University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust

3. Mrs A complains about the care provided to her father, Mr B, by University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust (the Trust) on 10 March 2025. Specifically:

• why was the fact that Mr B’s pain had increased and not decreased in the two days after his fall ignored when he was seen at the Cumberland Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) on 10 March 2025 • why did clinicians at the Trust initially fail to diagnose Mr B with septic arthritis when he was seen at the UTC • why was Mr B not given antibiotics after his initial consultation at the UTC.

4. Mrs A says that Mr B died prematurely on 1 April 2025. His death has left Mrs A and the rest of Mr B’s family shocked and distressed as they feel it was unnecessary. Mrs A says the impact of Mr B’s death will affect her and the rest of the family for life.

5. As an outcome, Mrs A wants changes in procedure at the Trust so no one else must go through what she did. Mrs A also wants a financial remedy.

6. Mr B was 83 years old and had pre-existing diabetes and heart failure. He suffered injuries to his right arm and elbow after falling in a crowd leaving a football match. Mr B’s injuries including open wounds were initially treated at home by his wife.

7. Unfortunately, Mr B’s pain became worse, and he subsequently attended the UTC on 10 March 2025. X-rays indicated a fractured elbow, for which he was put in a sling and told physiotherapy would be needed at a later stage.

8. Mr B’s pain continued to intensify over the next few days and, at an appointment for a different condition, on 19 March 2025, he was advised to go to the Accident and Emergency Department at Derriford Hospital. There, his elbow was x-rayed again, and no fracture was found, instead he was diagnosed with septic arthritis.

9. Mr B was admitted to Derriford Hospital for urgent surgery. He was transferred to Mount Gould Hospital for rehabilitation after being off IV drips for only around 6 hours, then admitted back to Derriford Hospital after 24 hours. His care was continued at Derriford Hospital until he sadly died on 1 April 2025.

11. 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. We have discussed this with Mrs A’s advocate to understand her circumstances and the outcomes she wants for her complaint about the Trust. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look in to.

12. The Trust acknowledged during a local resolution meeting on 30 April 2025 which Mrs A attended that Mr B should have been given antibiotics when he attended the UTC on 10 March 2025.

13. Unfortunately, the records indicate that Mr B developed an infection in his wounds which Mrs A feels the antibiotics could have possibly helped to treat.

14. Therefore, we appreciate the potential injustice for Mr B and his family including Mrs A, as Mr B sadly died just a few weeks later. This is a tragic situation for Mrs A and her family which they are all struggling to deal with.

15. We note that one of Mrs A’s desired outcomes is a financial remedy. Mrs A’s advocate has informed us that Mrs A and her family intend to take legal action against the Trust by way of a medical negligence claim. Mrs A has instructed solicitors and proceedings have now commenced.

16. Given this, we consider Mrs A has a cause of action (medical negligence), and she should be in time to take such action. Mrs A has not said how much compensation she is seeking but given the circumstances of her complaint and the potential injustice, it could be a significant amount beyond what we can realistically achieve.

17. We do remain an option for considering Mrs A’s complaint against the Trust, but only if the legal route does not cover some parts of her complaint that we can realistically consider. Therefore, in accordance with our processes, we must close Mrs A’s Ombudsman complaint. Mrs A can come back to us at the end of the legal process if she remains dissatisfied, but there is no guarantee we will be able to further consider any outstanding issues or achieve the outcomes she is seeking.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs A’s complaint about University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust (the Trust).

-We consider Mrs A could take legal action on the matters she has brought to us about the Trust.

2. We recognise that what happened to Mr B was unexpected and a tragic experience for Mrs A and her family. We understand why Mrs A brought her complaint to the Ombudsman, but we consider Mrs A has a reasonable Alternative Legal Remedy (ALR) to resolve her complaint about the Trust.