University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust

3. Mr P complains the Trust discharged his wife too soon after she had been admitted to hospital following a sudden collapse. Mrs P went back to hospital after complaining of headaches and the hospital discovered she had a bleed on the brain. Following an operation, Mrs P suffered a stroke and now lives with life-changing injuries.

4. Mrs P is no longer able to use the left side of her body and needs support with daily living. She is unable to hold conversations, she needs to use a wheelchair and is reliant on Mr P to meet her needs. Mrs P can no longer do activities she previously enjoyed such as hockey, tennis and swimming, and she is unable to return to her management position in education. Mrs P’s condition has not improved and she continues to have seizures.

5. Mr P asks for the Trust to accept the care they gave Mrs P fell below expected standards. Mr P also asks for service improvements to make sure there is not ‘another Mrs P’ in the future.

6. Mrs P collapsed suddenly at home in January 2021. An ambulance took her to hospital. Mr P told the paramedics about the history of cerebral haemorrhage (bleeding in the brain) and stroke in Mrs P’s family.

7. The Trust discharged Mrs P from hospital the following day. When Mr P and Mrs P returned home, Mrs P complained of a headache and went to bed. Mrs P took paracetamol and the potassium medication (commonly used for treating high blood pressure and preventing stroke) the Trust had prescribed.

8. Mr P asked the Trust for Mrs P’s discharge notes as his wife was still complaining about having a headache when she woke up. Mr P says the Trust told him they were not sure what had caused Mrs P to collapse but she may have fainted.

9. Mrs P continued to have a headache. Mr P called 111 (an NHS phone line which provides medical advice in an emergency) and a clinician arranged an urgent appointment. Mr P drove Mrs P back to the Trust.

10. Mrs P had a scan which showed a bleed on the brain. The Trust did a medical procedure on Mrs P and told Mr P she had some weakness on her left side. The Trust later told Mr P there had been complications during the procedure and Mrs P would need to stay in hospital for a few weeks.

11. While Mrs P was in hospital, Mr P says there were times when the phone was not answered and he was unable to contact staff. He says a call log shows he phoned the Trust 60 times in one day and not one call was answered. Mr and Mrs P shared some video calls, including a very distressing call during which Mrs P asked if she would ever go home.

12. Mr P says the Trust only told him the full extent of Mrs P’s condition nearly a week after her initial visit to hospital.

15. The HSCA says we cannot investigate a complaint if 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 P 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.

16. Mr P believes Mrs P’s current condition is due to failings by the Trust, which have clearly had an impact on them both. Given the concerns he has raised it appears there may be an alternative legal option available to him. We have considered whether it would be reasonable for Mr P to pursue this.

17. Mr P says he has not considered a compensation amount for his complaint and he is asking the Trust to recognise ‘mistakes were made with Mrs P’s treatment’. He is also asking for service improvements to stop a similar situation happening.

18. Mr P expresses concerns about Mrs P’s long-term care. Mr P gave us a copy of Mrs P’s continuing healthcare (a package of care for adults aged 18 or over which is arranged and funded solely by the NHS) assessment with his complaint form. This assessment did not give Mrs P funding to help with her care. Mr P provides a significant amount of Mrs P’s care himself but he does need to pay for some aspects of her support. Mr P tells us this is covered by their savings. Mr P also tells us he is worried about Mrs P’s long-term care and how this will be funded.

19. Although Mr P says he has not considered financial compensation and it is not the main outcome he is looking for, it is also clear these events are having a financial impact. This may be addressed through legal action. We think it is possible the outcomes Mr P is seeking - the apology and service improvements - could be achieved through legal action, even if indirectly.

20. Mr P will need to seek legal advice on his complaint to determine if he can pursue a clinical negligence claim (when a patient takes their medical practitioner and/or hospital to court for compensation due to an act of negligence during their medical care) to support Mrs P long term.

21. Mr P says a relative’s neighbour works in clinical negligence claims and previously offered to look at his complaint. Mr P also mentions no win no fee solicitors. Mr P says he did not involve solicitors sooner as he made a complaint to the Trust and then escalated his complaint to us.

22. We have considered Mr P’s circumstances and whether they would affect his ability to take legal action. It seems looking after Mrs P is a full-time job for Mr P, but we do not think this in itself would mean exploring legal action is not reasonable. It seems he could pursue the legal process in the same way he has been able to follow the complaints process.

23. During our conversations with Mr P, he has not made us aware of any reasons why he could not take legal action. It appears there may be a legal option for Mr P and there are no barriers to him pursuing this. So, we are unable to consider Mr P’s complaint further at this time. If Mr P is unable to resolve his concerns through legal action, he can ask us to consider his complaint again.

24. We would like to make Mr P aware there are time limits in bringing a complaint to us. The law says someone should make their complaint to us within a year of becoming aware of the need to complain, unless there is a good reason why they are unable to do so. Mr P has explained the delays in making his complaint, but he should contact us again as soon as possible if he would like us to consider it again.

1. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has carefully considered Mr P’s complaint about University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We are sorry to learn of his wife Mrs P’s life-changing injuries and how this has affected her ability to lead a full and independent life. We are also sorry to learn how this has affected Mr P.

2. We consider Mr P could take legal action on the matter he has brought to us. So, we have decided not to take further action on his complaint at this time.