Croydon Health Services NHS Trust

3. Mr G complains about Croydon Health Services NHS Trust’s (the Trust) decision to stop treating his sister with antibiotics for her infection on 10 December 2020, when blood results showed they were working.

4. Mr G’s sister sadly died at the Trust in mid-December 2020. Mr G questions the ethical and legal stance of the Trust’s decision. He says that by stopping antibiotic treatment the outcome was inevitable and the Trust let her die. He says the Trust’s decision meant his sister was unable to return to her home where she could have been comfortable and surrounded by friends. Mr G says he is left without closure, and he has been caused avoidable frustration and distress.

5. To resolve his complaint, Mr G would like an independent review of what happened. He would like to pursue disciplinary action and criminal prosecution if serious failings are found.

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.

9. We do not base our decision on how successful legal action would be. We consider whether legal action is (or was) a reasonable option for someone to take. We discussed this with Mr G to understand his circumstances and the outcomes he wants.

10. Mr G says he is suspicious of the Trust’s response and is left not knowing whether the decision to stop treating his sister was right. He explains his sister had Down’s syndrome and dementia meaning she would have been unaware about any care decisions. He feels this raises more concerns about the Trust’s decisions.

11. Mr G can take legal action, specifically through a clinical negligence claim. There is a three-year time limit for most clinical negligence claims. Mr G is still within this three-year time limit and still has the option to take legal action.

12. Mr G wants to pursue disciplinary proceedings and criminal prosecution if serious failings are found. We cannot achieve these outcomes but the legal system can. We think legal action is best suited to pursuing the outcomes Mr G wants.

13. Mr G says he has not taken legal action as he would not be able to afford the fee. We spoke with Mr G about the option of getting free legal advice, which he is yet to explore. Mr G could also get legal representation under what is called a conditional fee arrangement, or ‘no-win, no-fee’ basis where there is no upfront cost. By getting legal advice, Mr G can get the necessary help and support to use this route.

14. It is also an option for Mr G to approach the police directly. Mr G says he has not done this because he does not know who to contact. We understand this route may be new and daunting. The police are in the best place to advise and help him with this.

15. We have considered the relevant factors and the law. Mr G still has time to take legal action.

16. We do not see any barriers to stop him from exploring the available options and we think it is reasonable that he does. We have decided not to consider the complaint further.

1. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has carefully considered Mr G’s complaint and we have decided not to investigate it further. This is because Mr G could take legal action on the matter he has brought to us and because we cannot achieve the outcomes he wants.

2. We understand how important this is to Mr G and we recognise how much he has been affected by what happened.