Kingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust

4. Mr A complains about aspects of his care and treatment provided by Kingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) between December 2023 and June 2024. Specifically, Mr A says the Trust:

• dismissed, ignored and pressured him into accepting a psychiatric diagnosis without adequate investigation into his symptoms during consultations in December 2023, March 2024 and June 2024 • pressured him into taking antipsychotic medication without justification or understanding the root cause • dismissed a sample of an insect provided by Mr A as “insignificant” and • lacked professionalism by trying to link his issues to past drug use.

5. As a result of the Trust’s actions, Mr A says he has experienced a significant impact on multiple areas of his life, including loss of motivation, feelings of depression, and a sense of abandonment. He says he has had to modify how he navigates public spaces and has reduced contact with others. Additionally, Mr A says he has experienced disruption to his personal life, which has affected his ability to plan, concentrate, and interact with others. Despite these challenges, Mr A says he remains without a clear care plan or formal diagnosis.

As an outcome to his complaint, Mr A seeks an acknowledgement of failings, evidence of service improvements and a financial remedy of £3,500 to recognise his experience.

8. The law says a person must bring their complaint to us within one year of becoming aware of the issue. The law sets out our powers and remit when considering complaints about the NHS. We are unable to investigate complaints submitted outside this time limit unless we consider there is a good reason to do so.

9. Mr A complains about the care and treatment he received at the Trust between December 2023 and June 2024. Mr A tells he became aware of his complaint in June 2024. As the complaint covers the period between December 2023 and June 2024, we asked Mr A when he found out something went wrong or that he was unhappy with his care and treatment. Mr A told us he believes his date of knowledge is June 2024 as this is when he realised the Trust prescribed him with antipsychotics and pressured him to take them.

10. We can see Mr A was advised he may be prescribed antipsychotics during his initial consultation in December 2023. Mr A told us that it was during his second appointment in March 2024 where he was told his symptoms were ‘insignificant’ and also when the Trust prescribed him Risperidone, an anti-psychotic medication.

11. Mr A confirmed during our telephone discussion that this is also when he felt unhappy with the care and treatment he was receiving and in retrospective believes that is when he should have complained.

12. We consider when looking at the timeline of the complaint we cannot accept June 2024 as Mr A’s date of knowledge. This is because he was prescribed antipsychotics during his consultation in March 2024 and this is also when he says he was told his symptoms were ‘insignificant. These concerns are the crux of Mr A’s complaint.

13. Mr A would have therefore needed to complain to us by March 2025. Mr A received a final response from the Trust in April 2025, so we have not counted this one-month period.

14. Based on the information we have seen, Mr A’s complaint is approximately six weeks out of time from the date he received his final complaint response to when he bought his complaint to us.

15. To understand why the complaint has been brought out of time, we must actively engage in discussions with the complainant and or their representative. Where the response is unclear, we raise further enquiries and test responses, if appropriate, so that we are able to fully understand the reasons for the delay in bringing a complaint to us.

16. Mr A became aware of his complaint in March 2024. In line with the Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, Mr A should have approached our organisation by March 2025. Mr A complained to the Trust in February 2025, received a final response in April 2025 and approached us in June 2025. After making his complaint in February 2025, the Trust replied in April 2025. Mr A came to us after that on 4 June 2025, approximately six weeks later.

17. We explained to Mr A he is six weeks out of time and discussed the reasons for delay with him. Mr A explained he was unable to recall why he approached us six weeks after receiving his final response. As this response was unclear, we asked some further questions to fully understand his reasons. Mr A reiterated he could not remember.

18. As Mr A did not provide a strong reason for why he approached PHSO six weeks after receiving a final response, we have considered whether Mr A’s mental or physical health may have been a significant barrier in bringing his complaint to us. We can see Mr A had pursued his complaint with the Trust utilising tools such as AI to assist him. This demonstrates his ability to engage with the process during this period, and we have seen no indications to suggest his mental health or physical health may have been a barrier in bringing his complaint to us sooner.

19. We also considered whether Mr A lacked knowledge about the PHSO and our time limit. We can see Trust provided Mr A with clear instructions to escalate his complaint to us including providing information around our time limit.

20. Based on the information made available to us, we have not identified any mitigating or exceptional circumstances which would allow us to set the time limit aside for Mr A’s complaint, and for this reason we are unable to consider his concerns.

21. We recognise this will be disappointing for Mr A, given the ongoing concerns he has and the impact this has had on his wellbeing.

1. We have carefully considered Mr A’s complaint about Kingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We were sorry to hear Mr A was dissatisfied with aspects of the care and treatment he received. We do not underestimate the significant impact he told us this experience had on him.

2. After considering the information provided by Mr A, we have decided the concerns he has raised fall outside of our time limit. We have not seen sufficient reason to set the time limit aside, and therefore we are unable to consider the complaint further.

3. We will explain the reasons for our decision in this statement. Complaints give us valuable insight into the organisations we investigate, so we would like to thank Mr A for sharing his experience with us. It is important to acknowledge that although we are unable to look at the concerns he has raised, this does not detract from the experience he had, or the impact this had on him.