Independent Complaints Review to the Land Registry Annual Report 2001-2002 Part Two
Seeking a fair resolution
A changing landscape for complainants
My principal function as ICR is to provide an independent complaints review service for the customers of the Land Registry and of the other agencies for which I am ICR. However, independent reviewers are able to do more than reach decisions on whether or not to uphold individual complaints. The decision to have an ICR is significant for any agency or department. It means that it is willing to allow independent scrutiny of its actions and processes by someone charged with the duty of ensuring that it meets the highest standards of public service. This implies an acceptance of the opportunity to add value to its own services, in ways that will be identified within the review process.
An independent complaint review service is increasingly seen as evidence of an organisation's commitment to customer service. Because of this, it can be a contributory factor to success in achieving formal recognition of the quality of services, through initiatives such as the Chartermark. This can lead to an inevitable temptation to establish an ICR process in order to gain credit for it, without a full-hearted acceptance of the principles involved. I am pleased to report that the Land Registry has proved its commitment to the independence and purpose of the service over the course of the four years of my appointment.
In my last three annual reports, I have charted the establishment and development of this service and of the Land Registry's interaction with it from the setting up of a new office to the foundation of the Land Registry's Independent Complaints Reviewer Evaluation and Study Team (ICREST). The following are examples of ways in which the Registry has embraced the wider opportunities for adding value to its own services, thereby changing the landscape for complainants.
Jodi Berg
Enhanced complaints procedure
We can now be certain that the opportunity for independent review has been a valuable enhancement to our internal procedures, and complements nicely the existing Ombudsman scheme.
- Peter Collis, Chief Land Registrar and Chief Executive.
The landscape for those who wish to complain about the Land Registry is now radically different from that of four years ago. The provision of an ICR service has had its part in the development and implementation of these changes, partly through the ongoing dialogue between my office and the Registry and partly through some of the recommendations that I have made. Some of the improvements, however, have come about by virtue of the fact that there is a clear independent element to the complaints procedure. Here are some examples:
Subject to external scrutiny - The Land Registry was not obliged to appoint an ICR. Its decision to do this was a tangible demonstration to customers that it cares about resolving their complaints. On another level, it also represented an expression of confidence in its own systems and procedures, both to complainants and to its own staff. Those who handle complaints within the Land Registry know that any complaint they respond to may be reviewed by the ICR. This underlines the need to respond in a structured and helpful way.
Finite complaint procedure - Some complaints take a very long time to progress through the Land Registry's internal complaint procedure. In some cases, prior to the establishment of the ICR service, this could take several years. This was particularly true of complex cases where there were also substantive issues in dispute between householders or where legal proceedings were envisaged. In general, the provision of an independent review service has allowed the Land Registry to draw a line under some complaints that would otherwise have rumbled on almost indefinitely. This has saved the Registry both time and money and also provided complainants with an opportunity to move matters along. Although we continue to receive complaint referrals where the ICR criticises the Land Registry for prolonging internal procedures unnecessarily, this bears no comparison to the situation in previous years. We anticipate that, once it is fully operational,
the new 'fast track' system for the referral of complaints to the ICR direct from District Land Registries will assist in this area. As one Registry officer has put it to me, this new procedure ...removes stages from the complaints process that add no value for the complainant.
Recommendations for resolution - The ICR can make recommendations, following review, aimed at resolving complaints. The impact of these recommendations varies from case to case; sometimes, the complainant (or the Registry) regards them as a fair resolution and sometimes not. However, the review enables matters to move on, either to a final conclusion or to referral to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. So far, very few complainants have proceeded on to the Ombudsman although all are told about their right to do so.
Spotting the need for change
Our confidence in the review process is also reflected in our approach to ICR comments. As one example, you specifically suggested the priority of fast tracking certain sorts of complaints to the benefit of both the Land Registry and the customer. We could see that this was a worthwhile proposal, although it did not arise specifically out of any complaint referred to you. As you know, after an initial pilot, the fast track procedure is now in place throughout the Land Registry.
- Peter Collis, Chief Land Registrar and Chief Executive.
As well as making recommendations aimed at resolving specific complaints, the ICR can also offer recommendations that are aimed at improving Land Registry systems for the benefit of its customers. These recommendations may arise from a review of a particular complaint, but can also stem from general contact with and observation of the Land Registry and its processes.
