Confusion over lost documents

What happened

In spring 2013, Mr K applied for British citizenship for his two children. It was approved in early summer 2013. Later that month, Mr K told UKVI that he wanted it to return his documents via recorded delivery. However, UKVI's database noted that during a telephone call soon after, Mr K agreed that it should send his documents back using second class post. The note also stated that staff had posted each of the documents to Mr K that day.

Mr K did not receive his documents. UKVI undertook a search but was unable to find them, and offered to reimburse Mr K's costs for replacing the documents. When Mr K submitted his compensation claim, UKVI only agreed to reimburse part of the costs. In particular, UKVI did not agree to reimburse Mr K for his holiday costs, his missed job opportunity or his overnight costs in travelling to London with his family (to obtain replacement documents). In addition, in its letter, its calculation of the compensation claim did not include the costs it had agreed to reimburse.

What we found

We partly upheld this complaint. The evidence showed Mr K had agreed that UKVI could send his documents to him using second class post. The evidence also showed that UKVI had returned Mr K's documents to him.

As the evidence showed that UKVI was not responsible for the lost documents, it therefore followed that it was not responsible for Mr K's missed holiday and lost job opportunity.

However, UKVI's handling of the complaint was poor. Only when we spoke to UKVI did it make it clear that it did not accept liability for the lost documents, and that paying for replacements was a goodwill gesture. UKVI had led Mr K to believe that it had lost his documents when it undertook searches and offered to pay reimbursement costs. We said that UKVI should have made it clear to Mr K at the outset that its actions were a gesture of goodwill.

Lastly, we noted that UKVI had calculated the costs it had agreed to pay Mr K incorrectly. However, we were pleased to note that UKVI had now agreed to pay the correct (higher) amount.

Putting it right

UKVI apologised to Mr K. We decided that further compensation was not warranted in light of the goodwill payment of just under £460 that UKVI had already offered.