is raised it should aim to reply within 10 working days or explain to the customer why it cannot do so by sending a holding response.

27The Complaint Standards say we expect organisations to make sure they respond to complaints at the earliest opportunity. They should consistently meet expected timescales for acknowledging a complaint.

28From reviewing the evidence it appears HMCTS did not specifically answer Mr A’s email dated 15 May 2022 at the time he sent it. Instead, they treated a later email he sent on 17 May 2022 as a formal complaint and responded to concern on 6 June 2022.

29In HMCTS’s June responses (6 June and 15 June), they dealt with the underlying issues he had been raising in those earlier emails: they accepted that a document had been sent to the wrong address, explained how the address error had happened, confirmed his correct address for service had been recorded, and apologised for the address mistake.

30In HMCTS’s final response on 6 February 2023, it explained Mr A’s complaint was first recorded in May 2022 and that a first response was sent on 6 June 2022, which addressed his concerns and offered a £25 goodwill payment. It said his further emails of 7 June, 9 June and 13 June 2022 were treated as a request for a review, and that a review response was sent on 15 June 2022, which confirmed his correct address, explained the court’s actions in his cases and repeated the £25 offer.

31We can see after the 15 June response, Mr A replied to HMCTS to say his concerns had been “cleared up” and that he accepted the £25 in resolution of this issue.

32While HMCTS did not specifically reply to all of Mr A’s emails in May and June 2022, we can see HMCTS did address the concerns he raised in these emails in its complaint responses. It provided a goodwill gesture of £25 for the issues he had experienced, which Mr A accepted. It would have been better in the circumstances for HMCTS to have responded to Mr A’s emails at the time he sent them, this would have reduced the need for him to send further emails to chase a response, causing inconvenience for him to chase.

33Ultimately the failure to respond to his emails is contrary to the HMCTS’s complaints policy of replying to enquiries within 10 working days, and the Complaint Standards of ensuring an organisation responds to complaints at the earliest convenience. For these reasons, we accept there is an indication that HMCTS acted maladministratively.

34As an impact of the failure to respond to his emails, Mr A says this caused him considerable distress and inconvenience to have to chase. We are sorry to hear of the difficulties Mr A has described as being attributable to the time he had to wait for a response and the need to chase this on several occasions. Clearly this was a stressful period for him.

35Where maladministration or poor service has led to injustice or hardship, we consider whether it is proportionate for an organisation to take any further steps to provide an appropriate remedy.

36As an outcome of bringing the complaint to our service, Mr A is solely seeking a financial remedy to recognise the impact the issue caused him.

37We have considered the Complaint Standards outline how we expect organisations to openly identify instances where things have gone wrong, or where services have had an unfair impact, and take responsibility for these. They make sure colleagues can offer a range of ways to put things right for the service user. They should give sincere and meaningful apologies that reflect the impact experienced.

38In its response to Mr A dated 6 June 2022 HMCTS addressed his concerns about the incorrect address and offered a £25 goodwill payment in recognition of this. We are satisfied this action is in line with the Complaint Standards, as HMCTS has identified the issue with the incorrect address, resolved the issue and provided a financial remedy in recognition of this.

39For completeness we have considered Mr A’s request for a financial remedy against the PHSO’s guidance on financial remedy, which explains ‘A case will generally be level one if we consider the person affected has experienced a low impact injustice such as annoyance, frustration, worry or inconvenience, typically arising from a single (one-off) incidence of maladministration or service failure, where the effect on the person complaining is of short duration, and where there are no other adverse effects or ongoing wider impact. We will usually consider an apology to be an appropriate remedy for these cases’

40We are satisfied the lack of responses to his emails caused him inconvenience and frustration for a relatively short duration and consider there were no other adverse effects or impacts. Therefore, we consider the financial remedy already provided by HMCTS is an appropriate remedy in this case. We recognise Mr A will be disappointed with our decision and trust he will find the explanations above helpful.