Privacy settings

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.

Mental health services


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Bedford, Luton and Milton Keynes Clinical Commissioning Group (21 004 603)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 30-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs B complained the Council and the CCG failed to pay her sister's, Miss C's, charges for accommodation for a period when she was entitled to free aftercare under the Mental Health Act 1983 since 2017. She also complained that Miss C remained in an unsuitable placement with unmet needs for almost two years. Mrs B said the Trust failed to provide her sister with enough mental health support and when acting on behalf of the Council and the CCG. She said the alleged faults had adverse impact on her sister's wellbeing and caused Mrs B avoidable distress. We found fault by the Council and the CCG in the way they stopped paying for accommodation which should have been provided without charge. This led to Mrs B having to support her sister with financial matters and this could have been avoided. Delays by the Trust led to Miss C remaining in an unsuitable placement for longer than she should have reasonably expected without enough mental health support in place. This is likely to have impacted on her wellbeing. To remedy the injustice the authorities agreed to our recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B in writing and make acknowledgement payments. They will review their policies and procedures to ensure they are in line with relevant law and good practice. They will also ensure their staff act in accordance with legislation and established good practice.

  • East London NHS Foundation Trust (21 004 603)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 30-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs B complained the Council and the CCG failed to pay her sister's, Miss C's, charges for accommodation for a period when she was entitled to free aftercare under the Mental Health Act 1983 since 2017. She also complained that Miss C remained in an unsuitable placement with unmet needs for almost two years. Mrs B said the Trust failed to provide her sister with enough mental health support and when acting on behalf of the Council and the CCG. She said the alleged faults had adverse impact on her sister's wellbeing and caused Mrs B avoidable distress. We found fault by the Council and the CCG in the way they stopped paying for accommodation which should have been provided without charge. This led to Mrs B having to support her sister with financial matters and this could have been avoided. Delays by the Trust led to Miss C remaining in an unsuitable placement for longer than she should have reasonably expected without enough mental health support in place. This is likely to have impacted on her wellbeing. To remedy the injustice the authorities agreed to our recommendations and will apologise to Miss C and Mrs B in writing and make acknowledgement payments. They will review their policies and procedures to ensure they are in line with relevant law and good practice. They will also ensure their staff act in accordance with legislation and established good practice.

  • Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (20 004 266)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 30-Mar-2022

    Summary: We found fault with the care and treatment provided to Mr B over the period June 2018 to May 2019. These faults caused avoidable distress and frustration to Ms B. We recommended an apology, service improvements and financial recompense to address this injustice

  • Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (21 007 640)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 29-Mar-2022

    Summary: Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust clearly communicated Mr P's dementia diagnosis but did not develop a care and support plan for him. We also consider Durham County Council's poor communication with Mr P's wife, Mrs P, about his care and support leaves her uncertain if Mr P would have received different care and support before he died.

  • NHS East Sussex Clinical Commissioning Group (21 007 637)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 28-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs B complained about the care provided to her late husband, Mr B, by a care provider commissioned by the Council and the CCG to meet his aftercare needs. We found the care provider failed to properly record Mrs B's late husband's needs around eating and food consistency. As a result, Mrs B is left with uncertainty about whether the care provider met his needs in this area. We also found the care provider failed at times to communicate with Mrs B about changes in her husband's health despite her being his attorney for health and welfare. This is likely to have caused her avoidable distress. However, the care provider acted to improve when it dealt with Mrs B's complaint. The Council and the CCG have agreed to our recommendations and will apologise to Mrs B and pay her £250 each.

  • Brighton & Hove Clinical Commissioning Group (21 000 348)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 25-Mar-2022

    Summary: Dr B complained ESC Council and the NHS Trust failed to properly safeguard her when it undertook an investigation into allegations of physical assault when she lived in a care home jointly funded by the CCG and BHC Council. She also complained about the home's investigation and its decision to serve notice to end the placement. We found fault in the safeguarding protection plan put in place by ESC Council and as a result Dr B experienced avoidable distress. We also found fault in the way the jointly funded home completed its investigation, and this is likely to have meant Dr B missed an opportunity to have her views and outcomes properly recorded. The Councils and the CCG agreed to our recommendations and will arrange for Dr B to receive a written apology for the injustice caused. ESC Council will also remind its officers of the importance of updating safeguarding documentation.

  • Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (21 000 348)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 25-Mar-2022

    Summary: Dr B complained ESC Council and the NHS Trust failed to properly safeguard her when it undertook an investigation into allegations of physical assault when she lived in a care home jointly funded by the CCG and BHC Council. She also complained about the home's investigation and its decision to serve notice to end the placement. We found fault in the safeguarding protection plan put in place by ESC Council and as a result Dr B experienced avoidable distress. We also found fault in the way the jointly funded home completed its investigation, and this is likely to have meant Dr B missed an opportunity to have her views and outcomes properly recorded. The Councils and the CCG agreed to our recommendations and will arrange for Dr B to receive a written apology for the injustice caused. ESC Council will also remind its officers of the importance of updating safeguarding documentation.

  • Somerset NHS Foundation Trust (20 008 735)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs M complained on behalf of her son, Mr P, about the actions of Somerset County Council (the Council) and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). The complaint was about the Council's adult care services and the Trust's mental health and complaints services. We have upheld elements of the complaint relating to social care needs assessment, claims about Mrs M's behaviour, and complaint handling. We have not upheld other parts of the complaint. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations. We have therefore completed our investigation.

  • Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (19 018 519)

    Statement Upheld Mental health services 07-Mar-2022

    Summary: The complainant, Ms B, said she learnt in 2020 the Council, the Trust and two Clinical Commissioning Groups did not properly consider her daughter's, Miss G's, entitlement to free aftercare following her detainment under the Mental Health Act 1983. She also complained about the care and support provided to Miss G by the Council and the Trust. On the evidence available, we found that Miss G was not entitled to free aftercare. However, poor record keeping by the authorities led to confusion and Ms B's uncertainty about Miss G's entitlement to free aftercare. It also meant one of the CCG's did not consider Miss G for healthcare funding when it should have. The Council and the Trust did not work together to complete the actions in Miss G's discharge plan when she was released from detention and the Council did not complete care and support planning documentation properly. The authorities agreed to our recommendations and will reassess Miss G's needs and entitlement to healthcare funding. The Council, the Trust and one of the CCG's will apologise to Ms B and Miss G and make an acknowledgement payment. The Council will remind its officers of the importance of completing care and support planning documentation in line with best practice and statutory guidance.

  • Livewell Southwest (20 013 288)

    Statement Not upheld Mental health services 18-Feb-2022

    Summary: Mr B complained about the way his relative, Mr C, was discharged from psychiatric liaison services on two occasions over one weekend. We found no fault by the Council, Livewell Southwest or the Trust.