Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Redbridge Clinical Commissioning Group (18 001 822)

    Statement Upheld Other 08-Jul-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find a Council and CCG failed to work together properly to agree a young person's Education Health and Care Plan. The young person missed out on support for an assessed health need over a prolonged period. Their parents were able to fund some private support, for which they have been partly reimbursed by the Council. The CCG has agreed to reimburse the outstanding amount. Further, the CCG has agreed to provide a financial remedy to acknowledge the uncertainty about the impact on the young person's health.

  • Lewisham Clinical Commissioning Group (17 009 673)

    Statement Not upheld Other 19-Jun-2019

    Summary: A man complained that a council and clinical commissioning group took too long to assess his father's home for adaptations and did not consider his religious need to access a shower. The Ombudsmen find fault with communication about the assessments, which caused some frustration. The Ombudsmen find that the council was at fault for not considering religious needs but this did not cause injustice. The Council will apologise for the impact of the lack of updates about the assessments.

  • Bedfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group (16 002 323)

    Statement Upheld Other 17-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found fault with the way a CCG managed the Children's Continuing Care process for a child with severe disabilities. They recommended the CCG apologise for this fault and pay the complainants a financial remedy in recognition of the distress this caused them. They also found fault with the Council's delayed assessment of the parents' needs as carers. The Council agreed to apologise to the complainants. The Ombudsmen found no fault with the actions of a Trust involved with the child's care.

  • Essex Partnership University Foundation Trust (16 002 323)

    Statement Not upheld Other 17-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found fault with the way a CCG managed the Children's Continuing Care process for a child with severe disabilities. They recommended the CCG apologise for this fault and pay the complainants a financial remedy in recognition of the distress this caused them. They also found fault with the Council's delayed assessment of the parents' needs as carers. The Council agreed to apologise to the complainants. The Ombudsmen found no fault with the actions of a Trust involved with the child's care.

  • Somerset Doctors Urgent Care (18 001 076)

    Statement Not upheld Other 11-Jun-2019

    Summary: Ms Y complains about the care and treatment provided to her daughter, Ms X, mostly over a period of six days. The Ombudsmen do not find good reasons to criticise the clinical decisions taken about her care. However, there is evidence of fault causing injustice in the way NHS England dealt with the complaint. To remedy the outstanding injustice, the Ombudsmen recommend NHS England offers a symbolic payment of £100 to Ms X's mother, Ms Y, for the inconvenience caused by its delays.

  • NHS England - South West Area Team (18 001 076)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Jun-2019

    Summary: Ms Y complains about the care and treatment provided to her daughter, Ms X, mostly over a period of six days. The Ombudsmen do not find good reasons to criticise the clinical decisions taken about her care. However, there is evidence of fault causing injustice in the way NHS England dealt with the complaint. To remedy the outstanding injustice, the Ombudsmen recommend NHS England offers a symbolic payment of £100 to Ms X's mother, Ms Y, for the inconvenience caused by its delays.

  • Saxondale Nursing Home (18 010 443)

    Statement Upheld Other 07-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mrs D complained that a GP practice and nursing home failed to provide her father with medication he needed for four days and that this led to his death. The Ombudsmen find that both the GP practice and nursing home failed to make sure he received the medication on time, and this reduced his chances of surviving an infection. They have agreed to actions to address this.

  • 2gether NHS Foundation Trust (17 010 997)

    Statement Upheld Other 28-May-2019

    Summary: Mr D complained the Trust, the Council and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) failed to consider what aftercare services his son, Mr B, would need on discharge from hospital. He also said the authorities then failed to implement an agreed care package and this had an adverse impact on Mr B's wellbeing. The Ombudsmen found the authorities failed to have a specific aftercare plan in place when Mr B left hospital and failed to keep an appropriate plan for his care, support and safety under review in one place. The Trust, the Council and the CCG have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations to apologise, pay a financial remedy, ensure a robust care and support plan is in place for Mr B, improve aftercare planning and address a gap in commissioning.

  • Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group (17 010 997)

    Statement Upheld Other 28-May-2019

    Summary: Mr D complained the Trust, the Council and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) failed to consider what aftercare services his son, Mr B, would need on discharge from hospital. He also said the authorities then failed to implement an agreed care package and this had an adverse impact on Mr B's wellbeing. The Ombudsmen found the authorities failed to have a specific aftercare plan in place when Mr B left hospital and failed to keep an appropriate plan for his care, support and safety under review in one place. The Trust, the Council and the CCG have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations to apologise, pay a financial remedy, ensure a robust care and support plan is in place for Mr B, improve aftercare planning and address a gap in commissioning.

  • Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (17 002 402)

    Statement Not upheld Other 28-May-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found fault with a Council and a CCG in delaying care and funding assessments. This did not cause an injustice to the individual receiving care. There was an injustice to the carer with delays in being able to access respite support but they do not wish to receive an apology from the Council. The Ombudsmen did not find fault with the care provided by the organisations or with decisions to use safeguarding procedures to consider concerns about an individual's safety. The Ombudsmen found no fault by an NHS Trust about its role in providing care equipment.