NHS in England Closed After Initial Enquiries Search on PHSO website

University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust

P-002417 · Statement · Decision date: 31 January 2024 · View University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust scorecard
Diagnosis Transfer, discharge and aftercare Treatment Tests Complaint record keeping failures
Complaint (AI summary)
Mrs O complained the urology department withheld information about her enlarged kidney/kinked ureter, failed to treat these issues, and allegedly refused future treatment due to her complaint.
Outcome (AI summary)
Complaint closed. The Trust acted correctly by not informing or treating Mrs O for the issues, and did not refuse treatment. The final response letter was delayed.

Full decision details

The Complaint

2. Mrs O complains about the urology department’s care. She says:

• it did not tell her about her enlarged left kidney and kinked bladder pipe (ureter) until she saw a CT scan image in July 2021 • it did not treat her for these problems • it says she cannot be treated because she made a complaint • the Trust only sent its final response letter after we asked it to.

3. Mrs O says not being treated for the enlarged left kidney and kinked ureter is the reason for her urinary problems (needing to urinate often). She says she is also concerned about her future care because the Trust will not treat her.

4. Mrs O says she has spent a lot of time, effort and money writing complaint letters, making phone calls and sending documents in the post. This has caused her anxiety and stress and had a negative effect on her physical and mental health.

5. Mrs O wants the Trust to apologise for not telling her about her enlarged left kidney and kinked ureter. She also wants a financial payment.

Background

6. In July 2021 when Mrs O went to hospital for an appointment she was in her late sixties. A junior doctor asked her if they could help. They showed Mrs O a CT scan image of her kidneys. The CT scan was of a renal cyst (collection of fluid in or around the kidney). Mrs O says she saw her left kidney was larger than her right kidney and the ureter from the left kidney to the bladder was kinked and twisted.

Findings

The Trust did not tell Mrs O about the CT scan image and did not treat her

10. Before we decide if we should do a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found that the Trust did anything wrong.

11. Mrs O says nobody from the urology department told her about her enlarged left kidney and kinked ureter. She says the Trust should have given her an appointment, explained it to her and given her treatment. She says it is the reason for her pain and her urinary problems.

12. The GMC is responsible for regulating and setting professional standards for doctors in the UK. The GMC guidance says a doctor must provide or arrange suitable advice, investigations or treatment where necessary.

13. We asked our adviser about the CT scan image that Mrs O saw. Our adviser agreed with the Trust that it showed Mrs O has an extrarenal pelvis (where the renal pelvis extends outside the kidney). They explained a large amount of the population have this difference in their anatomy and it is not linked with any symptoms. Our adviser said there was no need for the Trust to tell a patient about the extrarenal pelvis because it is not a concern that needs to be treated.

14. We understand how upset Mrs O is with how she found out about this. When we weigh up the evidence, it seems there was no reason for the Trust’s urologists to tell Mrs O about the issue and it did not need to give treatment in line with the GMC guidance. The finding on the scan does not cause symptoms, so we cannot say it is the cause of her pain or urinary issues. We do understand why she thought there could be a link. We do not see anything wrong in the Trust’s actions.

The Trust refused to treat Mrs O in the future because of the complaint

15. The NHS Complaint Standards say organisations should make sure a patient’s care is not compromised if they make a complaint. So it would be wrong if the Trust had said it would not treat Mrs O in future because she had complained.

16. We can see that Mrs O did not go for a flexible cystoscopy (an examination to look inside the bladder) on two occasions, so the urology department discharged her back to her GP. Discharging a patient from a service is not the same as ending a professional relationship with a patient and refusing to see them again.

17. The Trust says it will treat Mrs O in the future. There is nothing stopping Mrs O’s GP from referring her to the Trust again. We hope this reassures Mrs O that making a complaint has not affected her ability to be treated by the Trust.

18. The Trust did not refuse to treat Mrs O in the future because she made a complaint. It discharged her back to her GP for a different reason. The Trust did not act outside the NHS Complaint Standards. We can see it did not do anything wrong.

The Trust only sent the second full response after we asked for it

19. After the Trust replied to her original complaint, she handed in another complaint letter on 14 September 2021. and The Trust acknowledged receipt the next day. It noted the details of the complaint on 14 October 2021. We asked the Trust for the status of the complaint on 21 April 2022 and it was waiting to sign off the response letter. The Trust sent the final response letter on 28 April 2022.

20. Our NHS Complaints Standards says organisations should resolve complaints at the earliest opportunity and keep complainants updated. The Trust did not keep Mrs O updated during this time. There is no indication of why it took over six months to respond to her second complaint that was a follow up. The Trust could have communicated better. We appreciate having to wait and ask us to chase the Trust for a response must have been frustrating for Mrs O. We thought about whether we should look into this further.

21. Mrs O wants a financial payment. We do not think the Trust’s delay in sending the final response merits a payment because the impact of waiting was relatively minor and her main concerns are about what the scan showed. We have decided not to look at this part of the complaint further.

22. Mrs O has had a difficult experience and we understand why she was worried. We hope our decision and knowing she can return to the Trust if she needs treatment in the future reassures her.

Our Decision

1. We have carefully considered Mrs O’s complaint about University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust (the Trust). We appreciate how strongly Mrs O feels about the concerns she brought to us. We think the Trust acted correctly by not telling Mrs O about the CT scan image and not offering her treatment. We do not think the Trust are refusing to treat Mrs O. We accept the Trust could have issued its final response letter earlier. We do not think that investigating the complaint further will help us to achieve anything more.

Other Decisions About University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust

P-005121 · 26 Mar 2026
Ms A complains about the care and treatment the Trust's gastroenterology team provided to her daughter over three admissions in …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004838 · 13 Feb 2026
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004789 · 9 Feb 2026
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004710 · 28 Jan 2026
Mrs B complains about the care and treatment her husband received from University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust in …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004616 · 14 Jan 2026
Mrs G complained the Trust should not have discharged her husband, Mr G as he was experiencing breathlessness and had …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
View all decisions for this organisation →