A practice in the Richmond upon Thames area

3. Mr E complains that a Practice in West London (the Practice) incorrectly declined to investigate his complaint about a safeguarding referral made on 25 March 2021, which he says contained misleading information.

4. Mr E says as a result he has suffered five years of parental blame and it has affected his psychological wellbeing. He says there is also an ongoing risk to his daughter’s wellbeing and mental health.

5. Mr E is seeking the Practice to re-consider its decision not to investigate his complaint.

6. Mr E raised a complaint with the Practice on 6 May 2025. On 13 May the Practice declined to investigate his complaint.

9. Mr E complains the Practice incorrectly declined to investigate his complaint. The Practice made a safeguarding referral regarding his children in March 2021. Mr E says this contained misleading information.

10. The Practice told Mr E on 13 May 2025 it would not consider his complaint as he was not registered at the Practice.

11. The Practice made a safeguarding referral following a discussion with a patient. The contents of the discussion are not contained within Mr E’s medical records. The information is contained within another individual’s records.

12. We have seen the Practice provided Mr E with a response to his complaint request on 13 May 2025. It stated as he was not registered as a patient with the Practice it would not consider his complaint. He received a second response on 12 September 2025. In this response the Practice set out it duties in line with data protection law.

13. Mr E is seeking details of the information that was provided in the safeguarding referral. The Practice said as the information is contained within someone else’s medical record and not his own, it is not able to discuss the matter further. It said under UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 it cannot discuss the matter Mr E complains about.

14. UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), says:

‘Processing of personal data revealing data concerning health shall be prohibited.’

15. The Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) says:

‘1. This Act makes provision about the processing of personal data.

2. Most processing of personal data is subject to the GDPR.’

16. The Practice’s position not to disclose medical records is in line with UK GDPR and DPA. The Practice clearly explained its position to Mr E. It would not be lawful to discuss the matter as this would be in breach of both GDPR and the DPA.

17. GMC Confidentiality: good practice in handling patient information, sets out:

‘Acting within the law 5. Medical professionals, like everyone else, must comply with the law when using, accessing or disclosing personal information. The law governing the use and disclosure of personal information is complex, however, and varies across the four countries of the UK.’

18. The Practice’s response is in keeping with GMC guidance. Medical professionals must comply with the law.

19. We acknowledge Mr E’s frustration as the Practice have not investigated his complaint. We would not consider an individual not being registered as a patient as a suitable reason for declining a complaint. We have seen an additional explanation was provided to Mr E. We consider the Practice’s second explanation is reasonable. Its decision is supported by GDPR, the Data Protection Act and GMC guidance. We will take no further action on the complaint.

1. We have carefully considered Mr E’s complaint about A Practice in West London (the Practice). We understand it is frustrating when an organisation declines to respond to a complaint.

2. We consider the Practice provided a reasonable and appropriate explanation as to why it will not respond to the complaint. We therefore will not consider this complaint further.