Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Wolverhampton Clinical Commissioning Group (17 013 455)

    Statement Not upheld Other 09-May-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen has not found fault by a Council, an NHS Trust or a CCG with their assessment and/or consideration of continuing healthcare funding. The Ombudsmen found fault by a GP Practice in not considering fast-tracking a continuing healthcare assessment. The Practice has already accepted the fault and taken action to learn from the complaint. A retrospective continuing healthcare review which the CCG has agreed to will remedy any potential financial injustice.

  • Northern Lincolnshire & Goole NHS Foundation Trust (17 014 253)

    Statement Upheld Other 29-Apr-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen do not consider Northern Lincolnshire & Goole NHS Foundation Trust's (the Trust) decision to remove M from the watchful wait list in January 2017 was fault. However, the Trust should have told Miss L it removed M from the watchful wait list in July 2016, before it later reinstated him. The Ombudsmen do not consider the Trust unnecessary delayed sending M for an autism assessment. Also, Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust's autism assessment of M was in line with the relevant guidelines.

  • North East Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group (17 014 253)

    Statement Not upheld Other 29-Apr-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen do not consider Northern Lincolnshire & Goole NHS Foundation Trust's (the Trust) decision to remove M from the watchful wait list in January 2017 was fault. However, the Trust should have told Miss L it removed M from the watchful wait list in July 2016, before it later reinstated him. The Ombudsmen do not consider the Trust unnecessary delayed sending M for an autism assessment. Also, Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust's autism assessment of M was in line with the relevant guidelines.

  • Wirral Clinical Commissioning Group (18 006 785)

    Statement Upheld Other 09-Apr-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find a CCG failed to act on information about a resident with nursing needs moving out of its area. The lack of action meant the care home in the new area did not receive the Funded Nursing Care contributions it was entitled to. This was an injustice. The CCG agreed to make a payment to reimburse these missed payments.

  • NHS England - London Area Team (17 003 012)

    Statement Not upheld Other 28-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains on behalf of his late great grandmother, Mrs C. He is unhappy with the care provided to her by a number of organisations which he says led to physical discomfort for her and distress for her family. There were some failings by the Council which it should apologise for and provide Mr B with details of how it will ensure these failings do not happen again. There were no failings by the other organisations involved in Mr B's complaint.

  • Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (17 003 012)

    Statement Not upheld Other 28-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains on behalf of his late great grandmother, Mrs C. He is unhappy with the care provided to her by a number of organisations which he says led to physical discomfort for her and distress for her family. There were some failings by the Council which it should apologise for and provide Mr B with details of how it will ensure these failings do not happen again. There were no failings by the other organisations involved in Mr B's complaint.

  • Stoke Clinical Commissioning Group (18 003 499)

    Statement Not upheld Other 27-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council and Trust failed to ensure the support set out in her son, B's, Education, Health and Care Plan during the 2017-18 school year was provided. She also complained the Council failed to involve her in planning the help B needed. The Council was at fault when it twice failed to issue the NHS Clinical Commissioning Group with a copy of B's Plan. However, B did not suffer an injustice because he received the Occupational Therapy specified in his assessment of his needs. The Council was also at fault when it included support in B's Plan which it did not consider B needed, took too long to issue B's amended final Plan and incorrectly advised Mrs X that it could not consider her complaint. However, these faults did not cause Mrs X or B a significant injustice. There was no fault in the Trust's actions.

  • Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust (17 009 661)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs P complained about the way the Council and the Trust assessed their son's, Mr T's, needs when he moved back to the family home from a failed residential placement. They claimed the Council and the Trust did not consider all his health and social care needs and this impacted adversely on his wellbeing. The Ombudsmen found the Council and the Trust failed to complete a holistic coordinated assessment to ensure Mr T's health and social care needs were aligned. The Ombudsmen recommend the Council lead on a holistic coordinated review of Mr T's needs with the Trust.

  • East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (18 010 287)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: Ms B complained about poor communication between the Council and two NHS Trusts which led to a delay in her father, Mr D, receiving community rehabilitation when he was discharged from hospital after he had a stroke. The Ombudsmen found poor communication and conflicting information between the Council and the two NHS Trusts led to a delay of two months before Mr D received community rehabilitation. This is likely to have had an adverse impact on Mr D's wellbeing. The Council and the two NHS Trusts have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations to act to improve their procedures, apologise to the complainant and her father and make a payment to acknowledge the injustice caused.

  • Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (17 010 333)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-Mar-2019

    Summary: Cambridge County Council and Cambridge & Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group worked together as the Cambridgeshire Learning Disability Partnership (the LDP). The Ombudsmen consider they were at fault for the lack of support for Mr Y's needs between March and September 2016. Care providers did not meet Mr Y's needs, which led him to gain a significant amount of weight, and caused Mrs X distress. Mrs X also suffered a financial impact at having to buy her son new clothes. The Ombudsmen consider the LDP should have done more when Mr Y refused to engage in the mental capacity assessment to decide his future accommodation. This fault has caused uncertainty and distress to Mrs X and Mr Y.