Barts Health NHS Trust

3. Miss W complains about the Trust’s care and treatment of her sister, Miss X who is deaf, when she went for brain surgery in September 2020.

4. Miss W complains:

• there was no care plan • the Trust did not allocate a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter and did not meet Miss X’s communication needs • communication was poor between departments, staff and Miss X and herself • clinical staff failed to properly investigate Miss X’s complaint about a lump on the back of her head causing pressure and pain • the Trust did not meet guidelines of the Equality Act 2020, Disability Act 2005 and Mental Health Act 2007.

5. Miss W says her sister was unable to effectively communicate the pain and symptoms she was experiencing without her being there. She says staff did not make the mental health team know about her sister and she experienced an episode where the team was needed. Miss W explains Miss X has had severe mental distress and sleepless nights since.

6. Miss W says she was told she could not leave the hospital because of COVID-19 restrictions. She says she did not leave for nine days, missing university and work. Miss W says the whole experience was ‘traumatising’ and she has been on anti-depressants and had therapy.

7. They would like the Trust to make service improvements and pay them financial compensation.

8. The Trust diagnosed Miss X with a brain tumour in January 2020. It planned to operate in March 2020 but this was delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Trust did the surgery in September 2020.

9. On 2 September, Miss W and Miss X arrived at the hospital with Miss X’s social worker. They found there was no BSL interpreter booked and Miss W explained the Trust had agreed this in the plan. When Miss W raised concerns and asked about the pre assessment plan, a member of staff told her there was no plan to begin with and they had lost it.

10. At first, staff told Miss W she could stay one night and she communicated all information to and from Miss X for the operation. The social worker was not allowed to come in or visit during the stay. Miss W ended up staying at the hospital for another nine days to interpret. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, she was told if she left the premises she would not be able to return.

11. Miss X was distressed, upset and in pain after surgery and had no movement on the left side of her body. Miss X complained about a lump and pain in the back of her head. The doctors checked and said there was nothing there. When Miss X complained about this again the next day, staff gave her medication for the pain but did not check again.

12. Miss W helped bathe her sister and found a lump, the size of a two-pound coin, on the back of her head. Staff continued to give her painkillers. Miss W continued to raise concerns about her sister’s care and communication needs throughout her stay.

13. Miss X slipped and fell on 9 September, which affected her mood. The next day, staff advised they were planning to discharge Miss X over the weekend. This made her mental health worse as she did not feel ready to go home. After this Miss X refused to take medication and did not respond well to staff. The mental health team went to see Miss X. It was at this time that the team became aware of her needs.

14. The Trust discharged Miss X on 23 September.

17. The law says we should not investigate a complaint if it is brought to us more than a year after the person first became aware of their reason to complain, unless there is a good reason to put the time limit to one side.

18. We have carefully considered this and the explanations Miss W gave for why she did not complain to us sooner. We have also considered the time the Trust took to handle the complaint.

19. Miss W and Miss X were aware of the problem in September 2020. To complain to us in time, they needed to bring us the complaint by September 2021. Miss W referred the complaint to us in June 2022. This means the complaint is out of time by nine months. We have looked at the timeline and discussed this with Miss W to understand her reasons for delay.

20. Miss W said she first emailed a complaint to the Trust on 5 September 2020, while she was staying at the hospital with her sister. She did not get a response. She said on 9 September she spoke to the Trust, who advised her to email again. She said she had already done this and had had enough. We appreciate this was a very frustrating time. She did not do anything else until March 2021 when she made a complaint with the help of an advocate.

21. Miss W complained to the Trust on 25 March 2021. There is a six-month gap between Miss W and Miss X knowing they had reason to complain and then making a formal complaint. Miss W says this delay was due to her mental health, researching into advocacy services and gathering information to help her make the complaint. She says she started feeling better at the beginning of February 2021 and she made contact with an advocate on 8 March.

22. We have carefully considered the background to this complaint. We appreciate why Miss W might have found it difficult to complain after going through a traumatic time with her sister while facing challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, this does mean the complaint has fallen outside of our time limit. The explanation Miss W has given does not give us good enough reason to justify why she could not take things further for six months.

23. There was a long gap when we consider Miss W could have complained to the Trust. We think she could have got support from an advocate sooner.

24. Although Miss W did come to us quickly after getting the first response from the Trust, the complaints process had not been completed and it was too soon for us to begin looking at the complaint.

25. Miss W replied to the Trust with more comments on 8 October 2021.

26. After getting a final response from the Trust on 24 May 2022, Miss W came to us quickly but by this time, her complaint was already nine months outside of our time limit. We have not seen that the time the Trust took to complete the complaints process caused a delay.

27. 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 Miss W and Miss X’s complaint about Barts Health NHS Trust (the Trust). We are sorry to hear about what happened and can see from what Miss W has told us, they have been through a difficult and distressing time.

2. Unfortunately, the complaint falls outside of our 12-month time limit. We have considered the reasons for any delays but have not seen strong reasons to allow us to put our time limit to one side. We are sorry for any further distress this may cause and hope our explanation below shows how we have fully considered this.