Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust

3. Ms E complains the Trust:

• shared false and misleading information about concerns of possible Fabricated and Induced Illness (FII) with social services, triggering a strategy meeting in August 2020 • did not communicate with her fully about the outcome of the meeting • has not removed the false information from the records.

4. Ms E says she has been left with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and is devastated by the accusations against her. She says the Trust’s actions left her with stress, trauma, suicidal thoughts, increased anxiety and panic attacks. She says her records are still inaccurate and this leaves her feeling psychologically tormented. She also says her daughter’s medication was stopped because of what happened, which affected a family holiday and her daughter tried to take her own life. Ms E says she had to hand in her notice at work.

5. Ms E would like a full independent investigation and answers. She would like the false information to be removed and would also like service improvements.

6. In August 2020, NHS staff and social services held a strategy meeting about Ms E and her children. The Trust told Ms E about the meeting in September, but gave no specific details of what it was about.

7. Ms E requested copies of the meeting notes to understand the purpose of the meeting and she was told to submit a Subject Access Request (SAR), which she did. She was later told the request was denied on grounds of data protection.

8. Ms E went to a meeting with the Trust in October where it explained the FII guidelines say the Trust can share the family’s confidential information with third parties without their consent. Ms E asked what would happen next, but no plan was put forward. The Trust said it would send her a transcript of the meeting. Ms E chased this up later that month and again in December.

9. Ms E raised a formal complaint with the Trust on 3 February 2021. She received a first response in May, a further response on 10 and 25 June, and a final response on 24 September 2021. Ms E brought her complaint to us on 24 March 2022.

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.

12. We have seen Ms E knew she was unhappy with the Trust in September 2020, when it told her about the meeting it held the month before.

13. To be within our 12-month time limit, Ms E needed to bring her complaint to us by September 2021. Ms E complained to us in March 2022, making her complaint six months outside of our time limit. We looked at the reasons why Ms E did not complain to the Trust and us sooner.

14. Ms E did not raise her complaint with the Trust until 3 February 2021, five months after knowing she had reason to complain. Ms E explained she was chasing up the Trust for answers and evidence. We think Ms E could have used this time to start the complaints process sooner. Had there not been this delay and if Ms E brought her complaint to us after getting the 25 June 2021 complaint response, her complaint would be in time.

15. Ms E’s letter to the Trust on 20 August 2021 raised many questions, adding to her original complaint. She expressed her unhappiness at how the Trust had answered her questions vaguely. Had she submitted her complaint to us on this date instead of seeking further answers from the Trust, the complaint would have been in time, and she could have pursued her complaint with us to get answers.

16. After getting the Trust’s final response in September 2021, Ms E waited another six months before bringing her complaint to us.

17. Ms E’s reasons for the delay are that all of her children have significant health issues. In particular, Ms E told us one of her children has autism as well as other mental and physical health issues, was sectioned in October 2021, and continues to be unwell.

18. Ms E explained that her caring responsibilities have been very demanding physically, emotionally and mentally, and took over her pursuing her complaint.

19. We understand the situation must have been very hard for Ms E, and we can understand why she was concentrating on her children and their ongoing care needs. These factors unfortunately mean her complaint came to us significantly outside of our time limit. Ms E could have explored some help and support during this time, such as asking a friend, family member or advocate to help her make her complaint. This may have meant her complaint was made to us sooner. l

20. Having carefully considered Ms E’s reasons for delay and how long it took the Trust to complete its complaint handling, we have not seen good reason to put the time limit to one side. This is because, from what we have seen Ms E was able to pursue her concerns throughout this time, but she chose not to make a formal complaint until five months after having reason to complain. She then brought her complaint to us six months after getting the Trust’s final response.

21. It is important we consider and act within the law and we regret any further upset this decision may cause. We hope this statement clearly explains the reasons why we will not be considering the complaint further.

1. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has carefully considered Ms E’s complaint about Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust (the Trust). We are sorry to hear about what happened and can see she has been through a difficult and distressing time.

2. Unfortunately, Ms E’s complaint falls outside of our 12-month time limit. We looked at the reasons for delay to see if we can put the time limit to one side. We have not seen strong reasons to put our time limit to one side. We are sorry for any further distress this decision may cause and hope our explanation below shows our full consideration.