Complaints by their very nature either touch upon issues or occasions where the Land Registry may not have performed as well as it could, or upon a customer's perception, whether right or wrong, that things could have been dealt with better or differently. These areas are fertile grounds for identifying room for improvements in service. These 'learning points', if properly considered and put into action, can and do have positive and far-reaching effects.
The experience of dealing with complaints, both individually and as a whole, provides the ICR with a further chance to detect any trends or areas requiring improvement or change. She has made a number of 'systemic' recommendations. These have included recommending review and amendment of various items of the Registry's published guidance; clarifying the limitations and nature of the Registry's title plans for the benefit of those who would wish to use them for defining the precise extents of their properties; strengthening the role of Customer Service Managers; and recording reasons for reaching discretionary or marginal decisions.
It is indicative of the Registry's openness to constructive criticism that it has been willing to listen to and act upon systemic recommendations.
Independent Complaints Reviewer Evaluation and Study Team (ICREST)
I think that, with now four years' operational experience, our current review system reflects some sort of maturity. We have, of course, in place ICREST, the evaluation and study team who are specifically charged with translating your recommendations into practice whenever appropriate.
- Peter Collis, Chief Land Registrar and Chief Executive.
Recommendations are of little value if they are not seriously considered with a view to implementation. The establishment of ICREST was a step-change for the Agency. Since its inception, it has played a crucial role in its practical remit to consider the implementation of recommendations that the ICR makes. Its success in doing this relies upon the commitment and wide experience of the individual ICREST members, who are drawn from a range of different roles across the whole of the Land Registry. It has the active support of the Registry's Management Board.
ICREST has enhanced and developed its service since my last report. This year it has developed and recently launched its own website on the Land Registry Intranet. This site reports on the Team's activities and contains anonymised copies of ICR reports on individual complaints. We hope that this will be publicised widely to ensure that all Registry staff are aware of this important development. It is a model for other public bodies, keen to share the lessons from customer feedback and complaints with staff across the organisation. It also demonstrates that the Registry's 'no blame' culture has come of age.
In addition to her normal role, the ICR seeks comments from ICREST on the way in which this office interacts with the Registry. This feedback helps to ensure that we continue to meet the changing needs of the Land Registry and its customers.
Training and development
We are sure that over the last four years the introductory and follow-up visits you have made to all our business units have reinforced to all staff the great importance that the Registry places on dealing properly and fully with complaints...We are sure that over the coming years of great change, your input will be equally valuable in providing a balanced view of the pressures under which District Land Registries operate...
- District Land Registrar and Area Manager, Stevenage District Land Registry.
Since her appointment, the ICR has taken active steps to ensure that the Land Registry's staff have direct opportunities to learn about this office and how it fits into the overall picture. One of the main ways of doing this has been through a programme of visits to all Land Registry offices. During these visits, she has met with a wide range of staff. This year, other experienced members of the ICR team have assisted in this process, giving training and presentations to Registry staff at conferences and at local Land Registry offices.
It is important for Registry staff to be aware about the ICR service and to understand how the Registry's own complaint procedures work. By engaging with staff and sharing our experience in this area of work, we have assisted in communicating the importance of effective complaints handling.
The challenges and difficulties of complaints handling are matters of concern to many Land Registry staff. This concern may increase as the focus of the Agency's interaction with its customers changes and as customers feel more empowered to complain. The Registry's role as an information provider, as well as a registrar, becomes more significant each year. Also, as more of the Registry's traditional functions in processing applications are either automated or carried out 'on-line', the nature of personal engagement with customers will change. However, its customers will inevitably contact the Registry when something has gone wrong, and this will render effective customer service and complaints handling strategies even more important.
Once again this year, the results of our quality survey of Land Registry staff show that respondents think more should be done to inform them about the ICR and complaints generally. As one person put it: "If you don't work in the customer service section then you don't know what they do." The ICR team welcomes its involvement in helping the Land Registry to face these challenges by acting as a resource in training and development in this specialist area.
Enhanced reputation
We are not perfect and there is no room for complacency...we need to make sure that our own review procedures, successful though they undoubtedly are, are kept under constant review to ensure that they keep pace with all the many proposed developments in the Land Registry...we should never lose sight of the priority of giving the best service we can to today's customers. Keeping our review processes up to the mark is an integral part of that.
