A practice in the Derbyshire area

3. Mr O complains the Practice failed to refer him to adult autism and neurodevelopment Service (AANS).

4. He complains the Practice did not correctly scan a request from the community mental health team (CMHT) to refer Mr O to the AANS in February 2020, and this caused a four year delay in the referral.

5. The delay in the referral, and subsequent news that the AANS will no longer see patients in Mr O’s area, severely impacted his mental health. It caused him significant distress and anxiety and when he found out he locked himself in his room convinced he had done something wrong. Mr O has attempted suicide and engaged in self-harm.

6. Mr O is seeking a financial remedy.

7. In January 2020 the community mental health team (CMHT) created a care plan for Mr O. The CMHT sent a copy of this to the Practice asking it to refer Mr O to AANS for specialised therapy and intervention. The family were told the waiting time at that point was approximately three years and nine months.

8. In February 2024 Mr O’s mother contacted the Practice because the AANS had not contacted them to arrange an appointment. The Practice scanned the original request under the wrong heading meaning it never tasked it to a GP for assessment in 2020. After Mr O’s mother raised this with the Practice it referred him to AANS on 15 February 2024.

11. To decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation into a complaint, we look at what outcome the complainant is seeking to resolve their complaint. We then explore if the organisation would be willing to take further steps to put the complaint right and to resolve it for the complainant at an earlier point in our complaint handling process.

Failure to refer to AANS 12. Mr O complains the Practice failed to refer him to AANS, as requested by the CMHT. He says this caused a four year delay to his referral.

13. He says the delayed referral had a significant negative impact on his mental health and caused him distress and anxiety.

14. The Practice says it scanned the request from the CMHT under the wrong heading. This meant it did not task it to a GP for assessment. As such, the GP did not refer Mr O to AANS. The Practice says once it was made aware of this it referred My O to the AANS.

15. AANS sent Mr O a letter on 4 September 2024 informing him that it would no longer provide treatment to people in his area. This news caused Mr O further distress and anxiety.

Outcomes achieved to resolve the complaint 16. During our initial call, we asked Mr O’s mother, who was acting as his representative, to explain the outcomes they sought. She told us they were seeking the treatment Mr O should have had from AANS.

17. We contacted AANS for more information on the service. It told us it is primarily a diagnostic service that offers limited post-diagnostic support. As Mr O already had a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, the referral was likely for further support. It told us it had previously offered autism specialised counselling to residents in Mr O’s area. This could be up to 16 sessions.

18. Our Principles of Remedy says: ‘our underlying principle is to ensure that the public body restores the complainant to the position they would have been in if the maladministration or poor service had not occurred. If that is not possible, the public body should compensate them appropriately.’

19. We contacted Miss Johnson again to discuss the resolution on 31 October 2024. We explained that our proposed resolution was an amount of money that would get Mr O an equivalent to the support he would have received had the Practice not made the mistake. Miss Johnson was happy to proceed with this resolution.

20. We contacted the Practice on 4 November 2024 to discuss the complaint. We asked if they could fulfil the sought outcome and proposed a payment of £500. The Practice asked us to submit this proposal in writing for the consideration of the practice partners. We submitted this to the Practice on 6 November 2024.

21. The Practice asked us if it could pay for ten sessions of private therapy for Mr O directly to the private provider.

22. We contacted Miss Johnson on 21 January 2025 to discuss the Practice’s proposal. She said Mr O accepted this proposal as it put him in a position similar to if the mistake had not happened. We asked if Miss Johnson or Mr O had identified a therapist they wanted to use. Miss Johnson said they would prefer the Practice find a suitable therapist.

23. We informed the Practice Mr O accepted the resolution and asked them to find a suitable therapist on 21 January 2025. The Practice told us it had located a therapist on 3 February 2025. It asked if we could pass this information onto Mr O. We informed the Practice that now it had agreed a resolution, it can arrange this directly with the family.

24. We consider the actions taken by the Practice to be in line with our Principles of Remedy and a reasonable resolution to this complaint.

25. We would like to take this opportunity to thank Mr O for bringing his complaint to us. We are sorry to hear of the distress the delayed referral caused him. We hope the actions the Practice has agreed to take resolve these matters for him.

1. We have carefully considered Mr O’s complaint about the Practice. We are sorry to hear about the distress and anxiety Mr O has experienced. We recognise the impact this complaint has had on him.

2. We have considered the information Mr O and the Practice provided us. After discussing the complaint with the Practice, it has agreed to provide Mr O with the outcome he is seeking.