Q4 January – March 2012
Complaints: 8, Average response time 5.25 days, Suggestions/Comments: 6, Compliments: 1
Marine
A candidate who had unsuccessfully applied for a post in NE had been promised feedback but complained that it had not been given.
Regulation
Complaint that a landowner who had breached the conditions of his EPS licence was allowed by the Police to undertake remedial work instead of being prosecuted.
Customer complained that we had asked for further information regarding his EPS licence application and queried what qualifications the staff member asking for it had.
Suggestion that changes to licensing guidance and the like be emailed to interested parties rather than just added to our website.
Land Management
Perceived destruction of habitat during preparation work at the site for an Olympic cycling event venue.
Customer was still being sent information by us despite having previously asked us not to because he is no longer farming.
Perceived destruction of habitat during invasive scrub clearance from a Common.
Query over historical accuracy of an interpretation board at an ES educational access site.
Request to be added to distribution list for Land Management Update.
Access & Engagement
Customer was unhappy that dogs were not allowed to run loose on an NNR
Customer Services
Resident felt that Natural England was not doing anything to prevent her neighbour from hosting caravan rallies.
Customer informed us of vandalism at a site which was not actually owned or managed by Natural England. (We informed the site owners).
Suggestion that face-to-face pre-application meetings would be very beneficial for planning applications which have the potential for significant environmental impact.
Compliment regarding fantastic service given by member of Customer Service team in connection with an urgent EPS licence application
Web Team
Could we be more careful about using the correct use of licence/license on our website.
.
