9. The Health Service Commissioners Act 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 do so. We discussed this with Mrs N to understand the reasons why she did not bring her complaint to us sooner. We also considered the time the Trust took to respond to Mrs N’s complaint.
10. Mrs N complains about events that took place in 2021, when her son was an inpatient at the Trust. We understand in July 2021, M sadly died. By Mrs N’s own account, she had serious concerns after N’s death and instructed a solicitor approximately three months after. We also understand some of Mrs N’s concerns predate her son’s death, however in the interests of proportionality, we accept July 2021 as Mrs N’s latest date of knowledge for her concerns about the Trust.
11. For Mrs N’s complaint to be in time, she needed to bring it to us within 12 months of her date of knowledge, meaning by July 2022. As Mrs N’s complaint was not ready for us until September 2024, we considered the reasons for the delay.
12. Mrs N raised her complaint with the Trust in March 2023, the Trust provided its first response to her in August 2023. This took five months, Mrs N returned to the Trust with further concerns four months later in December 2023. The Trust sent its final response to Mrs N in September 2024, nine months later. This is not in line with regulations which say organisations should respond to complaints within six months.
13. It is right the Trust has reflected on its delay to respond to Mrs Benett’s further complaint and apologised to Mrs N for this delay. We do not think this delay means we should set aside our time limit. This is because the complaint was already eight months outside of the time limit at the point she made the complaint in 2023.
14. We spoke to Mrs N to see if there was any reason she could not have made her complaint sooner. Mrs N told us the Trust was aware of her unofficial complaint from the beginning. She said there was information pending which prevented her from raising a formal complaint, this included the investigation into N’s death and inquest. She said these processes took much longer than usual due to COVID-19 backlogs. Mrs N said her decision to raise a formal complaint did not happen until both processes were complete, she told us she spent a significant amount of time chasing the Trust, this included repeatedly requesting a Child Death Review.
15. Mrs N explained she instructed a solicitor approximately three months after N’s death. She explained the Child Death Review panel and investigations were found to be unsatisfactory. Her solicitor acted on her behalf during this time. She also noted that the Trust repeatedly missed court document deadlines, which contributed to further delays. Mrs N assured us she was actively pursuing her concerns during this period.
16. We have carefully considered Mrs N’s reasons and are grateful for the time and work put into providing us with a clear and detailed complaint, and we thank her for this. We can see Mrs N wanted to allow for the inquest and Child Death Review to conclude before raising her formal complaint.
17. Having carefully considered the reasons Mrs N shared we do not think these sufficient to set our time limit aside. We can see from Mrs N’s own account she waited until the inquest and Child Death Review had concluded before pursuing her complaint with the Trust. This was open to Mrs N to do.
18. From Mrs N’s own account, she has confirmed she was aware of her reasons to complain as she had concerns about her sons care at the time of events. We can see Mrs N instructed a solicitor around October 2021. We do not think the time taken by Mrs N to wait for these processes to finish is good reason to set aside our time limit. Having full context of medical care and fully understanding what went wrong is not a requirement of raising a complaint, or of our own processes. We do not consider this prevented Mrs N from raising her complaint with the Trust earlier.
19. We can also see from the information Mrs N provided to us that she was engaged with legal advice and had instructed a solicitor. This was the choice she made and the time. We can see this was important to Mrs N as she obtained a solicitor around three months after N’s death.
20. We have thought about what Mrs N has said to us, including that the Trust was aware of her unofficial complaints before she formally raised them.
21. The Trust’s online complaint resources detail steps people can take if they are unhappy with the care and treatment received at the Trust. It says people should let the organisation know by telephoning or emailing it directly. It explains its complaints process, along with providing links and supporting information.
22. Given the information available, we think it would have been reasonable for Mrs N to take independent steps to consider what options were open to her before March 2023.
23. To summarise, we do not consider the reasons Mrs N gave for the delay in raising her concerns are enough justification for us to set aside our time limit. There was a significant period of between 2021 and 2022 when Mrs N could have made a complaint but did not do so.
24. We understand Mrs N chose to pursue matters by corresponding with solicitors and waiting for the inquest and review before raising a formal complaint or coming to our Office. Considering all that we have seen we think she had the opportunity to raise her complaint with the Trust sooner.
25. For this reason, we have decided not to consider the complaint further.
26. We understand how much this matter means to Mrs N and thank her for sharing the details of her complaint. It is important we consider and act within the law and we hope this statement clearly explains the reasons for our decision.