NHS in England Closed After Initial Enquiries Search on PHSO website

East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust

P-002005 · Statement · Decision date: 21 May 2023 · View East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust scorecard
Complaint (AI summary)
Mrs A complained about inadequate oncology and neurology care for Mr A, including incorrectly reported scans, a missed brain tumour diagnosis opportunity, and failure to provide pain relief.
Outcome (AI summary)
The ombudsman decided not to take further action. It concluded that Mrs A had a potential legal avenue available to resolve her complaint regarding her husband's care.

Full decision details

The Complaint

3. Mrs A complains about the Trust’s oncology and neurology care and treatment of Mr A from August 2021 to 4 July 2022.

4. She complains the Trust: • outsourced the MRI and CT scans to a third party who reported the results incorrectly • missed an opportunity to diagnose Mr A’s brain tumour and give him palliative treatment sooner • did not give Mr A pain relief.

5. Mrs A says Mr A was let down by the Trust. She says he was left in severe pain and if he had been diagnosed sooner, he would have had more treatment options.

6. Mrs A wants financial compensation.

Background

7. Mr A had cancer before and was in remission in March 2021.

8. In August 2021, at a routine check-up he told the Trust he was getting bad headaches and absent seizures. At this stage the Trust’s consultant saw him every six weeks.

9. On 7 November 2021, the Trust outsourced an MRI scan to a third party.

10. On 6 March 2022, Mr A saw the Trust’s neurology consultant. He told the consultant about his headaches, double vision, and loss of hearing on his right-hand side.

11. The Trust outsourced two scans (an MRI scan and a CT scan) to a third-party radiology company in March and June 2022.

12. On 4 July 2022, the Trust diagnosed Mr A with a cancerous brain tumour. It told him it was terminal and he had 12 months to live. It said the tumour could not be operated on.

13. Mr A sadly died in December 2022.

14. The third-party radiology company explained the second MRI and CT scan did show a tumour and the radiologist missed this due to human error.

Findings

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 Mrs A 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. In this case, Mrs A is saying the Trust outsourced MRI and CT scans to a third-party radiology company who incorrectly reported the results. She says the Trust missed an opportunity to diagnose Mr A’s brain tumour sooner and to give him palliative treatment and pain relief.

19. The main outcome Mrs A is seeking is financial compensation. We discussed this with her and understand that no amount will bring her husband back. Mrs A was unsure about the amount she wanted but said around £20,000. We discussed that if we investigated and found failings, we would be likely to recommend far below this amount.

20. Mrs A could potentially get financial compensation by making a clinical negligence claim. The time limits for doing this are strict. We believe it is important for Mrs A to explore this option while she is in time to. Also, a court can often award more compensation than we can.

21. We considered whether it is reasonable for Mrs A to take legal action. We discussed with Mrs A whether there are any barriers that would stop her from getting legal representation. Mrs A explained her main income is her pension which she supplements with benefits. She is worried about the costs involved with legal action and says she would not be able to pay upfront costs.

22. We asked Mrs A to explore her legal options. We suggested she contact the Law Society and Action Against Medical Accidents (AVMA) for help. Mrs A agreed to speak to solicitors and explore whether any will take the case with no upfront fee.

23. Because of this, we consider it reasonable for her to explore legal action fully now.

24. Mrs A can return to us with any outcomes not achieved through the court after the process is finished. We will then need to carefully consider the outcome of any legal action and the time which has passed (as there is a time limit for bringing a complaint to us).

Our Decision

1. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has carefully considered Mrs A’s complaint on behalf of her husband, Mr A, about the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We appreciate Mrs A taking the time to approach us with her concerns. We are sorry to hear the circumstances of Mr A’s death and of the severe pain he experienced.

2. We have decided Mrs A may be able to take legal action to resolve her complaint. We have explained below how we have come to this decision.

Other Decisions About East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust

P-005101 · 25 Mar 2026
Miss M complains about the care and treatment her father received at East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust during his inpatient …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-005048 · 18 Mar 2026
Mr J complains about the care he received from the Trust in 2024. He says the Trust mishandled his urgent …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-005050 · 18 Mar 2026
Mr A raises concerns about the Trust’s decision not to offer him implants.
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004249 · 12 Nov 2025
Mrs A complains the Trust failed to manage her headache symptoms correctly between October 2023 and April 2024.
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004440 · 31 Oct 2025
Mr E complains about the treatment of a hand injury at the Trust and its complaint handling.
Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation →