3. Mr K says the organisations named missed making a diagnosis of cancer for four years, from 2014 to 2018. He says something also went wrong during an operation in January 2019.
4. Mr K says as a result of what happened his leg became infected and he had to have it amputated. He told us the cancer has spread and he is now terminally ill.
5. The outcome he seeks from bringing his complaint is a financial remedy.
6. Mr K told us he had visited GPs with concerns about his knee on many occasions from 2014 onwards. He says the doctors all offered him reassurance that it was nothing to worry about.
7. He was referred to different hospitals for investigations and imaging between 2014 and 2018. He told us these investigations were inconclusive.
8. In late 2018 BHRT carried out a biopsy. This identified he had cancer in his leg which had spread to his lungs.
9. Mr K told us that during one of the operations something went wrong and his leg imploded. He said that this led to complications, and his leg was amputated in 2019.
10. Mr K said at this point in 2019 he knew something had gone wrong and so he instructed a solicitor. He told us his solicitor raised complaints with the organisations and began to act on his behalf in legal proceedings.
11. The solicitor acting for Mr K decided in April 2021 that the prospects of success of legal action were below the level they considered reasonable. They decided to close the file.
12. In April 2024 Mr K contacted NHS England contact centre to ask for help in making a complaint. NHS England directed him to North East London Integrated Care Board (the ICB). This is the organisation responsible for planning and commissioning health services for North East London.
13. In April 2024, Mr K made a complaint to the ICB.
14. Mr K approached this office in April 2025 to say he had not had a response to his complaint. We contacted the ICB to ask it to complete local resolution and provide a response to Mr K.
15. The ICB issued its response in June 2025. It explained his complaint was outside its time limit. It explained the passage of time and missing records made it impossible to provide a response to the issues he raised. The ICB gave Mr K advice on how to request his records and possible avenues to request the compensation he was seeking.
16. We began our consideration of Mr K’s complaint on 25 June 2025.
19. The law says a person needs to make their complaint to us within a year of becoming aware of the problem (we call this the date of knowledge). We cannot investigate complaints brought to us after one year, unless we consider there is a good reason to set aside the time limit.
20. Mr K told us he was aware he had cause to complain about the care and treatment in 2019. He told us solicitors were pursuing this for him at that time.
21. He bought his complaint to us In April 2025. At this point the complaint was five years outside our time limit. We looked to see if there were reasons why we should set aside our time limit.
22. We carefully considered all the evidence Mr K sent, which he told us showed his solicitors had complained on his behalf. We can see Mr K had two different firms of solicitors acting for him, the first from 2019 and the second from 2020.
23. We have not seen any evidence in the correspondence to show the solicitors were asked to, or had raised a complaint with any of the organisations involved. The majority of the information related to requests for medical records.
24. We think it would have been reasonable for Mr K to raise his complaint at the point when he first became aware he had cause to complain, in 2019.
25. The first evidence we have seen that Mr K raised a complaint is when he contacted NHS England, and then the ICB in April 2024.
26. The ICB took over a year to respond to his complaint. We understand this must have been frustrating for Mr K. It is not in line with the regulations, which say organisations should respond within six months.
27. It is right that the ICB has apologised to Mr K for this delay. We do not think this delay means we should set aside our time limit. This is because the complaint was already four years outside the time limit at the point he made the complaint in 2024.
28. We spoke to Mr K to see if there was any reason he could not have made his complaint sooner. Mr K did not provide any reason to make us think we should set aside the time limit. He explained to us that during COVID-19 the lockdown meant ‘we lost a couple of years’. Mr K confirmed his solicitors continued acting for him during this period, and told us they were not getting the responses they needed.
29. We have not seen any evidence the solicitors raised complaints, as outlined in paragraph 23. We can see Mr K was able to pursue his legal claim during this period and so we think it would have been reasonable for him to make complaints to the organisations.
30. Mr K told us that when his solicitor declined to act for him, he decided to request his records and considered taking the matter forward himself. We think this was a missed opportunity for Mr K to have made his complaint sooner than 2024, when he first raised it.
31. To summarise, we do not consider the reasons Mr K gave for the delay in raising his concerns are enough justification for us to set aside our time limit. There was a significant period of between 2019 and 2024 when Mr K could have made a complaint but did not do so.
32. For this reason we have decided not to consider the complaint further.
33. We understand how much this matter means to Mr K and thank him for sharing the details of his complaint. It is important we consider and act within the law and we hope this statement clearly explains the reasons for our decision.
1. Mr K’s complaint falls outside of our time limit. We carefully considered the information and evidence he shared with us about why he did not bring the complaint to us sooner. We did not think there were sufficient reasons to set aside our time limit and so we will take no further action.
2. We thank Mr K for taking the time to tell us about his upsetting experience. We are deeply sorry to hear about Mr K’s prognosis. We hope this statement clearly explains the reasons for our decision.