The Trust did not adhere to Ms J’s reasonable adjustment requests
12. Before we decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the events complained about had a negative effect which the organisation has not put right. Having done so we have found the Trust has already done enough to put right the impact of these events.
13. Ms J complains the Trust did not acknowledge or adhere to her reasonable adjustment request that the clinician’s phone be switched off during the psychological assessment process.
14. In its responses, the Trust apologised that it had been necessary for staff to keep their phones switched on. It said it had been necessary because the building did not have a working alarm system at the time. It advised it had recorded Ms J’s request that phones be switched off for future appointments and apologised for not finding a compromise solution which could have alleviated Ms J’s concerns earlier.
15. We are sorry to hear this interaction caused Ms J distress. We recognise she is concerned the Trust did not respond to her reasonable adjustment request appropriately.
16. We examined the records of Ms J’s assessment in March. The records do not record Ms J’s request for a reasonable adjustment. The notes say at the start of the assessment, Ms J requested the clinician switch her phone off, as opposed to leaving it on flight mode. The clinician explained they could not switch the phone off in case an emergency occurred and Ms J said she would not be able to answer some questions due to her concerns about data protection.
17. The appointment continued until Ms J requested the clinician sit on her phone. The clinician declined to do so. Ms J stated she could not proceed with the appointment due to her concerns about information being collected by the clinician’s phone and used in ways she had not consented to. The clinician agreed to switch the phone off to allow the meeting to continue. The notes show the risk assessment did not suggest a need for the phone to be on, having spent time with the patient.
18. We use PHSO’s ‘guidance on financial remedy’ to decide what the impact of any potential injustice was. We think this part of Ms J’s complaint falls in level one, in that it represented a one-off administrative failure which caused Ms J minor worry or annoyance. We generally consider an apology to be an appropriate remedy for a level one injustice.
19. Our ‘NHS Complaint Standards’ say organisations should provide meaningful apologies and transparent explanations. The records show the Trust apologised for not finding a compromise solution to Ms J’s reasonable adjustment request during her assessment and has recorded Ms J’s request for future appointments.
20. Given the impact of this interaction on Ms J, we consider this apology sufficient and in line with NHS Complaint Standards. We will therefore not be considering this part of the complaint further.
The Trust did not accurately record clinical history and produced a flawed assessment report
21. Ms J complains the Trust did not accurately record her clinical history and minimised her experiences during her assessments in March and April 2024. She says this meant the Trust’s report was flawed.
22. In its responses, the Trust apologised if Ms J had felt the report was incorrect. It said Ms J had been offered the chance to give any amendments and Ms J had provided these.
23. We are sorry Ms J had a negative experience during these assessments. We understand this would have been distressing for her.
24. We examined the records of Ms J’s assessments and the draft assessment report. The records show Ms J attended assessments in March and April 2024. In May, the Trust produced a draft assessment report and sent it to Ms J by email.
25. In its email, the Trust advised Ms J she had the option to collaborate with the clinician to make changes to the information in the report before it was sent back to her referring GP. It said that while there was no obligation to offer this, the Trust had found it a helpful way of working. It asked Ms J to make any comments by the end of May.
26. Ms J responded with comments prior to the deadline. The Trust sent her the final assessment report at the end of May and advised that it would apply for clinical approval to place Ms J on a waiting list for group psychotherapy.
27. Ms J responded by email requesting the Trust not send the full report to her GP, as this included a summary section with her medical history. The Trust advised by return email it would remove the report from her record and a new copy sent without the summary, which would be copied to Ms J. The records show the Trust did this at the start of June.
28. Ms J complained in June and wished to continue her treatment. She was placed on the waiting list for group therapy in August 2024.
29. This element of the complaint concerns conversations between Ms J and clinicians. The complainant’s medical records are the only documents we have concerning these meetings and conversations. We acknowledge Ms J disputes the accuracy of these records.
30. Upon review of the records we can see that irrespective of any inaccuracies recorded in Ms J’s assessments, the Trust gave Ms J an opportunity to engage with the draft report and give her comments on it in its email to her in mid-May. The records show Ms J provided comments, which were incorporated into the final assessment report.
31. The records show the Trust asked Ms J for permission to share the completed final report with her referring GP. When Ms J declined to give her permission, the Trust amended the report to remove a section concerning Ms J’s medical background.
32. We have not seen any evidence the Trust recorded inaccuracies in Ms J’s assessments or draft report. We can see Ms J had the opportunity to identify and correct any inaccuracies in the draft report, and that the Trust made Ms J’s proposed amendments. We do not have any evidence suggesting that inaccuracies were recorded, but if they were, the Trust gave Ms J an opportunity to correct them, which Ms J took up.
33. The Trust apologised if Ms J felt the assessment report was incorrect. We consider this sufficient and will therefore not be considering this part of the complaint further.
The Trust did not appropriately respond to the issues raised in Ms J’s complaint
34. Ms J complains the Trust did not acknowledge or appropriately respond to the issues raised in her complaint.
35. In its responses, the Trust apologised for not fully responding to some of Ms J’s email correspondence and partially upheld her complaint. It said that while it addressed Ms J’s concerns internally, on occasions it did not communicate this to Ms J by return email.
36. We are sorry Ms J felt the Trust did not acknowledge or respond to her complaint correctly. We understand this was upsetting for her.
37. We examined the Trust’s complaint file and Ms J’s email correspondence to the Trust to review this element of the complaint. The records show Ms J began the complaints process in June 2024. In July 2024, the Trust provided Ms J with further information about making a formal complaint. In August 2024, the Trust sent Ms J its first response to her complaint.
38. In September 2024, Ms J corresponded with and then met with senior members of Trust staff concerning her complaint. She provided clarifications on the details of her complaint via email. The Trust issued its final response in January 2025.
39. Our ‘NHS Complaint Standards’ say organisations should deliver fair and robust complaint investigations. They should give fair and accountable responses and detail the conclusions they reached, taking responsibility when things have gone wrong. They should also keep complainants informed about progress in their case.
40. The records suggest the Trust generally acknowledged and responded to Ms J’s complaint in line with our ‘NHS Complaint Standards.’ It provided prompt responses, engaged with Ms J throughout the complaints process and undertook to make improvements where things had gone wrong. It partially upheld her original complaint in its response of August 2024.
41. We consider the Trust responded to Ms J’s complaint in line with our ‘NHS complaint standards.’ We will therefore not be considering this part of the complaint further.
The Trust did not respond to Ms J’s complaint in a timely manner
42. Ms J complains the Trust did not respond to her complaint in a timely manner.
43. Our ‘NHS Complaint Standards’ says that organisations should respond to complaints within expected timescales. These are set out in the relevant legislation, Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations (2009).
44. Section 14 explains that an organisation should respond to the complainant within six months of the complaint being received. It also explains that if there is a delay, then the complainant should be notified in writing and the response given as soon as reasonably practicable.
45. The records show Ms J first complained to the Trust in June 2024 and the Trust responded in August, three months later. Ms J raised outstanding concerns in August and September 2024 and the Trust gave its final response in January 2025.
46. The Trust responded to Ms J’s complaint three months after she made it. Following Ms J raising outstanding concerns, it provided a final response four months later. We consider the Trust acted in line with our NHS Complaint Standards and Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations (2009) when responding to Ms J’s complaint. We will therefore not be looking into this part of the complaint further.
47. We thank Ms J for taking the time and effort to bring her complaint to our attention. We hope our decision reassures her the Trust has taken appropriate action to address her concerns.