8. Mr N complains to us about Bristol ICB’s failure to produce and implement an appropriate care plan for his son, Mr L, when his family relocated and his CHC arrangements became the ICB’s responsibility.
9. Continuing healthcare (CHC) is a package of health and social care that is funded by the NHS for people who have a primary health need. ICBs manage CHC packages to ensure the individual in receipt of the funding is getting the care they need.
10. In September 2021, Mr L and his family moved into the jurisdiction of Bristol ICB. Mr L was already receiving a CHC package from a different ICB. Bristol ICB was aware of the move in June 2021 and to take over Mr L’s CHC package. Part of the reason for the family’s move was because of the service a specific care provider could offer Mr L. The care provider became involved in Mr L’s care planning in July 2019 and assessed him further in June 2021.
11. Bristol ICB and the care provider produced a care plan in June 2021, but Mr N said it contained inaccuracies about Mr L’s conditions and the care he needed. Mr and Mrs N corrected this and sent the care plan back to Bristol ICB and the care provider but did not receive a final care plan after this.
12. In September 2021, the new care provider became responsible for Mr L’s care. Bristol ICB and the care provider produced another care plan in July 2022. Mr N said that before this date, he did not know what parts of the previous (June 2021) care plan the care provider had been delivering to Mr L. He says the family were left to deal with Mr L’s bowel deterioration and heightened pain.
13. The family received the final care plan draft in March 2023, and Mr N says this was the first time that Mr L had received an appropriate care plan since relocating.
14. 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.
15. We have discussed this with Mr N to understand the reasons why he could not bring his complaint to us sooner. We have considered the time Bristol ICB took to respond to him. We have also reviewed the time it took for us to look at Mr N’s first complaint to us between June and December 2024, and the actions he took before he approached us again with this complaint in June 2025.
16. Mr N said he became unhappy with Bristol ICB’s actions in late 2021. This means he should have brought the complaint to us by late 2021. He says he did not instruct his solicitor to complain straight away because it was better to try and resolve the concerns first.
17. The solicitor first complained in November 2022 but sent the complaint to the local authority by mistake. The solicitor made this complaint, albeit to the wrong organisation, around one year after the family became unhappy with the situation. It did not complain to Bristol ICB until June 2023, around 18 months after Mr L says he became unhappy with the situation.
18. We appreciate Mr N wanted to resolve the issues without using the complaint process first, and our time limit accommodates for scenarios like this. We think it was possible for the Mr N to complain sooner as there do not appear to be any barriers that stopped him.
19. Whilst we also understand Mr N’s solicitor complained to the wrong organisation first, it was another six months before they complained to Bristol ICB. At this point the complaint was already at least six months outside our time limit.
20. Bristol ICB’s complaint process ended in November 2023, and the solicitor first complained to us, seven months later in June 2024. At this point, the complaint was at least 18 months outside our time limit. We asked Mr N if there was something stopping him from bringing the complaint to us sooner. Mr N explained to us that unfortunately solicitors moved at a slow pace due to the demands of their role.
21. Complainants who choose to use a representative still need to make sure their complaint is brought to us within our timeframe, or as soon as possible if there are exceptional circumstances. Mr N chose to instruct solicitors to pursue the complaint on Mr L’s behalf. The delay here was not due to circumstances beyond Mr L’s control.
22. When Mr N’s solicitor brought the complaint to us again in June 2025, after we had asked Mr N to explore his legal options in December 2024, the complaint was around two years and six months outside our time limit. We considered the amount of time we took to look at Mr N’s first complaint and what we said he should do.
23. We have thought carefully about the factors leading to the delays. There was a significant delay between Mr N becoming unhappy with the situation and the first complaint to Bristol ICB. There was also a significant delay between the ICB’s final response and Mr N’s first complaint to us in June 2024. Overall, we do not think there are any exceptional circumstances that would allow us to put our time limit to one side on this occasion.
24. Our decision is not intended to detract from the family’s or Mr L’s experience that gave them a cause to complain to us. It is important we consider and act within the law and we regret any further upset this decision may cause.