Freedom to Critique and Shaping the Correct Response
In our society, freedom of speech is a cherished right, a cornerstone of our identity as a free and progressive community—or so it is believed. However, the paradox of this freedom lies in the fact that while we enjoy the liberty to express our thoughts, others possess the same right to voice opinions that may vehemently differ from ours. This, indeed, is the cost of freedom of speech.
Criticism is another facet of this freedom that we wield. If dissatisfied with a service or product, we possess the right to articulate our discontent and seek redress. This is a fundamental entitlement we can exercise.
It is only natural that we may find it upsetting when criticism is directed at us. Yet, when we fall short in delivering a promised service or product, we must be prepared for scrutiny. The right to respond and defend ourselves against unjust or baseless criticism is an integral part of this freedom.
These rights collectively form the bedrock of a society that aspires to be both free and just.
I've been fortunate enough to possess the skills and resources needed to actively provide feedback and criticism to my housing provider. Throughout this journey of sharing my thoughts, raising concerns, and exercising my right to freedom of speech and complaint, I've been struck by the resistance and confrontational attitudes I've encountered.
This experience has led me to ponder how prevalent such pushback is among other housing providers. Fortunately, I can affirm that the majority of providers recognise the value inherent in both positive and negative feedback. They see it not as an obstacle but as a constructive tool, an opportunity to reassess their approaches, refine their tools, redirect their efforts, issue apologies, learn, and fortify their relationships. This, undeniably, is the right way to respond—the right approach.
It's essential to acknowledge that everyone, myself included (don’t take my word for it just ask my wife!) falls short at times. None of us are immune to mistakes, and these instances serve as valuable opportunities for learning and growth.
The true misstep lies in failing to learn, resorting to blame, denying shortcomings, and foregoing the chance to evolve.
As my network has explained over the last 18 months I’ve connected with housing professionals and residents, it becomes evident that our shared objective is to guarantee everyone a place to call home—one that is safe, dry, and warm.
As I forge ahead into 2024, the mantra "every home, safe, warm, and dry" will become my personal creed. Granted, I recognise the challenge; I'm not so naive as to believe this can be achieved within a single year. However, even if, collectively, we attain a modest 10% success rate, the impact is substantial. Considering the 4 million social homes in the UK, a 10% success rate translates to securing over 400,000 homes that are safe, dry, and warm.
Big journeys commence with a single step. The question remains; what do we stand to lose by taking that step together and what is the cost of not aiming high, but instead opting to dig in and seek cover from the vocal tenants who dare to criticise?
I had the privilege of being featured in an ITV Meridian News interview, shedding light on the support I extended to my neighbours in addressing multiple issues with our landlord. It marked what I assumed would be the end of a prolonged journey. While our homes and those of my neighbours are now reasonably safe (despite the occasional lift failures and tripping hazards due to neglected grounds), however my journey persists.
So, how did my landlord respond?
Consistent with their historical approach; ignoring, denying, blocking, blaming, all while assuming the victim role. Let's dissect their response, as articulated by their Director of Communications, a celebrated ‘Comms Hero’:
"We are sorry that our leasehold customers at Maureen Christian House did not receive the level of service they should have.”
A commendable start.
"We know we should have responded more quickly to the concerns being raised, and we have taken learnings from this.”
An acknowledgment of reality.
"Following a Housing Ombudsman review of a complaint by one customer, we decided it was the right thing to do to make a compensation payment to all our leasehold customers at Maureen Christian House.”
I was that one customer. My complaint to the Housing Ombudsman, representing forty-three flats, prompted the Ombudsman to recommend compensation payments to all residents affected by the ongoing issues outlined in their findings, this was processed only after they pushed back and requested a review of the findings.
"Mr. Jenkins’ actions have significantly affected our customers, who have been encouraged to report issues with their service or home to him through his website rather than directly to us, meaning their concerns can’t be dealt with effectively.”
My actions have positively impacted many of their customers, providing support when they felt ignored, bullied, or silenced. In instances where our landlord had failed to respond, I offered my fellow residents a platform to voice their concerns externally in the hope of eliciting a response from the landlord.
"Over the last few years, Mr. Jenkins has contacted GSA many hundreds of times through various channels...This has had a significant and detrimental impact on these colleagues and their ability to provide services to our customers.”
I have indeed reached out to GSA numerous times, often reiterating requests stemming from ignored emails, calls, and posts. As revealed by their current CEO, GSA's service shortcomings were attributed to their inability to merge two failing housing providers.
Moving on…
Providers grappling with unresolved issues and complaints find themselves at a crossroads; they can either choose the path of evasion—ignoring, denying, blocking, blaming, all while adopting a victim stance—or embark on the route of diligence—investigating, communicating, resolving, learning, and moving forward.
As a provider, which path will you opt for? What path do you anticipate your provider navigating?
It doesn’t need to be gladiatorial combat. It's about delivering the agreed-upon level of service, and when shortcomings occur, expecting criticism is par for the course. How you choose to address that criticism is at your discretion, but tread carefully, for there exists a right and wrong way to respond. The sector is under scrutiny, and finding yourself on the wrong path can make the journey considerably more challenging for you and your tenants.
In the end, the question lingers; do your residents live under the governance of a democratic landlord, fostering transparency and accountability, or do they find themselves under the rule of a dictator, evading responsibility and suppressing the voice of those they serve?
