Medway NHS Foundation Trust

3. Mrs H complains about the care and treatment her husband had from the Trust after his admission on 7 August 2021 until his transfer to another hospital on 3 September.

4. She complains she has concerns and unanswered questions about:

• why she was not told Mr H had developed sepsis (when the body’s immune system overreacts to an infection), whether he already had this or if it was caused by a certain procedure • whether the correct procedures were followed after Mr H fell in hospital and was found on the floor • a four-week delay between Mr H being transferred to hospital from the Trust. Mrs H says she was told the referral was sent to the wrong email address, but that the Trust were chasing the hospital regularly. She questions that if the Trust were chasing this referral, the hospital would have told it that it had not been received • Mr H was due to be transferred on 1 September 2021 but was then told there were no beds available. Two ambulance staff arrived at around 9.45pm and woke Mr H up to tell him he was being transferred. It was only after speaking to staff they learned this was not correct. Mrs H questions how and why the ambulance staff were able to enter the ward and begin to move her husband. She complains the nursing staff should have been available to verify who they were and complete the transfer itself • her husband’s weight loss during his time at the Trust. She says he weighed 71.4kg when he was admitted on 7 August and 58.2kg when he was transferred on 3 September. She questions why there was such a drastic loss in weight and how this was allowed to happen • why her husband was not helped out of bed for around four weeks while he was at the Trust. She says after his transfer he was helped out of bed and to walk with assistance almost straight away • why it took over three weeks for her husband to be transferred if he was a high risk case.

5. Mrs H explained this affected them in these ways:

• increased worry as she did not know what was happening and if her husband had been left without help after falling • the lack of treatment made Mr H’s condition get worse and affected his recovery time • loss of trust in understanding when Mr H would be transferred and worry over who was able to gain access to the hospital • Mr H’s health got worse and he lost a lot of weight • Mr H began to feel depressed after not being moved from bed for around four weeks • Mrs H had to act like a full-time carer for her husband and was unable to go out and do things like see her friends.

6. Mrs H wants:

• service improvements so the same thing does not happen to patients in the future • a sincere apology from the Trust to recognise what it got wrong and how this affected them • a financial payment.

7. On 7 August 2021, Mr H was admitted to hospital and was diagnosed with a collapsed lung. His condition quickly got worse and he needed to be seen by A&E. The Trust noted it had concerns because Mr H already had pulmonary fibrosis (a disease of the respiratory system).

8. Mr H spent two nights on the ward.

9. On 9 August, Mr H was transferred to another ward but it was clear he needed specialist help from the other hospital.

10. On 19 August, Mr and Mrs H were told a referral to the other hospital had been made and it would take three to four days.

11. On 27 August, the hospital confirmed it had received the referral.

12. On 1 September, Mrs H complained to the Trust by writing to its chief executive officer.

13. Two days later Mr H was transferred to the hospital. He had become very weak and his mental and physical health had got worse.

14. On 9 September, Mr H was discharged from the hospital.

15. On 9 December, the Trust sent Mrs H a letter to confirm a complaint had been opened and would be investigated.

16. On 14 March 2022, the Trust sent Mrs H its complaint response letter.

17. On 21 April, Mrs H replied and raised more concerns and questions.

18. On 13 September, the Trust sent Mrs H its final response letter.

19. On 19 January 2023, Mrs H brought her complaint to us.

21. 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 H 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 in to.

22. Mrs H wants a financial payment to put right what went wrong. She wants over £10,000 to compensate for the physical pain, emotional stress and worry caused to both Mr H and herself. We do not look at financial payments like a court does and it would seem that legal action, by making a clinical negligence claim, would be the best option for Mrs H to achieve her outcomes.

23. We use a severity of injustice scale to help identify the amount of financial payment we would recommend if we were to uphold a complaint. Our scale allows us to make sure the recommendations we make are consistent, transparent and fair. The scale increases from level one to level six based on the severity of injustice or how seriously someone has been affected by what happened.

24. We do not have standard amounts that we recommend as people are affected differently and have different circumstances. We consider the individual facts of a case when deciding what level of financial payment is appropriate.

25. The level of compensation Mrs H wants would fall into level six on our scale. It seems reasonable for Mrs H to take legal action. We are aware she has not yet contacted any solicitors, but we have discussed this option with her.

26. We are aware Mrs H also wants an apology from the Trust and to see service improvements to make sure the same things do not happen again. While this is not something a court could achieve directly, they can be achieved as by-products of a successful legal claim.

27. Mrs H is still within the three-year time limit to take this case to a solicitor, so we feel this is the best route for her. If she is unable to take legal action, she can come back to and we will decide if we can investigate.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs H’s complaint about Medway NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) on behalf of her husband, Mr H.

2. We are sorry to learn of Mr H’s experience after his admission to the Trust with a collapsed lung. We appreciate the impact this had on Mr H and Mrs H. Our decision to suggest Mrs H explores taking legal action is not made without recognition of the distressing circumstances of the events.