Claughton Medical Centre (21 013 695c)

Category : Health > General Practice

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 25 Apr 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Ms P’s complaints about her mother’s care and treatment as it would be reasonable for her to use an alternative legal remedy. Further, we will not investigate her concerns about the Council’s handling of her complaint as there is insufficient injustice arising from complaint handling alone to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

  1. Ms P complains about the care her mother, Ms Q, received from Nazareth House Nursing Home (the Nursing Home). Ms Q’s care was funded by Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council). She is also unhappy with the care provided to her mother by Claughton Medical Centre (the GP Practice), Wirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust (the Hospital Trust) and Wirral Community Health & Care NHS Foundation Trust (the Community Trust). Specifically, she complains about:
  • management of her mother’s nutrition and fluid intake, including the treatment of a lump on her neck, dehydration, lack of supplementary drinks and failure to refer to dieticians and SALT;
  • pressure sore management;
  • end of life care;
  • the implementation and use of an Emergency Health Care Plan leading to delayed access to medical care;
  • medication management;
  • poor personal hygiene care; and
  • insufficient call bell/emergency cord system.
  1. Ms P is also unhappy with the way the Council handled her family’s complaint
  2. Ms P says there was a serious impact on her mother’s care and wellbeing, including delayed admission to hospital. The family also suffered unnecessary stress and worry.
  3. Ms P would like a financial remedy and answers to her outstanding questions.

Back to top

The Ombudsmen’s role and powers

  1. The Ombudsmen have the power to jointly consider complaints about health and social care. Since April 2015, a single team has considered these complaints acting on behalf of both Ombudsmen. (Local Government Act 1974, section 33ZA, as amended, and Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 18ZA)
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended and Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 4(1b))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the written information submitted by Ms P and spoke to her on the telephone. I also considered the information I obtained from the Trusts, the Council and the GP Practice. I shared my draft decision with Ms P and did not receive any comments.

Back to top

What I found

Ms Q’s care and treatment

  1. Ms P considers that her mother’s care was so poor as to amount to negligence and is seeking a financial remedy. Deciding about whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages.
  2. I cannot decide whether an organisation has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. If we were to find fault and decide that fault had a detrimental impact we may recommend a nominal financial remedy in recognition of that impact. However, we do not make recommendations at the same levels the courts might where a person is seeking compensation for the actions of an organisation.
  3. Ms P has shared her intention to challenge the Nursing Home, Community Trust and GP Practice’s actions via a legal route. This legal route remains available to Ms P as a means of pursuing her concerns. I do not consider there is any exceptional reason why Ms P cannot do this and she is currently actively engaging with her solicitor. So, I would usually expect someone in Ms P’s position to seek a remedy in the courts.
  4. Ms P is aware that pursuing legal action could achieve compensation for her and her sisters, which is an outcome sought by them in relation to Ms Q’s care and treatment. Therefore, this appears to be the most appropriate route for them to pursue their concerns. Given there is an alternative legal remedy open to Ms P, and that it would be reasonable for her to use it, the Ombudsmen will not investigate her complaint about the same matters.

The Council’s complaint handling

  1. Ms P is also dissatisfied with the way the Council handled her complaints and says it has not answered all her questions.
  2. We will not investigate Ms P’s concerns about the Council’s complaint response as we will not usually investigate an organisation’s complaint handling where we are not investigating the primary underlying complaint itself.
  3. The most significant claimed injustice, that Ms Q’s health and welfare was negatively impacted, arises from the concerns raised about the care and treatment she received. I acknowledge Ms P and her sisters have found the complaint process frustrating, however, there is not sufficient injustice arising from complaint handling alone to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final Decision

  1. The Ombudsmen will not investigate Ms P’s complaint about Ms Q’s care. I accept the legal action Ms P is considering may not provide a remedy for all of the matters she has brought to the Ombudsman. However, it represents the most appropriate way of securing significant financial compensation, which I understand to be the primary outcome Ms P and her sisters are seeking in relation to Ms Q’s care and treatment. Therefore, I consider it is reasonable for her to use this alternative remedy.
  2. We will not investigate Ms P’s concerns about the Council’s complaint handling when we are not investigating the underlying complaint about Ms Q’s care. This is because we do not consider there is sufficient injustice arising from complaint handling to warrant an investigation in itself

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings