11. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint where a person has the option to take legal action, unless we consider this is unreasonable in the circumstances.
12. We have discussed this with Mr Q to understand his 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.
13. Mr Q says the clinical care the Trust provided to his father resulted in Mr S’s death. He claims this would have been avoided if the Trust had cared for him appropriately. Mr Q would like a financial outcome to remedy his complaint. He has valued this remedy at £150,000.
14. Mr Q says this amount is to recognise the psychological distress his family has experienced because of Mr S’s death. Mr Q also says the amount is to cover the financial obligations his mother will struggle to meet without Mr S’s support.
15. As Mr Q says the Trust’s actions resulted in the death of his father, it appears he has a potential claim for clinical negligence. This would be well-suited to achieving the remedy he wants to cover future financial obligations. It may also be able to provide financial remedy for the psychological harm Mr Q has told us about.
16. As there is an alternative way Mr Q could potentially resolve his complaint, we have considered whether it is reasonable for him to investigate it further.
17. Mr Q explained his mother is the executor of his father’s will. This means it would not be possible for Mr Q to pursue a claim for damages on his father’s behalf.
18. Mr Q also explained he and his family are exploring legal advice as a parallel avenue. However, they are not in the process of pursuing any proceedings at this stage. He explained this is because he believes we are the most appropriate route to resolve his complaint.
19. He explained he had approached some solicitors as part of attempting to resolve matters but had declined to follow this further as he wants us to investigate first. He feels we will reach an outcome quicker, and avoid the delays and emotional turmoil associated with legal action.
20. We are also conscious Mr Q would like to achieve mixed outcomes from his complaint. Specifically, he would like service improvements, an explanation of what happened and an apology from the Trust. The legal route is not specifically designed to achieve these outcomes in the same way we can.
21. We have considered whether these barriers might make legal action unreasonable.
22. Firstly, it is possible Mr Q’s mother could pursue a claim herself with his support. Alternatively, she could make Mr Q executor of his father’s estate and give him the ability to pursue the claim.
23. The fact Mr Q has approached some solicitors indicates he has the knowledge and ability to pursue his claim.
24. It is possible the legal process might take longer than our own. However, it also has strict time limits on how long after the events someone can pursue a claim. This means it is important he follows the legal route promptly to have the best chance of securing the outcomes he wants. Moreover, there is no indication the legal process would be more emotionally draining than our own.
25. We are conscious Mr Q would like to achieve mixed outcomes. However, given the significant amount of money Mr Q wants to resolve his complaint this is something best suited to the legal process as we typically cannot achieve such sums. This financial payment will also act as an acknowledgement that things went wrong, and effectively act as an apology.
26. Moreover, it is entirely possible the legal process will indirectly bring about the service improvements Mr Q wants and provide further explanation of what happened.
27. We therefore consider a legal route is the most appropriate way for Mr Q to resolve his complaint and cannot see any barriers that would prevent him pursuing it. He should therefore investigate this route further.
28. We acknowledge there may be unresolved issues following legal action. Alternatively, it might be that upon further investigation of the legal route Mr Q is unable to pursue it. In these circumstances he is welcome to return to us. If he does, then we will consider looking at the case in more detail.
29. However, it is important Mr Q returns to us promptly due to our one-year time limit that started on the date Mr Q knew about the issues being complained about. Whilst we can set this time limit to one side in certain circumstances there must be a good reason for doing so.
30. We acknowledge the upsetting events Mr Q has experienced and hope our decision provides him with the best route to resolving his complaint.