A dental practice in the West Berkshire area
Mrs A complained the Practice closed her treatment prematurely, causing her to pay twice for fillings. She also experienced delays in complaint handling and postponed appointments.
Outcome
The complaint
3. Mrs A complains about the care and treatment she received from the Practice between the beginning of January 2024 and mid-August 2025. She says the Practice closed an open course of treatment for two fillings in July 2024, which was in contradiction to what it had told her in January 2024. Mrs A says they were delays acknowledging and responding to her complaint and appointments for two fillings were postponed for ten months due to an ongoing complaint.
4. Mrs A says the closed course of treatment meant she had to pay twice for the same course treatment. Mrs A says the delay in acknowledging and investigating her complaint is in breach of the Practice’s own complaints procedure. Mrs A says this led to an unreasonable delay in her complaint being dealt with and treatment for two fillings. Mrs A says the postponed filling appointments caused further decay in her tooth and she might have to have a root canal and crown.
5. Mrs Hawkins would like the Practice to acknowledge the failings and provide a financial remedy.
Background
6. Mrs A visited the Practice at the beginning of January 2024, and it informed her she required two fillings. Mrs A was also having an issue with her wisdom tooth in the same location where the fillings were required. Because of this, the Practice suggested she have the wisdom tooth removed prior to the two fillings, due to the risk of infection. The Practice informed Mrs A both procedures would be carried out under the same course of treatment and she what charged £70.70 for the appointment.
7. In April the Practice refunded the £70.70 charge for the January appointment. This was because Mrs A had complained to the Practice about being charged before the open course of treatment had been completed.
8. In June the Practice removed Mrs A’s wisdom tooth. Mrs A then had an emergency appointment at the Practice in July where she had treatment for an infection where the wisdom tooth was removed. The Practice charged Mrs A £26.80 for the emergence appointment.
9. The Practice then informed Mrs A there was no open course of treatment, and it was under the impression the two fillings had already been carried out. It informed her that if she wanted the two fillings then she would need to pay £70.70 for a new course of treatment.
10. In August Mrs A raised a complaint in writing to the Practice about the open course of treatment being closed.
11. In March 2025 the Practice carried out the two filling on Mrs A’s teeth. Mrs A paid £73.50 for the fillings.
12. In June Mrs A brought her complaint to us. In August the Practice sent Mrs A its final response to the complaint.
Findings
14. Before we decide if we should investigate a complaint, we consider attempting a resolution where it appears that, with minimal intervention, we could achieve a satisfactory result for the complainant. This could include asking an organisation to provide financial redress.
15. We called Mrs A in November to discuss her complaint. We discussed the outcome she was seeking from bringing her complaint to us. Mrs A told us she was seeking a refund of the cost of the fillings (£73.50) and a small financial remedy for the poor customer experience.
16. In December the Practice told us it would be willing to pay Mrs A £100 as a gesture of goodwill in recognition of its handling of her complaint. The Practice also explained how Mrs A could request a refund of the £73.50 fee, if she has evidence to show she should have been exempt.
17. We spoke with Mrs A on 12 December to explain what the Practice had offered to do to resolve the complaint. Mrs A confirmed she was happy to accept this.
18. We acknowledge this has been a difficult time for Mrs A, and she has experienced pain and inconvenience while waiting for the Practice to resolve her complaint. The Practice has agreed to take action to put things right for Mrs A. Because of this, we think the complaint has been resolved and we will not be considering the complaint further.
Our decision
1. We have carefully considered Mrs A’s complaint about a Dental Practice in Berkshire (the Practice). We were sorry to hear of Mrs A’s concerns about the service she received from Practice and of the impact this had on her.
2. We have agreed some action with the Practice to resolve Mrs A’s complaint. The Practice has now agreed to pay Mrs A £100. Based on this we are satisfied that Mrs A complaint has now been resolved as the outcome she wanted her been achieved and we will take no further action.
Decision details
- Reference
- P-004509
- Decision type
- Statement
- Jurisdiction
- NHS in England
- Decision date
- 18 December 2025
- Outcome
- Closed After Initial Enquiries
Complaint summary
- Summary
- Mrs A complained the Practice closed her treatment prematurely, causing her to pay twice for fillings. She also experienced delays in complaint handling and postponed appointments.
Source links
- PHSO portal
- Search on PHSO website →
Data from PHSO under Open Government Licence.