IUD implantation and uterine infection 17. 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 Ms E to understand her circumstances and the outcomes she wants. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look into.
18. Ms E complains in August 2015, during a loop excision procedure to remove cancerous cells in her vagina, a doctor at the Trust told her the tails of her IUD were in the way so he tucked them up into her womb. Ms E is complaining the doctor who treated her in 2015 was negligent when he pushed the tails of her IUD up above her cervix.
19. Ms E told us she believes the doctor should have removed the IUD. She told us she had never had the IUD removed. Ms E says because the tails of the IUD were tucked inside her womb, the IUD moved and implanted in the wall of her womb. She says this caused an infection in October 2021. This led to her having an operation that left her facing early menopause and unable to naturally conceive children.
20. Ms E is looking for a large amount of financial compensation. We consider it likely there is an alternative legal route for this complaint as a potential claim of clinical negligence.
21. While the action by the doctor which Ms E says was negligent occurred in 2015, she was not aware of the impact this would have until she developed a serious infection that needed surgery in October 2021.
22. The events Ms E complained about have had a significant impact on her and she said she would like a large sum of money in compensation. We have told Ms E we can achieve financial outcomes but the levels of financial compensation we achieve are generally a lot lower than the ones achieved via the courts.
23. If Ms E pursues a clinical negligence claim, she may also be able to get compensation. As compensation is the only outcome she wants and we think a clinical negligence course of action is available to her, the Law says she needs to take this route first.
24. Ms E told us she has been to see a solicitor but they did not agree to act for her. Ms E said she did not want to take the legal route as the solicitor firm she first approached was not interested. We understand Ms E’s hesitance due to having had her case rejected by one law firm in the past, but we consider there are other law firms Ms E could approach.
25. Ms E did not tell us there were any other barriers or difficulties she would face in pursuing a legal claim.
26. When we consider if a legal route is available, we do not consider whether a case would be likely to succeed, but rather whether a legal course of action exists for the complaint. It is possible there is still a legal course of action even where the chances of success are low. Where a legal course of action exists, the complaint is properly within the remit of the courts, and we should not act on the complaint unless we think it is unreasonable for the person to take this route.
27. Even though Ms E has said she does not want to take a legal route, we still consider she has a course of action and the legal route is still open to her.
28. Ms E had surgery because of the claimed failings, which left her facing early menopause and unable to have children naturally. We are sorry to hear about the significant impact Ms E has experienced due to these events. We consider Ms E’s legal claim would likely get compensation that would more than cover the costs of bringing such a claim.
29. Having taken all the circumstances into account, we consider it is reasonable for Ms E to take a legal route to her complaint. Ms E has not asked for any outcome other than a financial one, and she may get the level of compensation she wants through legal action.
30. If Ms E explores the legal route further and cannot pursue a claim, she could bring her complaint back to us. If Ms E wanted to bring her complaint back to us, she should do so quickly, within 12 months of the date of the event complained about, due to our time limit.
Complaint response
31. Ms E told us she formally complained to the Trust on 17 November 2021 about the procedure which took place in 2015. She bought her complaint to us on 4 February 2022 and told us the Trust had not answered her complaint.
32. On 6 October 2022 the Trust told us it would not investigate Ms E’s complaint. It said the issues related to clinical treatment which took place several years ago and, due to the time that had gone by since then, it could not investigate. It says its complaint regulations say it may only investigate complaints made within 12 months of the event.
33. The Trust told us it had written to Ms E to explain this decision.
34. Ms E told us in December 2022 she had not received a letter from the Trust telling her it would not investigate her complaint.
35. We contacted the Trust to ask if it could provide a copy of the letter that we could share with Ms E. The Trust sent us a copy of the letter dated 29 June 2022.
36. We shared a copy of this response with Ms E. She told us she felt the Trust’s complaint response was unsatisfactory and the Trust should provide a full response addressing her complaint.
37. We consider Ms E knew something was wrong on 1 November 2021, after she had treatment in hospital and was told the IUD was the cause of her infection. We consider Ms E did not have reason to complain sooner as she only knew about the impact of the events which took place in August 2015 on 1 November 2021.
38. While we appreciate the loop excision procedure took place in 2015, we consider Ms E could not have reasonably been expected to know something was wrong before 1 November 2021.
39. The Law says a complaint must be made to a Trust not later than 12 months after the date when the events happened; or, if later, the date when the events came to the notice of the complainant.
40. We can see Ms E made a complaint within 12 months of being aware there was a problem. We consider she raised an official complaint 17 days after she became aware there was a problem.
41. The Law also says after making a complaint it should be acknowledged and properly looked into.
42. In line with the NHS Complaints Guidance, we asked the Trust to give Ms E a full response to her complaint and the Trust sent a letter to Ms E on 3 March 2023 doing this.
43. We have read the letter and can see the Trust says it has reviewed Ms E’s medical file. We consider it has provided a meaningful and informative response which included relevant guidelines.
44. We spoke to Ms E about the response. She is still unhappy with the way the Trust handled her complaint in the beginning and feels she should have had a response from the Trust without having to bring her complaint to us. However, she said she is happy her complaint has now been answered by the Trust and there is nothing else left for us to do.
45. We appreciate Ms E’s frustration and disappointment when she did not receive a response to her complaint. We understand Ms E felt this meant the Trust had ignored her and her complaint did not matter. We appreciate it was important for Ms E to feel the Trust had listened to her as she had experienced a life-changing operation. We are pleased the Trust has now provided a response which Ms E feels resolves her complaint.
46. The Trust has now provided a response to Ms E which she feels answers her complaint. We consider Ms E’s complaint is resolved and there is no further action for us to take. We will not investigate the complaint further.
47. We thank Ms E for bringing her complaint to us.