Source · Select Committees · Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Recommendation 8
8
Paragraph: 29
It is necessary for complaints to the PHSO to be time-limited, as there needs to...
Conclusion
It is necessary for complaints to the PHSO to be time-limited, as there needs to be some level of certainty about when matters that could potentially be complained about can no longer be taken forward. However, the Committee’s view is that if an organisation cannot demonstrate that it has informed complainants in good time of their ability to refer a complaint to the PHSO, then this should be a material consideration in whether the Ombudsman decides to use his discretion to investigate the complaint despite being out-of-time under the legislation. The PHSO should report to the Committee annually about the number of cases that have been “timed out” and how often and why the Ombudsman’s discretion has been used.
Paragraph Reference:
29
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
The Health Service Commissioner Act and Parliamentary Commissioner Act both set a legal time limit of 12 months from the date an individual became aware of a failing for the Ombudsman to investigate. They also give the Ombudsman the power to use their discretion to look at complaints outside of this time limit, if the Ombudsman considers it reasonable to do so when taking into account the specific circumstances of each complaint. To support this, PHSO’s service policy provides guidance for caseworkers on how to approach the time limit and how to use discretion, as set out in PHSO’s letter to the Committee Chair on 30 October 2020. It is good practice that organizations signpost complainants to us. PHSO’s letter of 30 October 2020 outlined to the Committee how we work with organizations in PHSO’s jurisdiction and referring MPs to raise awareness of PHSO’s service. PHSO is able to look at complaints that have exceeded the 12 months time limit where it considers that it is reasonable to do so. This could include cases where there are special circumstances outside of the complainant’s control, for example where an organization has taken longer than 12 months to complete the local resolution process and the complainant did not then delay bringing their complaint to PHSO. The Committee recommends that if a body did not notify a complainant of their ability to refer a complaint to PHSO, then this should be a material consideration where a complainant comes to us after 12 months. We agree. This would be an element in PHSO’s consideration to explore, along with any other factors, whether discretion should be applied to look at an out of time case. We collect data on the number of cases we have not looked at due to the time limit, but do not collect data in instances where we have set aside the time limit, as these cases are considered in line with our standard investigation processes. During 2019–20 we recorded 969 cases as out-of-time. We will shortly be publishing a new version of PHSO’s service model policy, which sets out in detail the process that caseworkers follow when looking into a complaint. This will include updated information on how we handle cases that exceed the time limit. This will be available on PHSO’s website to support members of the public, complainants, MPs and organizations to understand what cases PHSO can look into.