East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust

3. Mrs E complains James Paget University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust failed to diagnose her husband, Mr E with a stroke while under its care in August and September 2023.

4. Mrs E says the delay in diagnosis has impacted her husband’s recovery from the stroke. She says he has lost his independence as he cannot work, and he relies on his family for support with daily tasks which has impacted his mental health. She says the impact on the family has been devastating both emotionally and financially. She wants an acknowledgement of failings, an apology and financial compensation.

5. Mr E attended the emergency department (ED) at the Trust on the 28 August 2023 with a headache and numb arm and following a CT scan was diagnosed with a migraine and discharged. On 13 September, his symptoms worsened, and an ambulance was called. During this ambulance attendance, the crew considered Mr E to be having a mental health crisis and his wife was advised to take him home.

6. On the evening of 13 September, Mr E was still unwell so attended ED where after further investigations, he was diagnosed with a stroke and blocked carotid arteries.

8. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint if there is or was a legal remedy that the aggrieved could pursue or could have pursued unless it is (or was) not reasonable for them to do so.

9. We discussed this with Mrs E to understand her complaint and how the Trust and the Ambulance Trust’s actions have impacted her husband and what outcomes she is hoping to achieve. She explained that she felt both Trusts had missed his stroke and delayed his diagnosis leading to harm to her husband.

10. Mrs E explained they are seeking an acknowledgment of failings, an apology, and a financial remedy to cover the impact the stroke has had on her husband and their immediate family as he is no longer able to work. She has told us he was the main earner for the family and the financial impact of this loss of earnings has been devastating. Following a discussion regarding our severity of injustice scale, Mrs E has confirmed she is seeking a significant amount of financial remedy.

11. Mr E’s complaint is strongly suggesting that some form of negligence has occurred. We can clearly see that she believes the actions of the Trust and the Ambulance Trust resulted in a delay of her husband being diagnosed with a stroke and blocked carotid arteries. She told us she believes this is due to the poor standard of care her husband received. Mrs E confirmed there are no barriers to them seeking legal advice and that she was happy to proceed with legal action.

12. We are therefore satisfied at this time that the Courts are better placed to establish if the Trust and Ambulance Trust were negligent and obtain compensation for the impact on Mr E and his immediate family. This could also achieve the acknowledgement and apology as if the Courts find the Trust and Ambulance Trust was negligent it will naturally reflect on this to learn and improve through its serious incident framework.

13. If Mrs E is not able to pursue legal action, she can bring her complaint back to us and we could consider it as a new complaint. At that point, we would need to carefully consider the outcome of any legal enquiries and the outcomes she was seeking.

14. We also need to consider the time which has elapsed, as our time limits would still apply. It is therefore important that Mrs E takes legal advice without any avoidable delays.

15. We understand Mrs E’s experience has been difficult for both her and her husband as the delay in Mr E’s diagnosis of a stroke and blocked carotid arteries have impacted him both physically, mentally, and financially. We hope this statement clearly explains our decision not to consider his complaint further at this time.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs E’s complaint about James Paget University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) and East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (the Ambulance Trust). We were sorry to hear about the experience, Mrs E’s husband, had and the challenges he now faces after the diagnosis of his stroke and blocked carotid arteries. We recognise that both Mr and Mrs E have been through a difficult time which has had a devastating impact on the quality of their lives.

2. We consider Mrs E may be able to take legal action on the matter she has brought to us. We have considered the circumstances of her complaint and what she has told us and decided to take no further action for this reason. We are sorry for any additional distress this may cause but we hope our reasoning below explains how we have considered this and why we think this is the best way to achieve the outcomes she wants.