A medical practice in the Hertfordshire area

2. Mr M is raising a complaint about the Practice after collapsing at home on 24 September 2020. He says he suspected a stroke, but his GP did not properly assess his symptoms and advised him to go home. He says he later went to the hospital and was found to have suffered a heart attack.

3. Mr M says he has suffered permanent physical and mental health problems following the heart attack. He believes the advice of his GP caused a significant delay in receiving medical assistance, which has resulted in his health being worse off.

4. Mr M wants a financial reward for the permanent impact on his health because of the failure to send him to hospital.

5. On 24 September 2020, Mr M collapsed at home and was suffering with several symptoms that he believed to be a stroke. He booked an appointment that morning and went in to speak with his GP.

6. Mr M says that he stressed the issues with his heart, and that he believed he was having a stroke. He believes the GP was more concerned about his elbow, which he had injured during his fall. The GP sent him home and advised he would be contacted with further information. The only information provided was about carpal tunnel syndrome.

7. Mr M's symptoms became worse, and he was later taken to hospital by ambulance, where he was diagnosed with a heart attack.

8. Mr M says following the heart attack he has suffered long term physical and mental health issues including constant pain, fatigue, and memory loss. He also says he finds his job is now too physically and mentally challenging for him to do effectively. He believes the delay in seeking further assistance has contributed to him having a worse health outcome, and he believes this was the fault of his GP.

11. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint where a person has (or had) the option to take legal action, unless we consider this is (or was) unreasonable in the circumstances. We have discussed this with Mr M to understand his circumstances and the outcomes he wants. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look in to.

12. Mr M has alternative legal routes available to him through the courts for clinical negligence, as the main outcome he is seeking is a financial remedy. He wants a payment to make up for the reduction in his quality of life, and he has also suggested there could be a future loss of earnings. Mr M wants someone to look at his case to make a fair judgement and he is seeking a significant amount of compensation. This outcome can be sought through the courts.

13. Mr M has previously consulted with a no win no fee medical negligence firm about his case. As he had already brought the case to us, they advised him to wait for our decision, which is why he did not pursue this further at the time.

14. Mr M has raised concerns over the difficulty of starting the legal process and the impact this may have due to his health. However, pursuing a legal remedy though the courts will involve having a dedicated legal professional on a case who has a vested interest in winning the case. That means that he will be supported while going through the legal route.

15. Taking all of this into account, we believe it is reasonable for Mr M to seek legal action and for us to decline the complaint on these grounds. The courts will independently review this complaint and decide whether there has been clinical negligence. It is also possible the legal action could resolve Mr M’s complaint by achieving the outcome he seeks.

1. We have carefully considered Mr M’s complaint about a medical practice in the Hertfordshire area (the Practice). We appreciate how the impact on his health has affected him. We consider Mr M could take legal action on the matter that he has brought to us. We have decided not to consider his complaint further.