Can you help me word a formal complaint without being rude?

[thenineteenth]

I am starting the complaints process with a public body and have had a response to my first stage complaint which is a bit poor.

I put some very specific points to them (e.g. this document contained this inaccuracy; this issue was not considered in the decision making process) but the response basically says "we think we are right" in four different ways, and doesn't actually engage with what I am saying.*

I want to take the complaint to the next stage but what I am stuck on is how to say "and can you actually answer the points I have made" without being rude.

I know this isn't strictly a legal matter (although it might be if the whole process goes on in this way) but I thought you lot might be used to writing "this is a bit rubbish" politely and could help.

*Part of the reason I am complaining is that they've refused to engage with facts for five years and so to some degree I want to make them (!).

Claude.AI will be a really big help with this

Something along the lines of:

I have received your response to my letter/complaint of (date). Unfortunately it does not address the specific issues raised in my original letter/complaint. I would appreciate if you would review the original issues raised and respond in a matter that comprehensively addresses each one. I enclosed a copy of my original letter/complaint for your convenience.

I would set out all the background information/reason for complaint etc. Then something like 'These are the questions I would like you to address:' and then list the questions and make them very specific, eg:

1. Who took decision x?

2.Why wasn't y done?

3.How do you plan on fixing this?

Depending on the circumstances is it worth writing to your MP? Maybe they are too busy nowadays, but when I worked for a public body a letter from an MP was regarded as hugely significant/important and got any investigating done properly.

Thank you all.

I usually try and avoid ChatGPT but I fed it my complaint and the reply and asked it to produce a legally based response and I have to say the results are excellent. I am going to reword it slightly and check the case law references. It also defined the reply as 'broad and dismissive' which is spot on.

@Redburnett Yes, I'm in email contact with the MP, but they've been to conference and I've been on holiday so we've not got very far.

Really, I know that they are going to carry on stonewalling because they've done so for five years, and so I will then have to decide whether to go for a judicial review or draw attention to it in the media, which they will hate because they think they are very right on.

Remember there is a very strict timeline to commence a judicial review which is 3 months from the date of the decision you are challenging. This doesn’t get put on hold just because you have made a formal complaint. If this has been going on for 5 years, are you positive you haven’t missed the boat on this?

I've been very AI reluctant too. But I've been using Claude for something v similar and I honestly believe it helped me get a review/complaint upheld. It showed up my own draft as being a bit wishy washy. I highly recommend it.

Thanks for the heads up, but yes - the situation has been ongoing for five years but the decision was made at the end of August.

To be honest, much as I would love to do a judicial review, I am not sure I can afford either the cost or the emotional energy involved. It could probably be crowdfunded (it's a feminist issue, but not to do with trans) but again, I have work to do and a life to live. I would do it if it became a test case and changed things for loads more women and girls, but that isn't guaranteed. The media coverage however might be an option

So I've run it through Claude and Chat GPT and I think the latter was slightly better overall, mainly through being more concise. It's now offering to write me summaries, covering letters and press releases too, so it has a lot of enthusiasm.

But what I'm going to do tomorrow is edit the Chat GPT one with some useful bits from Claude, check the case law and then send it off.

And thank you everyone, this has been incredibly helpful. Should any of you be experts on gender budgeting, do say...

When you move to the next stage, it’s reasonable to say (politely) that the response did not address the specific points raised. You can frame it as seeking clarification rather than criticism. For example, you might say that while you note their position, the response does not engage with the factual inaccuracies or decision-making omissions you identified, and you are therefore requesting a substantive response to each point as part of the next-stage review.
Keeping it factual, structured (numbering your original points again), and neutral in tone usually works best and avoids it sounding confrontational.