11. The law says a person needs to make their complaint to us within a year of becoming aware of the problem. We cannot investigate complaints brought to us after one year, unless we consider there is a good reason to do so. We have discussed this with Mrs U to understand the reasons why Mr and Mrs U could not complain to us in time. We have also considered the time the organisation has taken to respond to Mr U.
12. Mr U first had reason to complain to the CMHT on 2 January 2020, when it wrote to advise him of its decision to discharge him. This means Mr U needed to complain to us before 2 January 2021 for his complaint to be in time. Mrs U complained to us on 26 August 2021. This means the complaint is seven months outside our time limit.
13. Because the complaint is outside of our 12 month time limit, we have gone on to consider if there are significant enough reasons to enable us to put the time limit to one side. We asked Mrs U to explain the reasons for any delays in her and Mr U actively pursuing the complaint. This is to see if there were any missed opportunities in them bringing the complaint to us sooner.
14. The CMHT wrote to Mr U on 2 January 2020 to explain why he no longer met the criteria for the service.
15. Mr U complained to the CMHT on 4 January 2020 about this decision. There is evidence of Mr U being concerned about the potential serious impact of this decision as in March 2020 he sought legal advice from a solicitor. He also contacted the Trust’s Patient Advisory Liaison Service (PALS) and his local MP. Mrs U also expressed concern to the CMHT about her ability to cope as Mr U’s primary caregiver without their support.
16. The Trust sent a final response to Mrs U on 30 September 2020. The response included information about complaining to us. It specifically included 'it is important that you make the complaint as soon as you receive our final response as there are time limits for the Ombudsman to look into complaints’. It also provided a link to our website.
17. We see no periods of delay between 2 January 2020 and 30 September 2020.
18. Mrs U contacted us on Mr U’s behalf on 23 November 2020. She says we advised her they had 12 months from the Trust’s final response to complain, which is incorrect information. We sent a complaint form which contained the correct information that ‘the law says that you should complain to us within a year of becoming aware of the problem. Sometimes, depending on the circumstances, we will extend this time limit.’ The form says to phone us if there are questions about this.
19. Mrs U did not return the complaint form until 26 August 2021. Although Mrs U says an Intake Caseworker advised she had 12 months from the Trust’s final response to complain, this does not explain why she waited approximately seven months to bring the complaint to us.
20. Mrs U explained a solicitor was advising Mr U between March 2020 and November 2021. Mr U did not give the solicitor authority to obtain his medical records until 21 September 2020. This did not delay the complaints process however may have delayed the solicitor’s advice to him. In October 2020 Mr U complained to the legal firm about the lack of progress in his case.
21. There is no evidence to explain why Mr U did not complain to us in October 2020. The Trust had sent its final response and Mr U was dissatisfied with his solicitor’s progress in his case.
22. Mrs U explained the solicitor was advising them until November 2021. We have noted she did contact us, despite the solicitor’s involvement, and submitted the complaint prior to the solicitor and law firm ending their support. As a result, there is no strong evidence that Mrs U considered the solicitor’s involvement to be a barrier to contacting us for advice and submitting the complaint.
23. Mrs U advised Mr U’s care was reinstated by the CMHT and his records indicate this happened on 16 April 2021. They did not complain at that time.
24. We have not seen reasons for Mr and Mrs U waiting until 26 August 2021 to return the complaint form.
25. It is difficult to justify putting the time limit to one side if the complainant could have come to us sooner. We have seen that the matter is extremely important to Mr and Mrs U and appreciate the time spent pursuing the complaint. Sadly, for the reasons stated above, in considering the time that has passed, we have decided we cannot look at the complaint further.