A dental practice in the Nottinghamshire area

2. Mrs R complains about the service provided by the Practice between January 2013 and December 2020. She says the Practice overfilled her teeth and did not offer alternative treatment.

3. Mrs R says she has suffered with a high level of stress, caused by hours of corrective dental work, as well as financial loss.

4. By bringing her complaint to us, Mrs R seeks financial compensation and service improvements.

5. Mrs R told us between January 2013 and December 2020 her dentist did not offer crowns as treatment for four of her teeth. She says the dentist continued to fill them until they fractured. She was not aware her dentist should have been offering crowns until she attended an appointment with a specialist in late 2020/early 2021.

6. The Practice says it could not offer crowns as Mrs R did not want to have X-rays. The Practice says this made it difficult for it to fully assess Mrs R’s condition.

8. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint where a person has (or had) the option to take legal action, unless we consider this is (or was) unreasonable in the circumstances. We have discussed this with Mrs R to understand her circumstances and the outcomes she wants. We do not consider whether legal action would succeed but whether it would be a reasonable option to look into.

9. Mrs R has explained she would like financial compensation as well as service improvements to ensure no one else goes through a similar situation.

10. There is a potential cause of action in medical negligence, as Mrs R says the lack of treatment by the dentist caused her teeth to deteriorate.

11. Mrs R said she had not considered approaching a solicitor as her preference was for the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to consider her case. She also says she did not think it was appropriate as money is not the only outcome she wants. Mrs R says she is also passionate about her desire for service improvements.

12. We appreciate Mrs R is not only seeking financial compensation and would like to see service improvements. We have also considered the significant cost Mrs R has paid for specialist treatment, which she says could have been avoided had the Practice acted appropriately.

13. Mrs R says the specialist treatment has cost over £20,000. We consider this to be the driving force of her complaint. It is unlikely Mrs R would be satisfied with the amount of financial remedy we tend to achieve, even if we achieved service improvements alongside. This is because it is not in line with our guidance on financial remedy. The amount we achieve tends to be significantly below the amount she paid for private treatment.

14. While we could potentially provide the outcomes Mrs R seeks, by law, we cannot consider a complaint where the person has, or had, the option to get an answer to their concerns by taking legal action.

15. We have not seen any evidence it would not be reasonable or practical for Mrs R to enquire about a medical negligence claim.

16. Taking all of the above into account, we consider it reasonable for Mrs R to seek legal advice.

17. If successful, this route would be able to achieve a financial outcome as well as the possibility of service improvements, as this can be a secondary outcome obtained via the courts.

18. Mrs R can return to us following legal action, for us to consider any issues not already considered by the court.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs R’s complaint about a dental practice in the Nottinghamshire area (the Practice). We consider Mrs R could take legal action on the matter she has brought to us.