Sometimes, as the popular song has it, sorry seems to be the hardest word.
While there has been a recent vogue on the part of countries making apologies for events that happened in the past, public bodies remain shockingly bad at apologising.
But a failure to learn from mistakes, or to remedy them quickly and properly, is not just a problem for those affected; it can also be expensive for the public purse, according to a recent report from Ann Abraham, the parliamentary and health service ombudsman.
Small mistakes, big consequences is a hard-hitting report from Abraham that sets out 11 case studies where failing to correct relatively small mistakes has led to a "disproportionate" impact on those involved.
In her foreword, Abraham concludes that she "cannot stress strongly enough the importance of bodies learning from complaints and using this learning to improve their services and performance".
Much of this is about providing staff with the correct equipment, guidance and embedded procedures to do their jobs properly, Abraham points out.
Her report identifies three main failings of many public bodies in this respect: being careless with information, delaying in handling complaints, and poor complaint handling. She underlines the importance of public bodies respecting the privacy of personal and confidential information, particularly as more information is online.
Delay is sometimes unavoidable
On delay, Abraham says she accepts that delay is sometimes unavoidable, and things can often take longer than customers want, but says public bodies should give people information about when they can expect their case to be dealt with. They should also offer appropriate redress.
The report says poor complaint handling is a waste of money, time and effort. Rather, she says, public bodies should see complaints as a source of valuable and free feedback about what needs to be improved.
The consequences of errors and delays in handling complaints are shocking: the report is littered with words such as devastating, severe stress, "incalculable heartache, worry and distress".
The 11 cases cited in the report include complaints about a variety of public bodies. Three of the cases involve HM Revenue & Customs, and three more concern the UK Border Agency; other bodies in the report include Jobcentre Plus, the Child Support Agency and the Department for Work and Pensions.
One of the cases involves the dealings of one citizen with the UK Border Agency who was wrongly threatened with removal from the country, missed two close family members' funerals and was unable to visit his sick mother, in a case that took three years and "considerable" expense to the taxpayer.
"How was it resolved? The Border Agency finally got round to checking his paper file." This costly mistake would have been easily avoided, says the report, if the agency had made it clear to staff that they should search all records thoroughly, including archived paper files, when asked to confirm if someone has leave to remain in the UK.
