Somerset Clinical Commissioning Group (18 010 660b)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 29-Aug-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms A’s complaint about the behaviour and alleged neglect of a Social Worker who visited her in hospital. This is because it is unlikely he would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Social Worker to warrant an investigation.

Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (17 015 382a)

Statement Upheld Mental health services 21-Aug-2019

Summary: Mrs Y complains about the Council’s and Trust’s actions when providing care and support for her adult daughter Miss X. There was fault by the Council and the Trust in the way it assessed Miss X and this has caused some uncertainty about her care planning. I recommend a re-assessment with a specialist autism assessor to remedy the injustice. I also found fault with the delayed complaints handling by both bodies and their failure to consider a ‘joint response’ which caused injustice to Mrs Y. I have made recommendations to remedy the injustice.

Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (19 002 959a)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 19-Aug-2019

Summary: A man complained that a social worker fabricated an assessment, which made it harder for him to get the right support. The Ombudsmen have decided not to investigate the complaint because it is unlikely they would find evidence of fault causing injustice.

Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust (18 012 800a)

Statement Upheld Mental health services 14-Aug-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen find there was an avoidable and unreasonable delay in arranging support for a man entitled to s117 aftercare. As a result he missed out on an opportunity to benefit from this support for close to a year. The fault also meant his mother incurred costs she would not have otherwise had, in attempting to provide replacement care. The NHS Trust has agreed to apologise, make payments and create an action plan to address the injustice these failings caused.

Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group (18 012 800b)

Statement Not upheld Mental health services 14-Aug-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen find there was an avoidable and unreasonable delay in arranging support for a man entitled to s117 aftercare. As a result he missed out on an opportunity to benefit from this support for close to a year. The fault also meant his mother incurred costs she would not have otherwise had, in attempting to provide replacement care. The NHS Trust has agreed to apologise, make payments and create an action plan to address the injustice these failings caused.

Norfolk & Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust (18 002 602a)

Statement Upheld Mental health services 08-Aug-2019

Summary: The complainant, Mr X, complained about the way the Council and Trust assessed his physical and mental health needs in 2014. The Ombudsmen found the Trust acted with fault in not properly assessing Mr X especially his concerns over his medication when he was discharged from its care. The Trust promptly acknowledged this and has already reimbursed the complainant £375 for his costs incurred in seeking a private doctor to review his medication. However, the Ombudsmen also later found the complainant suffered uncertainty as to whether his personal budget would have increased but for the fault. He also suffered a lost opportunity to challenge the assessment as it was not provided to him at the time. And the Trust continued to fail to deal with his complaint properly. The Trust has now agreed to the Ombudsmen’s recommendations to pay Mr X an additional £750 to remedy Mr X’s uncertainty, lost opportunity and time and trouble taken to complain.

North East London NHS Foundation Trust (18 013 938a)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 24-Jul-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Mrs D’s complaint about the care and treatment provided to Mr Y after he was discharged from detention under s3 of the Mental Health Act. This is because I do not consider that an investigation would achieve anything further for Mrs D.

Redbridge Clinical Commissioning Group (18 013 938b)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 24-Jul-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Mrs D’s complaint about the care and treatment provided to Mr Y after he was discharged from detention under s3 of the Mental Health Act. This is because I do not consider that an investigation would achieve anything further for Mrs D.

Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (17 013 954a)

Statement Upheld Mental health services 22-Jul-2019

Summary: The complainant, Ms G, said Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and Hertfordshire County Council failed to properly plan her discharge from hospital and provide her with formal support after she was discharged from hospital. Ms G said this had an adverse impact on her wellbeing. She also said Watford Borough Council failed to consider her homelessness and housing application properly which meant she remained in unsuitable accommodation for too long. On the evidence available the Ombudsmen found no fault in the way the Borough Council dealt with Ms G’s homelessness situation. There were faults in the way the Trust discharged Ms G from hospital and both it and the County Council failed to assess all her needs once she was in the community and this had adverse impact on Ms G’s wellbeing. The Trust and the County Council have agreed to the Ombudsmen’s recommendations and will apologise to Ms G and pay her a financial remedy to acknowledge the adverse impact the faults had on her wellbeing. The Trust and the County Council will act to improve discharge planning and the requirement to complete formal assessments in line with the Care Act 2014.

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (18 000 974a)

Statement Upheld Mental health services 22-Jul-2019

Summary: The complainant said London Borough of Islington and Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust failed to properly consider his brother’s entitlement to aftercare services which should have been provided without charge. During the investigation, the Council and the Trust accepted they were at fault as they had failed to act in accordance with the terms of the Mental Health Act 1983. As a result, the complainant’s brother paid for services which should have been provided without charge. To remedy the injustice, the Council and the Trust have agreed to the Ombudsmen’s recommendations to repay the financial loss plus interest. Both the Council and the Trust will apologise to the complainant and his brother, make additional time, trouble and distress payments, provide training for staff, and improve practice. The Council will also complete a register to identify whether anyone else in its locality has been affected.