- Peter Collis, Chief Land Registrar and Chief Executive
The Land Registry maintains a very good reputation amongst its stakeholders, customers and other public bodies. It has achieved this through the strength and efficiency of its service provision, but the establishment and success of its ICR service has been another contributing factor. Although the opportunity for independent review is increasingly seen as highly desirable, not all public bodies have decided to take this step.
The Registry was one of the first public bodies to introduce an independent element to its complaint procedure, and this sent a very positive message to its customers and the wider public sector. Since its inception in 1998, the ICR service has widened its remit across three other public bodies. This has not only enhanced the independence of the ICR's office but has also reflected well on the Registry and on the quality of the service that we provide.
The Land Registry's reputation in this area has led to a recognition of the quality of its complaint handling processes and its input has been sought by other organisations wishing to establish an independent review process. This has enabled the Registry to share the good practice it has established whilst remaining aware of the need for continuous improvement.
Staff resource
Since our inception, the Land Registry has supported the work of this office by provision of seconded staff. There are currently two such members of our team. John Calvert, an experienced Investigations Officer, is shortly to return to the Registry after two years in the ICR's office and we wish him well for the future. The skills and experience that he has gained will stand him in good stead in his future career but will also benefit the Land Registry. The Registry's Management Board supports development opportunities of this kind and the ICR's office will continue to contribute to this endeavour.
A changing landscape for the Land Registry
This last year has been an exceptionally busy one for the Land Registry, during which it has achieved or exceeded all its key performance indicators, whilst processing a 10% increase in its casework. This involves dealing with more than 4 million substantive applications a year, 4.5 million calls to telephone centres and 1.5 million telephone enquiries. The quality of Land Registry services has been recognised by the award of its fourth Charter Mark in the last year.
Like many public sector organisations, the Agency is undergoing an era of change and the Quinquennial Review of the Land Registry's activities that was published in June 2001 has provided the framework for an ambitious ten-year strategic plan. The Review highlighted the radical changes that will take place in the way that the Agency delivers land registration services and gave a focus for developing a vision for future operations. The Review concentrated on '7 pillars', or strategic areas for Land Registry attention and suggested target dates for implementation of new or re-engineered services. It has recommended fundamental changes to the operation of the property market.
As the year has progressed, the Registry has been able to take stock of the content and recommendations of the Review. It has engaged in a series of 'working groups', encouraging staff from across the Agency to contribute to its vision for the future. The Land Registry can now take the opportunity to evaluate operations at all levels and radically rethink the way that it works.
During this time, the Land Registry has also been actively involved in the development and subsequent progress of the Land Registration Bill, which received Royal Assent in February 2002.
All of these initiatives together provide for changes that relate to all aspects of the property market. They envisage full registration of various interests in land in England and Wales; independent adjudication for property disputes; an electronic property register and electronic conveyancing processes; transparent property markets and extended Registry services. This will provide many new challenges for the Land Registry as it faces the task of providing current services now and developing new ones for the future.
The new legislation requires a large training programme for staff and practitioners working in the property sector. The demands of computerising its records in anticipation of a full electronic register and the possible changes in working practice that will bring will demand the utmost staffing flexibility. Effective staff management and deployment will be vital if the Registry is to ensure a smooth transition to the new era of services.
Consultation with stakeholders is key to ensuring that the new system meets the requirements of its customers. The Land Registry has already begun this process, as it begins to determine the scope and impact of the Review.
Meanwhile, the principles contained in the Quinquennial Review have been incorporated into the Land Registry's strategic plans.
The Registry has set a target of delivering services electronically by 2005. Importantly, the Agency realises that part of its customer base includes members of the public, who conduct their transactions without professional support. The needs of these stakeholders are being considered in the development of electronic services in order to ensure that they are not precluded from continuing to represent themselves.
The Registry has already made progress on a number of initiatives, including the introduction of 'real time' priority, a computerised mapping function and conversion of existing registers into computerised format. In common with some of these projects, the development of the National Land Information Service involves working in partnership with the private sector and local government to provide a single point of entry on the Internet for the provision of land and property information.
