Hospital acute services


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (16 001 681)

    Statement Not upheld Hospital acute services 14-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found no fault with the medical care complained about. There was some fault with the nursing care investigated, but no evidence it caused harm. There was some fault with the safeguarding investigation. The Council will take action to address this.

  • Central Manchester Clinical Commissiong Group (16 007 286)

    Statement Not upheld Hospital acute services 12-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault with the decision to transfer a young man with autism to an out-of-area placement. However, they do find fault with the Council's failure to support him with his finances. In addition, they find fault with the Council's failure to communicate effectively with his family.

  • Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (16 007 279)

    Statement Not upheld Hospital acute services 12-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault with the decision to transfer a young man with autism to an out-of-area placement. However, they do find fault with the Council's failure to support him with his finances. In addition, they find fault with the Council's failure to communicate effectively with his family.

  • Stockport NHS Foundation Trust (16 014 003)

    Statement Not upheld Hospital acute services 12-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault with the decision to transfer a young man with autism to an out-of-area placement. However, they do find fault with the Council's failure to support him with his finances. In addition, they find fault with the Council's failure to communicate effectively with his family.

  • Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (16 009 427)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Hospital acute services 09-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found not fault by a council in giving due regard to the location of care homes when identifying a suitable care placement. There was no fault with the council's best interests decision process as appropriate family members were consulted.

  • The Whittington Hospital NHS Trust (15 018 598)

    Statement Upheld Hospital acute services 01-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find a Trust should have done more to quickly assess whether a girl, M, had treatable needs which were preventing her from attending school. This fault caused a delay which, in turn, caused M's parents frustration and stress. The Ombudsmen recommend the Trust apologise and take steps to prevent recurrences. The Council followed the correct process when it received child protection referrals, and the Trust contributed in line with its own responsibilities.

  • NHS Redditch & Bromsgrove C C G (16 001 466)

    Statement Upheld Hospital acute services 12-May-2017

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council, BUPA and the CCG's failure to safeguard his wife in 2011 and 2012. The Council and CCG have commissioned two independent investigations and retrospective safeguarding investigations into Mr X's concerns. These reviews have identified faults for which the organisations have apologised. However, Mr X should be given more information about practical actions taken. The Council, BUPA and CCG have agreed to do this.

  • North Derbyshire Clinical Commissioning Group (15 020 599)

    Statement Not upheld Hospital acute services 08-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found no fault in the way two CCGs dealt with the complainant's daughter's transfer of care and support when she and the complainant moved area. The Council acted quickly to complete disabled adaptations to the property they moved to. The Council and Liverpool CCG failed to provide the complainant's daughter with enough support to keep her safe and well when a care agency suddenly stopped providing support. The Council's failure to provide the complainant with enough formal support caused her increased carer's strain and distress. The Council and Liverpool CCG have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations that they apologise to the complainant and her daughter, pay a financial remedy to acknowledge the injustice caused and improve contingency support planning when agreeing joint packages of care for complex cases.

  • Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group (15 019 068)

    Statement Upheld Hospital acute services 08-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found no fault in the way two CCGs dealt with the complainant's daughter's transfer of care and support when she and the complainant moved area. The Council acted quickly to complete disabled adaptations to the property they moved to. The Council and Liverpool CCG failed to provide the complainant's daughter with enough support to keep her safe and well when a care agency suddenly stopped providing support. The Council's failure to provide the complainant with enough formal support caused her increased carer's strain and distress. The Council and Liverpool CCG have agreed to the Ombudsmen's recommendations that they apologise to the complainant and her daughter, pay a financial remedy to acknowledge the injustice caused and improve contingency support planning when agreeing joint packages of care for complex cases.

  • East & North Hertfordshire NHS Trust (16 003 052)

    Statement Upheld Hospital acute services 05-May-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found the Trust failed to act in accordance with its safeguarding procedures when it received a safeguarding alert but it took action to improve. The Ombudsmen found the Council, the CCG and Bupa Care Homes failed to communicate properly about funding and responsibility after the CCG placed the complainant's father in a care home. The Council delayed in assessing the complainant's father and also failed to be clear about who was financially responsible for the placement. Because of this the complainant was caused distress when she received a bill for the placement and her father remained in an inappropriate placement for longer than necessary. The Council has agreed to the Ombudsmen recommendations that it pays the complainant's father £1857 and refund £64 he paid extra for care fees. Bupa will pay £192 to the complainant. The CCG has agreed to improve its processes around healthcare funding eligibility decisions. The CCG, the Council and Bupa will also apologise to the complainant and each pay her £100.

;