8. The law says a person needs to make their complaint to us within a year of becoming aware of the problem. We cannot investigate complaints brought to us after one year, unless we consider there is a good reason to do so. We have asked for clarification from Ms C to try and understand the reasons why she did not complain sooner when she was dissatisfied with the complaint responses. We have also considered the time the organisations have taken to respond to the complaint.
9. Ms C’s complaint to us is out of time. The events she complained about happened more than two years before she contacted us.
10. Ms C complained to both organisations in July 2023. This was more than one year of the events in question. This was not in line with the NHS complaints process which has a time limit of one year. Despite this both organisations sent written responses to her complaint. The Trust replied to Ms C on 26 October 2023 and the Practice on 17 November 2023. Both organisations gave Ms C our contact details if she was unhappy with the responses.
11. Ms C complained to us on 6 January 2025. This was more than a year after the organisations’ responses to her complaint.
12. We asked Ms C to explain the reasons for the delay in making her initial complaint. She explained how distressing she found her brother’s death. She also said she wanted to wait for copies of her brother’s clinical records from the Trust before making her complaint.
13. Ms C sent us copies of emails from May 2022 in which she asked the Trust for copies of clinical records relating to both hospitals. She says the Trust only sent copies of records relating to one of the two hospitals. When she made her complaint in July 2023 she pointed out she had yet to receive copies of these records.
14. We would not expect someone to request copies of clinical records before making a complaint to an NHS organisation. This was a choice Ms C made.
15. We asked Ms C why she took so long to complain to us following the Trust’s responses. She said she was unaware that we existed. But we can see that both organisations provided her with our contact details. She also explained how her brother’s death continues to affect her and that she sometimes has flashbacks to what happened. We were sorry to hear about this and appreciate how upsetting the events have been for her.
16. Ms C has been unable to provide a satisfactory explanation about why she could not contact us sooner following the responses from the organisations.
17. Clearly, the events of March and April 2022 continue to be a source of distress for Ms C and her family. We appreciate our decision not to investigate further is likely to add to their distress. We hope we have clearly explained why we are unable to waive the time limit in this case.