These initiatives will pave the way for a possible expansion of the Land Registry's customer base. This has the potential to bring more members of the public into contact with the Agency as historical and genealogical research areas of interest open up and may provide new challenges for the Land Registry as it manages relationships with these new customers.
Customer service is embedded in the overarching strategy of the Registry and is an integral part of running its core business and managing the organisation. The Land Registry conducts regular and frequent customer satisfaction surveys and measures its performance against challenging targets. The results continue to demonstrate an extremely high level of customer satisfaction.
A look at Land Charges
The main work of this department is to record interests in unregistered land and to maintain the Bankruptcy Index for England and Wales. There are a variety of situations in which people can have a legal interest in land but do not have the protection of deeds or registration. The Department plays a crucial role in these circumstances, by entering such interests on the Land Charges Index. A potential purchaser can search against the names of previous owners of the land to find out details of any such 'interests'. In addition, anyone can search the Bankruptcy Index to see whether or not an individual is bankrupt. This is particularly important for lenders.
The Quinquennial Review made a number of recommendations in relation to the Department. As a first step, it recommended closer co-operation between the Land Charges Department, the Land Registry and the Insolvency and Court Services in order to deliver service improvements. The Department is now undertaking discussions with representatives of these other departments to set a long-term strategy.
The proposals for full registration of property in England and Wales have huge long-term implications for the Land Charges Department. The register of charges on unregistered land will eventually become obsolete. The Department will need to manage the wind down of the register as full national land registration becomes effective. However, in the meantime, the Department has a very busy workload.
On the ICR's first visit to Land Charges in Plymouth following her appointment in 1998, the Department presented as somewhat old-fashioned compared with other Land Registry offices. As part of her ongoing programme of visits to Land Registry offices, the ICR recently re-visited the Department, which in July 2001 had relocated to the same building as the Plymouth District Land Registry. The move took place over a weekend and it is a credit to all those involved that the Department was fully operational for Monday morning. A programme is now underway to integrate the Department with the District Land Registry.
In the past, it was easy to form the perception that the Department was a 'separate entity' from the Land Registry. Its inclusion in the Land Registry's modernisation programme will help to dispel this view. The ICR was impressed with the progress recently made in bringing the Department into line with the best that the Land Registry offers in terms of IT and process. However, more could and should be done to raise awareness about the services that it offers, both with the general public and amongst other Land Registry staff. A higher profile for the Department within the Land Registry would help to further develop team spirit and staff integration across the Agency.
An immediate benefit of the move is that personal callers can be dealt with in the Customer Information Centre, a service that was not available on the previous site. The quality of service the Department provides is demonstrated by the response to its customer surveys. The customer satisfaction rating for speed of service is 96%, with 98% ratings for both telephone enquiries and accuracy. The Land Charges Department processed more than 5 million searches and applications this year and received only 52 complaints, all of which were resolved by the Agency.
An independent perspective
One of the key tasks of the Independent Complaints Reviewer is to hold the Agency to account for the quality of its complaints handling. The ability of an organisation to recognise and to learn from its mistakes is paramount, if it is to improve the quality of service it delivers to its customers.
Every officer receiving a complaint from a customer, whether oral or written, has a responsibility to do their utmost to resolve matters immediately or as soon as they can, within the limits of the Registry's procedures. In some cases reviewed this year, people have sought to give information or advice outside of their own areas of expertise. This has proved a problem to others later when they tried to resolve complaints. The ability to identify complaints, to offer redress in a timely and appropriate manner or to pass customers to someone who can, is a key component of effective complaints handling.
At the local level, there is no doubt that Customer Service Managers tasked with resolving complaints or progressing them to the next stage of review have made a significant difference to the Agency's response to complaints and to its success in this area of work. However, we continue to receive requests for advice and assistance or complaint referrals from people who feel that the Registry has not responded to the particular points they are raising about its service but rather has concentrated solely on the legal issues involved.
The Cabinet Office guidance "How to deal with complaints", offers public bodies clear guidance in this important area of customer care. It requires that procedures are clearly explained and are simple and straightforward to operate. The Registry adheres to these guidelines, save for the number of internal stages of review. This is one reason why fast-track referral was recommended last year and we hope to see this initiative reduce the time taken to complete the internal review procedures in due course.
