language: Deutsch   Français   italiano   Español   Português   日本語   russian   arabic   norwegian   swedish   danish   Nederlands   finland   ireland   English  

HR005/HR005: Customer Complaints and Types of Customers complaint definition

Customer Complaints and Types of Customers 1

Allen F. Wysocki, Karl W. Kepner, Michelle W. Glasser, Derek Farnsworth, and Jennifer L. Clark 2


In this article we discuss customer complaints and types of customers. Similar articles by these authors discuss superior customer performance. The handling of customer complaints is an important component of providing superior customer performance. Three important aspects of the complaint process involve acknowledging customer complaints, identifying customer complaints, and handling customer complaints (Albrecht 1995).

Acknowledging Complaints

It is important to realize that organizations that are customer-focused acknowledge customer complaints in a positive manner. What specific activities does your organization utilize to provide customers with easy opportunities to register their dissatisfaction? Are these activities sufficient? Remember, research indicates that for every complaint expressed there are over 25 unregistered complaints. Many dissatisfied customers just quietly take their business elsewhere. Therefore, organizations that are truly committed to delivering superior customer performance work hard at providing their customers opportunities to complain. What opportunities exist for your organization to acknowledge customer complaints in a positive manner? No organization is so perfect in the delivery of superior customer performance that significant levels of dissatisfaction (the source of complaints) do not exist. No news from customers regarding your performance is not necessarily good news.

Figure 1.  [Click thumbnail to enlarge.]

Identifying Complaints

At least five types of customers and their complaints can be identified. Each type is motivated by different beliefs, attitudes, and needs. Consider the following definitions of the types of complainers, how one might respond to them, and the danger of not handling complaints effectively.

The Meek Customer. Generally will not complain.

Response : Actively solicit comments and complaints, and act appropriately to resolve complaints.

Danger : Customer may quietly leave, never to return again.

The Aggressive Customer. Opposite of the Meek Customer. Readily complains, often loudly and at length.

Response : Listen respectfully and actively, agree that a problem exists, and indicate what will be done to resolve it and when.

Danger : Being aggressive in return. The Aggressive Customer does not respond well to excuses or reasons why the product or service was unsatisfactory.

The High-Roller Customer. Expects the absolute best and is willing to pay for it. Likely to complain in a reasonable manner, unless a hybrid of the Aggressive Customer. Is interested in results and how you handle the customer service problem.

Response : Listen respectfully and actively, question carefully to fully determine cause, and correct the situation.

Danger : Like the Aggressive Customer, the High-Roller Customer is not interested in excuses.

The Rip-Off Customer. The goal is not to get the complaint satisfied but rather to win by getting something the customer is not entitled to receive. A constant, repetitive "not good enough" response to efforts to satisfy this customer is a sure indicator of a rip-off artist.

Response : Remain unfailingly objective. Use accurate quantified data to backup your response. Be sure the adjustment is in keeping with what the organization would normally do under the circumstances. Consider asking "What can I do to make things right?" after the first "not good enough" response.

The Chronic Complainer Customer. Is never satisfied; there is always something wrong. These customers mission is to complain. Yet, they are your customer, and as frustrating as these customers can be, they cannot be dismissed.

Response : Extraordinary patience is required. One must listen respectively and never express frustration. A sympathetic ear, a sincere apology, and an honest effort to correct the situation are likely to be the most productive response. Unlike the Rip-Off Customer, most Chronic Complainer Customers will accept and appreciate your efforts to make things right. This customer wants an apology and appreciates it when you listen. Chronic Complainers are often repeat customers (in spite of their constant complaining) and will tell others about your positive response to their complaints.

Handling Complaints

All good managers listen to customer complaints. Only when a complaint has been expressed can the appropriate corrective action be taken. It is estimated that for every customer complaint received, there are at least 25 complaints that are never expressed. What are the implications of this statistic? Furthermore, a customer with a complaint is likely to tell others about his complaint. Every organization needs an effective procedure for resolving customer complaints.

Customer Complaint Procedure

Consider the following seven-step customer complaint procedure for handling customer complaints in your organization:

Provide customers with the opportunity to complain.

Give customers your full and undivided attention.

Listen respectfully.

