Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

3. Mr A says the Trust failed to diagnose a hernia between 2019 and 2022. He complains the Trust:

• incorrectly diagnosed arthritis, despite its own orthopaedic consultant disagreeing with the diagnosis • failed to send radiological images to his GP, which would have helped the misdiagnosis to be spotted • failed to do a full complaint investigation.

4. Mr A says he has experienced increased and ongoing pain and anxiety. He also says his anxiety has negatively affected his daily life, including his choice of job and hobbies.

5. Mr A says the misdiagnosis meant he could not have the hernia repaired using the simplest type of surgery.

6. Mr A has been left frustrated by the Trust’s handling of his complaint.

7. Mr A wants the Trust to acknowledge and apologise for its complaint handling. He would like service improvements to make sure no other patients go through a similar experience. He also wants financial compensation for the length of time he was in pain, the unacceptable complaint response and the impact on his treatment options.

8. After experiencing abdominal pain, Mr A went to his GP in January 2012 for this to be investigated. The investigation found and treated prostate cancer.

9. Mr A says he continued to complain of pain to the left abdomen/left testicular region. He was referred for ultrasound at another Trust but nothing was diagnosed.

10. Mr A says the pain continued. After an MRI scan in 2012, an ultrasound in 2013, a CT scan in 2017 and X-rays in 2019, he was told there was nothing to see except arthritis in the hips.

12. 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.

13. Mr A could potentially achieve the financial compensation he wants by making a clinical negligence claim. Mr A says he feels £3,000 to £9,500 is a reasonable amount.

14. We checked if there are any barriers that may prevent Mr A from taking legal action. Mr A told us he has not taken legal advice because he thought coming to us first was the right thing to do. He has not told us about any challenges he may have in taking legal action.

15. Mr A also wants the Trust to accept it got things wrong, apologise and make service improvements. His primary outcome of financial compensation could be achieved by legal action. It is possible that explanations, apologies and service improvements may be achieved as secondary outcomes of any legal action. We consider it is reasonable for Mr A to explore legal action because he is looking for a large amount of compensation and a court is better suited to consider this.

16. While we appreciate Mr A has approached us to consider his complaint first, the law is clear that we cannot investigate if there is a legal route that is reasonable for the complainant to take. As Mr A has not yet made any enquiries with a solicitor, it reasonable that he should explore legal action now. The time limits for taking legal action are strict (three years from when you become aware of a problem) so that window of opportunity is limited. If he does not explore this now, he may lose the opportunity.

17. Mr A can return to us for any issues that the court could not consider once this route has been fully explored. If he comes back to us, we would need to consider our time limit set for us by law. Mr A should approach us as soon as possible should legal action not address all of his complaint.

1. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has carefully considered Mr A’s complaint about Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We have decided not to look at the complaint further because Mr A could take legal action to resolve it

2. We understand Mr A experienced pain and distress and we are sorry to hear this.