Best practice also requires that anyone who may have need of our service is easily able to find out about it. There are a number of ways in which this can be achieved. Local Registry offices carry a stock of our leaflet 'Seeking a Fair Resolution' and our service is mentioned in the Registry's own complaints leaflet 'Putting Things Right'. However, it is disappointing that there is no information about this office on the Land Registry's website. Reference to the ICR service and a link to our site would be welcome and helpful additions to information about the Registry's customer service and response to complaints.
The Land Registry leaflet 'Statement of Service Standards' also provides information to customers on the level of service that they can expect from the Land Registry and what they should do when they have a complaint. Regrettably, it requires some updating, for example it contains the previous address for the ICR's office. This leaflet and other relevant information need regular review and update to ensure that accurate information is given to both customers and staff.
Although many Land Registry customers contact the Agency by telephone or in writing, some people prefer to deal with matters face to face. Every Land Registry office has a Customer Information Centre for personal callers. However, members of the public are often surprised to learn that the office dealing with their application may not be their 'local' District Land Registry. There is little doubt that those offices that deal with their local areas are visited far more frequently by their customers. We explain to customers that any contact centre can liaise with other District Land Registries on their behalf. This is a popular service that would benefit from wider publicity so that people are aware that they can visit their nearest Land Registry office, should they wish to do so.
It is fair to say that the complaints referred to the ICR represent only a tiny percentage of the Agency's overall workload. In many respects, they reflect some of its most complex and problematic cases. Once again last year, boundary disputes between neighbours featured heavily amongst our referrals. My recommendation last year that Agency office copies of plans be annotated with an explanatory note has been accepted but, as this report is written, disappointingly it has not yet been implemented. I hope that the plans to do so will not be long in coming to fruition.
Experience of working with several other public bodies has underlined the fact that complaints about the Land Registry are amongst the most difficult that one can review. The law itself can be couched in confusing language and the Registry's practice and procedure equally complicated. Files that stretch back over several years can take an inordinate length of time to review.
This is not helped by the Registry's system of record keeping which does not allow for a simple, date order sequence of documents or correspondence within one or two files. Instead, documents are kept in folders or envelopes and one has to search between many of these in order to obtain a clear picture of what has happened. Whilst I hope that the move towards electronic record keeping will alleviate this problem, it would be helpful if a more straightforward method of document retention could be considered.
As in previous years, complaint referrals this year were often concerned with boundary disputes, applications for 'adverse possession' (ownership based on squatter's rights) or other matters where there is a disagreement between neighbours. These are always difficult to resolve and occasionally result in complaints about a perceived lack of impartiality on the part of Land Registry officers.
The following are examples of cases concluded during the reporting year. Each was referred following a lengthy engagement with the Agency which has often added to its complexity, not least in terms of the number of issues complained of. Nevertheless, many of the issues raised are familiar to Agency staff across England and Wales.
About HM Land Registry
The Land Registry was originally established to maintain and develop an effective land information system for England and Wales. It does this by keeping records about the ownership of property and the transactions that affect it on a national register. The Land Register itself now comprises over 17 million titles, each of which relates to a specific property. The Land Registry issues free, quarterly residential property price reports, providing data on all residential property sales in England and Wales.
The Registry itself was established as a separate government department in 1862; it became an Executive Agency in 1990 and a Government Trading Fund in 1993. The Chief Land Registrar heads the Agency and is directly accountable to the Lord Chancellor. The current Chief Land Registrar, Peter Collis, leads the Management Board, which provides the strategic leadership and management for the whole of the Registry.
As well as a central London headquarters, there are 24 District Land Registry offices throughout England and Wales. The Computer Services Division and the Land Charges and Agricultural Credits Department are both based in Plymouth. The Land Charges Department processes transactions and provides information about unregistered land.
The Registry employs some 8,000 staff and is a major employer in a number of towns across England and Wales. Each district office is led by a District Land Registrar, who is a lawyer and an expert in land registration, and an Area Manager, who is responsible for the general management of the office and leadership of staff other than lawyers.
The Land Registry is funded entirely from income received from fees. In 2001-02 the Land Registry processed some 4 million applications. It is the Land Registry's policy to use any surplus fees for the benefit of its customers, either directly as fee reductions or indirectly by the provision of new or enhanced services.