How to cope with a flood of AI-generated complaints

AI-generated complaints are making life harder for housing services, but they may help people get a response.

A complaints investigator at a UK housing association writes that his work has changed over the past few months: he now has to work through hundreds of pages of long-winded complaints drafted with AI. He says people often struggle to understand the technical language in these letters when staff repeat it in person or over the phone. Other readers writing to the publication disagree: AI can help complainants put their case into words and get a problem considered, even if they previously lacked the education, confidence or time to do so.

What concerns the complaints investigator

The author of the first letter has worked at a housing association for nine years. He knows the legislation and rules well and enjoys his job, but working through hundreds of pages of extremely long-winded complaints has become unbearable.

Making the complaints process accessible to residents matters, as the tragic story of Awaab Ishak shows. But the author believes AI-generated letters do not always make it easier to raise a complaint. Filing one can be difficult and time-consuming, and AI can help people feel more confident. But when a staff member uses the same technical language in conversation as in the letter, complainants often do not understand it.

The investigator finds it easier to work with a complaint written by the person themselves, even if it contains errors and swearing: such a letter conveys the problem more clearly and explains what help is needed. At the same time, he says, AI makes life easier for people who complain regularly.

People who complain often are not new to this work, even without AI. But the author writes that receiving several huge complaints a month from one person creates the impression that staff are not considered worthy of respect. His organisation is considering whether to classify this behaviour as a form of bullying.

AI as a way to get a complaint considered

London-based transformation consultant Dexter Jandu is not surprised by the rise in AI-generated complaints, but sees it differently. In his view, using AI to seek help or compensation as public services deteriorate should not be treated as a nuisance. It allows people who usually lack the time and resources for the process to get their problems considered.

Jandu believes public bodies, especially local councils, need to address valid complaints regardless of how they are written. In his view, those bodies should use AI with human involvement to do so.

Pete Bibby from Sheffield also notes that using AI to prepare a complaint does not, in itself, make it invalid. AI can give a voice to people who were previously held back by limited education or difficulty expressing their thoughts. A rise in complaints may then reflect not only the burden on public bodies, but also the fact that some people were previously unable to raise a problem.

Dataist's take: The letters show two sides of the same problem: AI makes it easier to file complaints, but long-winded submissions can make them harder to handle and complicate communication with complainants. Public services will need to account both for access to the complaints process and for the need to assess submissions on their merits.