Annual Report 2007-08 - the Parliamentary and Health Service ...

19Case StudyPoor complaint handlingled to GP’s retirement onhealth groundsOn 3 September 2002 an altercation occurred between Mrs B,Dr R and a nurse while Mrs B was attempting to register as apatient at the practice where Dr R worked. On 6 SeptemberMrs B wrote to the Chief Executive of Medway Primary Care Trust(Medway) to complain about Dr R. On 16 September Medwayasked Dr R to respond to Mrs B’s complaint letter and informedMrs B that she could request an Independent Review of hercomplaint if she was dissatisfied with the practice’s eventualresponse. Mrs B replied that she had already received a responsefrom the practice, which she felt was unsatisfactory. Medwaytold Mrs B that she now had the right to request an IndependentReview, but did not say they had already asked Dr R to responddirect to her.On 2 October 2002 Dr R replied personally to Mrs B’s complaint,apologising for the delay in responding, caused by her absence onleave, and setting out her view of the incident. After a conciliationprocess failed to resolve the complaint, Mrs B requested anIndependent Review of the case. Responsibility for arranging thiswas delegated to Kent Primary Care Agency, which operatedunder the management of the Dartford, Gravesham and SwanleyPCT (now West Kent PCT).The Independent Review Panel (the Panel) met in June 2003 andpartly upheld Mrs B’s complaint. It said that Dr R had not breachedher Terms of Service for General Practitioners, because Mrs B hadnot been registered with the practice. The Panel’s report notedthat the complaint arose out of Mrs B’s attempts to register, butnonetheless said that ‘such a complaint falls within the guidelinesof the Health Service’s Complaints Procedure’. Dr R’s mental statewas such that the day of the hearing was her last day in generalpractice. She took sick leave and was admitted in Septemberto a psychiatric hospital with bipolar disorder. She retired fromgeneral practice on health grounds in March 2004.Dr R complained to the Ombudsman in August 2003, wanting aninvestigation into the process that had led to the Panel sitting atall. She felt she had been the victim of a ‘witch hunt’ and said thatthe Trusts’ mishandling of the complaint against her had cost herher career, and significantly disrupted her personal and family life.Our investigation found that key documents had not been sentto Dr R in a timely manner and that Medway did not inform Dr Rthat they had told Mrs B that she could ask for a review despiteasking Dr R to provide a local resolution letter. Dr R’s letter toMrs B was unreasonably dismissed throughout the investigationbecause it arrived very slightly late, despite valid reasons for thedelay. Both Trusts repeatedly failed to answer Dr R’s reasonablequestions about whether they had considered her letter to Mrs B,and whether Mrs B was even entitled to pursue a complaint underthe NHS complaints procedure. The Trusts’ investigation lacked42