7. We have carefully considered the available information. 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 Mr E to understand the circumstances and the outcomes he wants. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look in to.
8. Mr E says a failing in the duty of care by the Trust neglecting the care for his mental health has caused him psychological damage as his mental health deteriorated to the point of suicidal thoughts. He also experienced associated financial loss and other associated distress. He explains due to the lack of support meant he had to pay for a private therapist, which has now put him in debt. Mr E is looking for a financial remedy, so it appears there is a clinical negligence action open to him. Negligence, in law, is an act or failure to act (omission), that does not meet the level of appropriate care expected, which results in injury or loss. If a doctor or health professional is negligent when giving you medical treatment, this is called 'clinical negligence'.
9. As a legal remedy appears to be open to him we then need to consider whether it is unreasonable for him to pursue the matter in that way. In doing this we have considered the outcomes, including the amount of compensation Mr E wants, and whether we are likely to recommend it in relation to the injustice claimed. We discussed the figure he is hoping to achieve, by sharing our Severity of Injustice scale with him. Mr E confirmed that he is seeking £8000 as compensation for the impact he believes the Trust has caused him.
10. If we were to consider the complaint and was to find failing, we would likely place his case at Level 4 (£1,250-£3,700) of our severity of injustice scale based on what Mr E has described the impact as to us. Our SOI states a case a case at level four will involve the person affected experiencing a significant and/or lasting impact, so much so that to some extent it has affected their ability to live a relatively normal life. As we have indicated Mr E has explained the lack of care provided by the Trust has severely deteriorated his mental health, which has led to suicidal thoughts which seems to reflect that. However, we also need to establish a failing caused the impact, and therefore our financial remedy may be lower than this depending on what we failings we can find and what we can link. We note he is also looking for admission of failings that is also achievable through our process.
11. The law says if there is a legal remedy available it should be pursued, unless it is not reasonable. We therefore carefully considered whether there are any reasons that would make exploring taking legal action not a reasonable option. To do that we considered whether legal action would address what Mr E is trying to achieve. Legal action could allow for a financial remedy. Furthermore, it is more likely to lead to a higher award (covering general and special damages) and whilst admission of failings would not be directly achievable through that process it is a likely side effect of successful legal action. It therefore appears legal action could achieve what he is keen to do.
12. Lastly, we discussed whether there are any barriers in taking legal action. Mr E has confirmed he has not taken any legal action prior to approaching us. However, Mr E expressed concerns about going through the legal process. We appreciate his concerns in this, specifically with further thought to the psychological impact he has described to us a backdrop. However, we explained the process of pursuing legal action is similar to ours. We noted that as solicitors would be acting on his behalf it is likely this would not be too challenging, and interaction is likely to be by telephone and email in the first instance in a similar way to our own. We also noted that a significant amount of claims are settled before reaching court so this also may not have any additional stress associated. Mr E did not advise of any other barriers in exploring the legal avenue.
13. Considering the available information, the availability of a legal remedy, the level of financial remedy that he is looking for, we consider that the ALR should be explored in this case.
14. We appreciate that this is not an easy time for Mr E as he is still experiencing ongoing issues with his mental health. We hope that our decision explains why it is better to explore taking legal action as the best way to achieve the outcomes he wants. If, however, unsuccessful he can return to us, and we can consider the complaint further.