24. We first looked at what responsibilities the Trust has in keeping its patient’s possessions safe.
25. The Trust’s policy says:
• ‘the Trust will not accept responsibility or liability for personal property brought onto the Trust’s premises unless it is handed in for safe custody and an official receipt is obtained’ • ‘consideration must be given to items of sentimental value which the patient may wish to keep with them, in accordance with involvement of next of kin and must be clearly documented in the patient record’ • ‘a patient’s property form from the Property Book must be completed by staff upon admission and at the point of transfer to another ward area documented property handed in for safe keeping and property chosen to stay with the patient’ • ‘Where a patient is conscious and has capacity, they should be informed that the Trust does not accept responsibility or any liability for cash, valuables or personal property brought onto Trust premises, and a disclaimer should be signed’.
26. On 19 July 2021 when Mrs I visited the ED the Trust recorded her personal belongings on a patient property disclaimer form. This said, ‘No cash. No mobile. Pt had a white wristwatch on left arm…necklace with a white wedding band, white necklace with two pendant, yellow dressing ring with black eye’. The form also records Mrs I wore two hearing aids.
27. The form says, ‘I wish to keep my property/valuables with me during my stay in hospital and have declined the opportunity to put them in place of safe keeping. I acknowledge that in doing so, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust does not accept responsibility for any loss or damage to my property during my stay’.
28. Mrs I signed this disclaimer. This shows the Trust followed its policy to ask patients to sign a disclaimer and that it is not responsible for personal belongings.
29. Another form was completed on 20 July 2021 when Mrs I was admitted to a ward. The form says, ‘Property kept with patient’ and the items of property listed are glasses, hearing aids, two chains, one yellow ring on a chain, clothes, footwear, a black pill case and medication.
30. The disclaimer on the form says, ‘the Trust will not accept responsibility or liability for personal property brought onto the Trust’s premises unless it is handed in for safe custody and an official receipt is obtained’. Both the nurse and Mrs I signed and dated the form.
31. Mr I explained the jewellery Mrs I always wore was not listed in full on the Trust’s property forms.
32. We can see the Trust said in its response to Mr I’s complaint, ‘staff on [ward 1] have advised that your mother’s property as on this form was handed over to [ward 2] at the time of her transfer on 21 July. This was, two necklaces, one additional chain with yellow ring attached, hearing aids, spectacles, black pill case, medications, and clothing’.
33. The clinical ward manager on ward 2 said they could not find a property list for Mrs I’s admission or discharge from the ward.
34. The Trust said the healthcare assistant who was looking after Mrs I remembered a white envelope which she put on Mrs I’s table, and in it were two chains and one ring on another chain. She remembers this was a ‘second wedding ring’ on a chain.
35. The Trust explained the jewellery was not handed to the nurses on ward 2 for safe keeping. The Trust says, ‘the jewellery would have been placed in the envelope on a previous ward as she arrived with the envelope. Patient informed nurses about the jewellery but no request was made for it to be kept in the ward safe’.
36. There is no record of the wedding ring that went missing in Mrs I’s bedclothes on the property forms.
37. After reviewing the evidence, it seems Mrs I was wearing the wedding ring during her first admission to hospital (as the healthcare assistant remembers Mrs I explaining to them why she had a second wedding ring on a chain). This suggests she had another ring which was not on a chain (despite this not being listed on the property form).
38. From considering Mr I’s account, we can also see Mrs I still had the wedding ring when she was readmitted to the Trust (as she told him on 26 October that she had lost the ring).
39. This suggests the property was not handed in for safe keeping. However, it also suggests the Trust did not correctly record Mrs I’s jewellery in the list of personal items when she first went to the Trust. The Trust did not follow its policy to record Mrs I’s personal items.
40. We have found no evidence to suggest Mrs I handed her jewellery in for safe keeping at any point. On balance, it seems Mrs I chose to keep her jewellery in her possession, as she signed disclaimers during her first and second admission and told Mr I that she had lost her ring as it fell off her finger.
41. We also cannot say whether the jewellery went missing in the care home shortly after Mrs I’s discharge from her first admission to hospital. We are unable to investigate this, as this is not in our remit.
42. We can see that the Trust did not follow its policy, as it did not complete any more property forms when Mrs I moved wards or when she was readmitted.
43. We cannot say for certain that if the forms had been completed, the jewellery would not have been lost. We understand how this affects Mr I as he will also never know for certain what would have happened.
44. We have looked at what the Trust has done to put things right.
45. Our ‘Principles of Good Complaint Handling’ say where an organisation has failed to get it right and this has led to injustice or hardship, it should take steps to put things right. It explains there are different ways to put things right like an apology, explanation and taking responsibility, offering solutions, and financial compensation.
46. We do not consider the Trust should pay Mr I for the full value of the jewellery. This is because we have looked at the evidence and it seems the jewellery was not given to the Trust for safe keeping. This means we cannot say the Trust is responsible for the lost jewellery.
47. The Trust accepted it could have handled Mrs I’s property better and it apologised for this. It offered to pay £1,000.
48. We consider this to be a fair offer for the way Mr I has been affected by what happened. We appreciate how difficult and distressing this must be for Mr I and his family and we are sorry to hear the missing items could not be found.