Agree that a problem exists; never disagree or argue.


Resolve the complaint.

Thank the customer for bringing the complaint to your attention.

Determine how well your organization does in handling complaints effectively. Use your answers to determine where you need to improve your customer complaint procedure.


All customer service personnel need to be trained in handling customer complaints effectively and being empowered to respond in a positive manner. We hope you found this article useful. Your comments and suggestions are always welcome.


Albrecht, K. 1995. At America’s Service: How Your Company Can Join the Customer Service Revolution . New York: Grand Central Publishing



This document is HR005, one of a series of the Food and Resource Economics Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date May 2001. Revised October 2015. Visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas. .


Allen F. Wysocki, associate dean and professor; Karl W. Kepner, emeritus professor; Michelle W. Glasser, former graduate research assistant; Derek Farnsworth, assistant professor; and Jennifer L. Clark, senior lecturer, Food and Resource Economics Department; UF/IFAS Extension, Gainesville, FL 32611.

The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, s kvspkqfr. moncler mens boots saleexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other UF/IFAS Extension publications, contact your county's UF/IFAS Extension office. U.S. Department of Agriculture, UF/IFAS Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Nick T. Place, dean for UF/IFAS Extension.

complaint definition

moncler mens jacket replica
buy moncler
Discount Moncler
replica moncler jackets wholesale
red moncler down jacket men's III. Administrative Complaints A. Legal Framework

Section 508 provides two alternative methods through which individuals with disabilities can enforce the statute: (1) administrative complaints and (2) lawsuits. The Department’s self-evaluation guidance and this Report focus primarily on issues concerning the formal administrative complaint process.

Best Practice: Solicit Input Before Problems Occur In addition to the formal complaint process, agencies should establish alternatives to increase communication from appropriate parties while procuring and deploying electronic and information technology (EIT). Full use of these methods is likely to decrease the need for formal dispute resolution. For example: Agencies should consider, in appropriate circumstances, issuing draft Requests for Proposals (RFPs) in anticipation of procurement actions in order to facilitate a dialogue with the vendor community and to solicit the input of advocacy groups and people with disabilities regarding the adequacy of the draft RFPs’ treatment of section 508's requirements and defenses. Agencies should elicit and record informal troubleshooting suggestions from people with disabilities who use agencies’ EIT. 1 Many agencies and manufacturers who maintain “help desks” already use special software to track types of problems encountered by their users. In addition to increasing the general efficiency of their information technology staff, this technique may also help eliminate disability-related problems. For instance, agencies may want to train their computer support “help” desk personnel to recognize and record disability-related requests for assistance related to integration issues between assistive technology and EIT. These requests and the methods used to resolve them can be logged and later referenced when other people with disabilities experience similar problems. These requests can also be forwarded to the vendor for appropriate consideration.

Persons with disabilities may file administrative complaints or lawsuits on or after June 21, 2001 (six months after the Access Board published its final rule), but only with respect to federal agency procurements made in violation of section 508. 2 29 U.S.C. § 794d(f). Section 508 does not authorize administrative complaints or lawsuits to be filed with respect to EIT that is “developed, maintained, or used” by a federal agency. 3

By statute, persons with disabilities who file administrative complaints alleging that an agency’s procurement has violated section 508 must file it with the agency alleged to be in noncompliance. 29 U.S.C. § 794d(f)(2). Specifically, that section provides:

Complaints filed under paragraph (1) shall be filed with the Federal department or agency alleged to be in noncompliance. The Federal department or agency receiving the complaint shall apply the complaint procedures established to implement section 794 of this title for resolving allegations of discrimination in a federally conducted program or activity. Id

For technical assistance on the proper procedures for handling and resolving civil rights complaints, generally, the Department of Justice has published Investigations Procedures Manual for the Investigation and Resolution of Complaints Alleging Violations of Title VI and Other Nondiscrimination Statutes (Investigations Procedures Manual). The Investigative Procedures Manual is available online ( ). Because section 508's administrative complaint processes are patterned after those of title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Investigative Procedures Manual provides relevant guidance to agencies during their development of appropriate policies and procedures for section 508.

Agencies are advised not to follow the procedures developed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, which sets forth the federal sector complaint process for section 501 complaints.


On July 22, 2003, EEOC Chair Cari M. Dominguez signed an order making clear that section 508 complaints against the agency would not be handled through the process outlined in 29 C.F.R. Part 1614. Instead, all such complaints will be handled under the procedures that the agency already uses for section 504 complaints from members of the public (29 C.F.R. 1615.170(d)-(m)). A notice summarizing this order was published in the Federal Register on August 6, 2003. 68 Fed. Reg. 46,630 (avail able at Agencies are encouraged to review this information when devising their section 508 complaint procedures. Where possible, agencies should adopt policies that require that web pages are tested by people with disabilities familiar with the use of screen readers or other assistive technologies.

Under certain circumstances, however, an employee’s complaint may give rise to claims under both section 501 and 508. The EEOC procedures make clear that if such a complaint against the agency is received under the Part 1614 procedures, the agency will process the 501 claim under Part 1614 and the 508 claim under Part 1615.

The Department’s January 2001 self-evaluation materials posed three questions designed to focus agencies’ attention on their administrative complaint handling and resolution procedures, in preparation for the June 2001 enforcement date for section 508. Responses to the survey were due significantly before the June 2001 date. The statistics discussed below, therefore, are not representative of agencies’ ability to receive and resolve appropriately complaints by the date on which enforcement of section 508 was authorized. Rather, they reflect a relatively early snapshot of how agencies approached this new responsibility.

B. Specific Agency Survey Questions 1. Tailored Complaint Procedures for Section 508 (Agency Question B-1) Finding _____________________________________________________________________ Most agencies have tailored their 504 complaint processes to meet the needs of section 508 complaints or have plans to do so. Recommendation _____________________________________________________________________ Aencies that have not yet done so should examine their existing complaint-handling processes applicable to complaints filed under section 504 for federally conducted activities and tailor them to the section 508 context

As explained previously, when it amended section 508, Congress required agencies to follow the complaint procedures already established under section 504 for resolving complaints of discrimination in programs conducted by federal agencies.

Agencies may find that their existing section 504 complaint processes for federally conducted activities do not adequately address a variety of issues that arise under section 508. For instance, some agencies handle section 504 complaints on a local basis, reflecting a management structure of local control over local programs. The same agencies may, however, exercise strong centralized control over EIT procurements. Under this bifurcated management model, a section 508 complaint alleging that the centralized procurement process has not sufficiently addressed section 508 concerns with respect to an EIT procurement should be handled by a central office, rather than a local authority that is not involved in EIT procurement.

Additionally, many section 504 complaints filed against federally conducted activities do not involve issues over which third parties exercise much control. For instance, if an agency fails to provide effective communication upon request to a member of the public attending an agency-operated conference, and no defenses are applicable, the individual’s dispute would be directly with the agency. In contrast, many section 508 complaints will likely implicate a particular vendor’s product. For instance, an employee may allege that certain features of a software product bought by the agency can be operated only through manipulation of a computer mouse, in violation of section 1194.21(a) of the Access Board’s Standards. If the agency attempts to resolve this complaint without involving the software vendor in the process, it forgoes an opportunity for the company’s software engineers to propose a technological solution. The company may never learn that there has been a problem (that may or may not have been easily redressed), until the next time it responds to an agency’s RFP and is informed that its products did not meet performance expectations. Agencies should carefully consider how they will handle section 508 complaints, especially given the complaint-resolution dynamics inherent to issues that involve multiple parties.

The Department asked each agency, “Has your agency examined its existing complaint-handling processes applicable to complaints filed under section 504 for federally conducted activities and tailored them to the section 508 context?” (Agency Question B-1)

Six of 18 large agencies (20.03% * ) and 2 of 20 mid-sized (15.63% * ) agencies described themselves as prepared to handle incoming section 508 complaints by the date of their response. A larger proportion of smaller agencies chose this response, including 10 of 21 small agencies (47.83% * ) and 7 of 18 very small agencies (42.94% * ). More agencies indicated that while they did not (as of the date of their response) have an appropriate set of policies and procedures in place to handle section 508 complaints as they arise; they have established a timetable for tailoring their existing complaint processes to the section 508 context. These include 12 of 18 large agencies (79.97% * ); 14 of 20 mid-sized agencies (71.70% * ); 7 of 21 small agencies (39.08% * ); and 4 of 18 very small agencies (25.19% * ). Some agencies – including a third of the very small agencies – indicated that, at least as of the date of their response, they had neither developed an appropriate set of policies and procedures to handle section 508 complaints, nor had they established a timetable for tailoring their existing complaint processes to the section 508 context. These include none of the large agencies; 4 of 20 mid-sized agencies (12.67% * ); 4 of 21 small agencies (13.09% * ); and 7 of 18 very small agencies (31.87% * ).

