NHS in England Closed After Initial Enquiries Search on PHSO website

Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust

P-004312 · Statement · Decision date: 20 November 2025 · View Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust scorecard
Complaint (AI summary)
Miss E complained the Trust failed to electronically record her father's vital observations and did not escalate his care after he passed blood, leading to his death.
Outcome (AI summary)
The ombudsman closed the case, suggesting Miss E explore legal action as it was reasonable for her to do so.

Full decision details

The Complaint

3. Miss E complains that Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) failed to electronically record her father’s, Mr E’s, vital observations, after recording these on paper.

4. She also complains the Trust failed to escalate his care to on-call specialists when he passed blood during the night.

5. Miss E believes the Trust’s actions led to Mr E’s death and prevented Mr E’s family from saying goodbye. She says this has caused the family to feel distraught and experience extreme sadness. Miss E told us she feels cheated and that she feels the NHS has failed the family terribly.

6. Miss E is seeking financial remedy.

Findings

9. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint where a person has (or had) the option to take legal action, unless we consider this is (or was) unreasonable in the circumstances. This ensures the Ombudsman does not interfere with matters which are in the remit of the Courts.

10. We have discussed this with Miss E to understand her circumstances and the outcomes she wants. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look in to.

11. Miss E says that the Trust’s failure to electronically record Mr E’s vital observations, and escalate his care when he was bleeding, led to his death. If Miss E is correct, she would have a legal cause of action.

12. She can pursue a clinical negligence claim against the Trust, as she is claiming Mr E’s care fell below the expected standard and was ‘negligent’. She is seeking financial remedy of at least £12,500.

13. There is a clear available legal route which Miss E could use to potentially achieve her desired outcome of financial remedy.

14. Legal action is therefore something we think Miss E should explore, given the serious nature of her concerns, what she believes the significant impact of those were on Mr E and the financial compensation she is seeking.

15. We asked Miss E if she had any barriers that might prevent her being able to pursue this route. She told us she did not have any barriers, although due to her financial situation any advice would need to be on a no-win no-fee basis.

16. It is important to note that our process is not guaranteed to be quick. Miss E currently has just under two years remaining of the three-year limitation on legal action.

17. We would not wish to deny Miss E the opportunity to take legal action by considering her complaint and causing here to be outside of the three-year limitation for legal action.

18. Additionally, as set out above, the law prevents us from investigating a complaint where the complainant could pursue legal action, unless we think it would unreasonable. In this case, Miss E has a clear legal route, and it appears there are no barriers to her securing representation or pursuing this.

19. A solicitor will be able to advise Miss E whether she has a case, and a court would be able to carefully consider and assess whether Mr E’s care was negligent. It would also be able to consider what the impact of that was on her, and determine accountability, including awarding an appropriate amount of compensation if applicable.

20. In summary, we consider it is reasonable for Miss E to pursue legal remedy. Miss E can return to our service if she is unable to get legal representation, or if she has outstanding outcomes we can achieve following legal action.

21. If Miss E chooses to bring the complaint back to us, we would advise she does so as promptly as possible. This is because we have a one-year time-limit by which to consider complaints (from the day a person became aware of their reason to complain). We have discretion to set this time-limit to one side if there are strong reasons to do so. We will consider the time it has taken us to consider the complaint and any other delays outside of her control.

22. We are sorry to hear of Mr E’s death and the devastating impact this has had on Miss E and the rest of Mr E’s family.

Our Decision

1. We have carefully considered Miss E’s complaint about Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We are very sorry to hear about the circumstances of her complaint and sympathise with her, and Miss E’s family, for her loss.

2. We have decided to take no further action. This is because we consider Miss E could take legal action on the matter she has brought to us, and it is reasonable for her to explore this.

Other Decisions About Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust

P-004976 · 4 Mar 2026
Mrs G complains the Trust did not provide her with treatment for COVID-19 and a chest infection during her admission …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004496 · 17 Dec 2025
Ms T complained about aspects of her father's care and the invoice he later received. She asked the Trust to …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-004003 · 25 Sep 2025
Ms B complains about several aspects of care Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust provided to her partner between May and …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-003604 · 29 Jun 2025
Mrs J complains the Trust did not correctly handle her mother’s antibiotics between 12 and 15 November 2022. Mrs J …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
P-003634 · 29 Jun 2025
Mrs E complains about how staff treated her father’s COVID-19, the two hospital transfers and their communication. She also complains …
Closed After Initial Enquiries
View all decisions for this organisation →