Mental health services


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (18 006 895)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 18-Dec-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault in a mental health team's decision to discharge a patient back to his GP. The patient remains entitled to section 117 aftercare.

  • Waltham Forest Clinical Commissioning Group (18 006 895)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 18-Dec-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault in a mental health team's decision to discharge a patient back to his GP. The patient remains entitled to section 117 aftercare.

  • Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (16 015 553)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 30-Nov-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found no fault by a Council, an NHS Trust and a Mental Health Trust about the care they arranged or provided to someone with Parkinson's Disease following several hospital admissions. The Ombudsmen found fault by a GP Practice in its assessment of a patient and in its recording about medication reviews. However, the faults did not cause the patient harm and there was no fault with the clinical care. The Ombudsmen made recommendations to the Practice to apologise to the patient's family for the distress caused by the faults and to review this case and make service improvements.

  • Surrey & Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (18 001 292)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 30-Oct-2018

    Summary: A man complained about mental health services provided to his son by the council and an NHS Trust. He complained about delays in assessments, about not receiving all the support services they wanted, and that staff encouraged his to move to independent housing which led to him being exploited and developing a drug addiction. We found that the Trust and Council failed to review his son's need for support when he moved, but we could not link this to the drug addiction or other matters. We found that there were delays with social care assessments and the provision of direct payments.

  • Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (17 013 323)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 29-Oct-2018

    Summary: Mrs Q complains about a lack of support from the Council and the Trust over her mother's health and social care needs in 2016/17. There was no significant fault by the Trust, but the Council failed to fulfil all its duties under the Care Act 2014 and the Mental Health Act 2005. This caused injustice as it delayed taking action to meet the mother's care needs. The Council needs to apologise, pay financial redress and consider what action to take to prevent similar problems happening again.

  • Berkshire West Clinical Commissioning Group (16 016 953)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 23-Oct-2018

    Summary: The complainant, Mrs B, said a funding dispute between the Council and three clinical commissioning groups delayed her daughter's, Miss C's, move from an independent hospital to a more suitable placement although she was medically fit for discharge.
    Mrs B was unhappy with the way NHS England arbitrated the dispute and said the events had an adverse impact of both her and Miss C. The Ombudsmen found no fault by the Council when it decided to accept responsibility for Miss C's aftercare needs. The clinical commissioning groups delayed in agreeing responsibility which meant Miss C remained in an inappropriate hospital placement, which did not meet her needs, for too long. The clinical commissioning groups have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B, pay a financial remedy and review the National Health Service's guidance relating to establishing the responsible commissioner.

  • NHS England - South Central Area Team (16 016 953)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 23-Oct-2018

    Summary: The complainant, Mrs B, said a funding dispute between the Council and three clinical commissioning groups delayed her daughter's, Miss C's, move from an independent hospital to a more suitable placement although she was medically fit for discharge.
    Mrs B was unhappy with the way NHS England arbitrated the dispute and said the events had an adverse impact of both her and Miss C. The Ombudsmen found no fault by the Council when it decided to accept responsibility for Miss C's aftercare needs. The clinical commissioning groups delayed in agreeing responsibility which meant Miss C remained in an inappropriate hospital placement, which did not meet her needs, for too long. The clinical commissioning groups have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B, pay a financial remedy and review the National Health Service's guidance relating to establishing the responsible commissioner.

  • Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissiong Group (16 016 953)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 23-Oct-2018

    Summary: The complainant, Mrs B, said a funding dispute between the Council and three clinical commissioning groups delayed her daughter's, Miss C's, move from an independent hospital to a more suitable placement although she was medically fit for discharge.
    Mrs B was unhappy with the way NHS England arbitrated the dispute and said the events had an adverse impact of both her and Miss C. The Ombudsmen found no fault by the Council when it decided to accept responsibility for Miss C's aftercare needs. The clinical commissioning groups delayed in agreeing responsibility which meant Miss C remained in an inappropriate hospital placement, which did not meet her needs, for too long. The clinical commissioning groups have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B, pay a financial remedy and review the National Health Service's guidance relating to establishing the responsible commissioner.

  • Haringey Clinical Commissioning Group (16 016 953)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 23-Oct-2018

    Summary: The complainant, Mrs B, said a funding dispute between the Council and three clinical commissioning groups delayed her daughter's, Miss C's, move from an independent hospital to a more suitable placement although she was medically fit for discharge.
    Mrs B was unhappy with the way NHS England arbitrated the dispute and said the events had an adverse impact of both her and Miss C. The Ombudsmen found no fault by the Council when it decided to accept responsibility for Miss C's aftercare needs. The clinical commissioning groups delayed in agreeing responsibility which meant Miss C remained in an inappropriate hospital placement, which did not meet her needs, for too long. The clinical commissioning groups have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B, pay a financial remedy and review the National Health Service's guidance relating to establishing the responsible commissioner.

  • Tees, Esk & Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust (17 002 243)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 05-Oct-2018

    Summary: The Ombudsmen uphold a complaint against the Trust for a delay in diagnosis of a mental health patient but not against the Council for inappropriate residential placements.

;