A strong majority of agencies indicated that they had tailored their complaint resolution process to the section 508 context or had established a timetable for doing so. While a significant number of very small agencies had not done so, this observation may be a reflection of the relative lack of formality in administrative processes, generally, among very small agencies.

2. Alternate Dispute Resolution (Agency Question B-2) Finding _____________________________________________________________________ Most agencies are familiar with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques. Recommendation _____________________________________________________________________ Agencies should attempt to resolve all section 508 complaints as amicably and informally as possible, using mediation or other methods of alternative dispute resolution where appropriate, in their existing administrative complaint resolution processes

One of the best ways to resolve section 508 complaints is through alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Over the last several years, ADR has become an increasingly popular way to avoid costly litigation and resolve disputes in a much more timely manner. For instance, arbitration allows multiple parties to provide their perspective to an impartial adjudicator. An even less formal process is mediation that brings the parties before a neutral third-party mediator who facilitates communication between the parties to assist them in identifying and implementing a resolution of disputes. It works best when the mediator has been trained in the legal requirements of the law and possesses specialized knowledge about the issues presented. The Department has had tremendous success with mediation, resulting in the equitable and efficient resolution of disputes, saving thousands of taxpayer dollars while achieving meaningful compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Successful mediators produce “win-win” results.

The Department believes that mediation may play an important role in resolving complaints under section 508. Because mediation is an informal process, any interested parties or neutral experts may be consulted or “brought in” to help resolve the complaint at a very early stage. In resolving section 508 complaints, the parties to the mediation have some control over choosing the participants and may wish to involve a representative from the agency’s program office who requested the procurement, someone from the agency’s own technology staff, the vendor, and, on occasion, an assistive technology vendor, if the complainant alleges that the EIT interferes with his or her assistive technology, such as a particular model of screen reader. Mediation facilitates opening the lines of communication between the agency and the person with a disability. Full communication is often needed to resolve a section 508 complaint, as the technological problems at issue may be complex. It may be desirable, on occasion, to invite advocacy groups for persons with disabilities to suggest possible solutions or engage in the testing of industry-proposed solutions.

Prior to mediation, agencies may wish to also consider expedited processing of complaints, including contacting the vendor or systems integrator at the earliest possible stage to determine whether a problem can be resolved quickly and easily. Although vendors and systems integrators are not formally included in the complaint resolution process, they can play an important role. Industry representatives have expressed their concern that a complaint could harm the credibility of the vendor or systems integrator who supplied the product or service. Accordingly, agencies may consider allowing vendors and systems integrators to have the opportunity to help clarify how their products meet the section 508 standards. For instance, vendors and systems integrators should also have the chance to explain the state of scientific and engineering capacities at the time of procurement, because their products or services may have been the best available at the time; thus, an agency procuring such a product would not have violated section 508, even if more accessible products were available later. Offering industry a chance to participate early in the complaint process makes sense because the vendors and system integrators have the technical expertise to address the issues raised in the complaint.

The Department asked, “Has your agency incorporated Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), such as mediation or arbitration, into your existing administrative complaint resolution processes?” (Agency Question B-2)

Many agencies indicated that their existing complaint processes include some form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). These include 11 of 18 large agencies (29.64% * ); 11 of 20 mid-sized agencies (50.89% * ); 16 of 21 small agencies (79.87% * ); and 9 of 18 very small agencies (55.84% * ). A strong majority of large agencies and a smaller number of agencies in other size categories have some components that have incorporated ADR principles into their complaint resolution procedures, while others have not. These include 6 of 18 large agencies (69.98% * ); 6 of 20 mid-sized agencies (26.13% * ); 3 of 21 small agencies (13.89% * ); and 3 of 18 very small agencies (17.60% * ). Relatively few agencies have taken no steps to incorporate ADR principles into their complaint resolution procedures. These include 1 of 18 large agencies (0.38% * ); 3 of 20 mid-sized agencies (22.99% * ); 2 of 21 small agencies (6.24% * ); and 6 of 18 very small agencies (26.56% * ). The data suggest that a strong majority of agencies have incorporated – or have established a timetable to incorporate – ADR techniques into their complaint resolution procedures. Thus, agencies should be well-equipped to use mediation techniques in helping to resolve their more difficult section 508 complaints. 3. Outreach and Information Dissemination (Agency Question B-3) Finding _____________________________________________________________________ Most agencies widely disseminate information about filing section 508 complaints or have plans to do so. Recommendation _____________________________________________________________________ Agencies that have not yet done so should instruct members of the public and employees how to file administrative complaints under section 508.

When individuals with disabilities do not know how (or with whom) to file administrative complaints under section 508, agencies, potential complainants, and industry are negatively affected:

Agencies are more likely to face lawsuits if individuals do not know that other, less formal, dispute resolution avenues are open to them to redress perceived violations of section 508. Facilitating the ability of individuals to file administrative complaints will also help agencies monitor their efforts to comply with section 508 and avert further problems with the same products or services. Individuals with disabilities must make a choice among foregoing an opportunity to assert their rights when they believe an agency has violated section 508, filing an expensive and time-consuming lawsuit, or filing an administrative complaint in the wrong format or with the wrong office when they are unfamiliar with the form or manner in which section 508 complaints should be filed. Members of industry potentially miss out on the opportunity to participate in an informal process that can serve as a valuable trouble-shooting mechanism for them, if individuals provide no notification of problems with products or services that could potentially be remedied or, alternatively, resort to federal court where industry may not become party to a lawsuit. (Section 508 is only enforceable against the agency, not the EIT manufacturer, designer, or vendor.)

The Department asked, “Has your agency widely disseminated instructions to the public and to employees regarding how to file administrative complaints under section 508?” (Agency Question B-3)

Relatively few agencies have widely disseminated instructions to the public and to employees regarding how to file administrative complaints under section 508. These include 3 of 18 large agencies (19.07% * ); 1 of 20 mid-sized agencies (1.96% * ); 0 of 21 small agencies (0.00% * ); and 2 of 18 very small agencies (12.44% * ). Most agencies have not yet widely disseminated instructions to the public and to employees regarding how to file administrative complaints under section 508, but have established a timetable for doing so. These include 14 of 18 large agencies (17.80% * ); 15 of 20 mid-sized agencies (85.37% * ); 13 of 21 small agencies (65.83% * ); and 10 of 18 very small agencies (64.34% * ). Some agencies have no plans to widely disseminate information regarding how to file section 508 administrative complaints. These include 1 of 18 large agencies (63.13% * ); 4 of 20 mid-sized agencies (12.67% * ); 8 of 21 small agencies (34.17% * ); and 6 of 18 very small agencies (23.22% * ).

The data suggest that when agencies submitted their responses to this question, before June 2001, most agencies had either already begun advertising how individuals with disabilities should file administrative complaints or had established timetables for doing so. A significant minority of agencies, however, had no plans to do so.

C. Key Recommendations

As noted previously, the complaint resolution process for section 508 should be tailored from the agencies’ section 504 complaint process, using as informal a process as quickly as possible. To facilitate this process, the Department’s most important recommendations are summarized below:

Vendors and systems integrators should be provided adequate opportunities to provide technological solutions during the complaint resolution processes. The Department of Justice, in consultation with the Interagency Disability Coordinating Council (IDCC), should issue model complaint resolution policies and procedures for section 508. GSA, the Access Board, the Department of Justice, and the EEOC should develop a mediation program – with mediators specially trained in section 508 issues – and make the program available to all agencies for resolution of section 508 complaints. All agencies should post their section 508 administrative complaint processes on their Internet and intranet sites, as well as prominently in equal employment opportunity handbooks and other appropriate publications.

* This is a weighted value measuring the number of full-time employees in these agencies, compared with the total number of persons employed full-time by agencies in this size category.

1 While section 508 is only enforceable for EIT procured on or after June 21, 2001, agencies should consider all informal complaints alleging that EIT is inaccessible to people with disabilities, regardless of the date on which the EIT was acquired or developed in-house in light of their obligations under sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

2 In addition to administrative complaints, individuals with disabilities may file lawsuits in federal district court for violations of section 508. The remedies available in court proceedings are defined by sections 505(a)(2) and 505(b) of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 794a(a)(2) and 794a(b), and include injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees, but do not include monetary damages. See Lane v. Pena, 518 U.S. 187 (1996).

3 However, agencies have additional longstanding obligations that are enforceable under sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Some of these obligations may be triggered when EIT “maintained, used, or developed” by federal agencies is not accessible. For this reason, if individuals file complaints pertaining to EIT acquired or developed before June 21, 2001, agencies should review the allegations to determine if they more properly allege violations of sections 501 or 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Some agency responsibilities under sections 501 and 504 may become easier to meet once an agency has begun replacing inaccessible EIT with accessible EIT during the normal course of business.

Back to Index

Last Updated: 6/14/04

> Updated August 6, 2015

Dictionaries Grammar & usage About FAQs Redeem a code My account Log in Back to Top Definition of complaint noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary

    complaint   noun noun BrE BrE / / kəmˈpleɪnt / /   ; NAmE NAmE / / kəmˈpleɪnt / /   Being ill   Add to my wordlist jump to other results 1   [ countable ] a reason for not being satisfied; a statement that somebody makes saying that they are not satisfied complaint (about somebody/something) The most common complaint is about poor service. We received a number of complaints from customers about the lack of parking facilities. I'd like to make a complaint about the noise. complaint (against somebody/something) I believe you have a complaint against one of our nurses. complaint (that…) a complaint that he had been unfairly treated a formal complaint ( formal ) to file/lodge ( = make ) a complaint 2   [ uncountable ] the act of complaining I can see no grounds for complaint . a letter of complaint Express Yourself Making a complaint You can express your dissatisfaction when something you buy is of poor quality or the standard of service you receive is not good enough in various ways: I'm afraid I'm not satisfied with this. I'm sorry. This isn't acceptable/​good enough. We've been waiting half an hour. I'd like to make a complaint. The radio I bought doesn't work. Excuse me—this isn't what I asked for. I'm having/​I ordered the soup, not the salad. I'd like to speak to the manager. I've got a complaint about something I bought. 3 [ countable ] an illness, especially one that is not serious, and often one that affects a particular part of the body a skin complaint See related entries: Being ill Word Origin late Middle English: from Old French complainte , feminine past participle of complaindre ‘to lament’, from medieval Latin complangere ‘bewail’, from Latin com- (expressing intensive force) + plangere ‘to lament’. Extra examples He has a minor skin complaint. I have a complaint about the food. My only complaint is that the website is a little difficult to use. Not being able to sleep at night is a very common complaint. One of the chief complaints is the cost. The tribunal heard complaints against the director. The way I was treated gave me no cause for complaint. They filed a complaint with the Commission. We have had some serious complaints from parents. a complaint about working conditions a complaint against the police a complaint from a customer a complaint from the neighbours a complaint of unfair dismissal complaints arising from late payment to make a complaint to the authorities He suffers from a skin complaint called ‘rosacea’. I believe you have a serious complaint against one of our nurses. I can see no grounds for complaint. I’d like to make a complaint about the noise. I’m planning to write a formal letter of complaint. The couple have lodged an official complaint against the hospital. The police have an independent complaints procedure to deal with such issues. We received a number of complaints from customers about the lack of parking. Check pronunciation: complaint See the Oxford Advanced American Dictionary entry: complaint Other Links iWriter iSpeaker My Wordlists Resources Wordlists Oxford 3000 Pronunciation Topics Nearby words complainant noun complain of phrasal verb complaint noun complaisance noun complaisant adjective Explore our topics Animals Body and appearance Business Clothes and fashion Crime and law Culture Education Family and life stages Food and drink Health Houses and buildings Language Leisure Nature Personality and emotions Religion and politics Retail Science Social issues Technology The media Travel and tourism War and conflict Work