West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust

4. Mr A complains about the care and treatment the Trust provided to Mr L following his cancer diagnosis in 2022. He complains about a consultant haematologist’s decision to proceed with the final cycle of chemotherapy in 2022. Mr A says his father was too ill and frail.

5. Mr A complains a consultant geriatrician cancelled a planned hospital admission in 2023. He says they instead completed a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) order and told his mother there was nothing further they could do.

6. Mr A also complains the consultant haematologist later denied, misled, or materially minimised their knowledge of, and responsibility for, key decisions and communications in 2023.

7. Mr A says the final cycle of chemotherapy further weakened Mr L and made him more frail. He also says it led to him developing an infection and then sepsis triggering a long inpatient admission and ultimately his death.

8. Mr A says Mr L was only admitted to hospital in 2023 as the family intervened. He says what happened caused the family a great deal of distress. He also told us about the impact of Mr L’s death on his family particularly his mother.

9. Mr A says the lack of clear answers and inconsistencies in the accounts provided has compounded the family’s grief and prevented closure. He says it has also left them with a continuing sense of injustice and loss of trust.

10. Mr A is seeking explanations, acknowledgements, service improvements and a financial remedy from the Trust.

11. Mr L was in his 70s. He was diagnosed with low-grade B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2022. This is a type of slow-growing cancer that affects the lymphatic system, which is part of the body's immune system. It can take time before it causes any serious problems, and people often live with it for years.

12. Mr L started a six-month course of chemotherapy in 2022. The consultant haematologist said he was fit to proceed with the final cycle in late 2022. Sadly, the Trust admitted him to hospital two days after this and later diagnosed sepsis. This is a life-threatening condition where the body overreacts to an infection.

13. Mr L then moved between hospital and a community assessment bed managed by the Trust in a care home. He very sadly died in hospital in 2023 following a severe chest infection and suspected sepsis. We cannot begin to imagine what a difficult time this must have been for Mr A and his family.

What happened

16. The family contacted PALS with concerns in early 2023. They subsequently spoke with the medical team and then advised PALS this discussion had addressed their concerns. The family contacted PALS again four months later as they wanted to have one doctor as point of contact, but Mr L sadly died a week later.

17. The Trust’s complaints manager met with the family three days after Mr L died to discuss concerns they had about his death. The complaints manager advised them to discuss their concerns with the medical examiner but said they would ask the Trust’s learning from deaths team to do a review. This team issued the outcome of its review the following month.

18. The family contacted the complaints manager again five months later saying they still had unanswered questions about Mr L’s care. The complaints manager replied two weeks later advising them to raise these concerns in writing. The family emailed the complaints manager three questions that same day and they answered these two weeks after that.

19. The family raised a formal complaint with the Trust two months later. They also contacted the General Medical Council (GMC) with concerns about a doctor(s) one month after this. The GMC deals with serious concerns about doctors that may affect their ability to practise safely.

20. The Trust shared its complaint response four months after receiving it and the GMC issued its decision in early 2025. Mr A then contacted us in late 2025. Overall, we can see there are some significant delays in Mr A progressing his complaint through the NHS complaints process.

Our time limit

21. The law says a person needs to make their complaint to us within a year of becoming aware of the problem they are complaining about. We received Mr A’s complaint in late 2025. After carefully reviewing what happened, we have determined it falls outside our time limit.

22. Mr A was aware of his complaint about his father’s chemotherapy when he was admitted to hospital in 2022. However, we recognise he was not fully aware of the claimed impact until his father died in 2023. This means this part of his complaint has been brought to us around 18 months out of time.

23. Mr A was aware of his complaint surrounding his father’s planned hospital admission at the time events took place in 2023. This means this part of his complaint has been brought to us nearly two years out of time.

24. We cannot investigate complaints brought to us after one year, unless we consider there is a good reason to do so. We have therefore spoken with Mr A to understand why he did not come to us sooner.

Mr A’s reasons for the delay in coming to us

25. Mr A says the family engaged with PALS before his father died. He says they contacted PALS again after his death as they had concerns about the death certificate. He says they then went back to PALS with concerns about his care and treatment after speaking with the coroner.

26. Mr A says this eventually led them to complain to the Trust. He says they also contacted the GMC as they felt, and had been advised, this was the most appropriate step. He told us he accepts that was the wrong decision. He says the GMC did not provide its final response until early 2025.

27. Mr A says he accepts it then took him a fair amount of time to contact us. He told us about how emotionally difficult it was for him to continue with the complaint and that he was worried about not completing the process properly. We are very sorry to hear what a difficult time this has been for him.

28. Mr A told us he was made redundant in 2025 and then let go in three months later. He also told us his wife was going through a series of health challenges following treatment for cancer. Overall, he says there was a lot going on and it therefore took him longer to contact us.

Our decision

29. We recognise how difficult it can be to go through the NHS complaints process and the specific reasons Mr A has provided for the delay in coming to us. Unfortunately, after careful consideration, we have decided these reasons do not justify the length of the delays. Overall, we think he could have contacted us much sooner.

30. Mr A took over nine months to complain to the Trust. The Trust responded to his complaint within the six months set out in the NHS complaints regulations, but he decided to wait for the GMC’s decision. This was despite the Trust clearly signposting to us and explaining our role.

31. Mr A then took over 10 months to come to us after receiving the GMC’s decision. We appreciate how difficult it must have been to go through such challenging circumstances, and we are truly sorry for what he and his family have experienced. Overall, we consider the delays are too great for us to justify putting our time limit to one side.

1. Mr A complains about the care and treatment West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) provided to his father, Mr L, following a cancer diagnosis in 2022. Mr L very sadly died in 2023.

2. We have carefully considered Mr A’s complaint about the Trust. The complaint falls outside our one-year time limit. We have decided we cannot put our time limit to one side to consider it.

3. We appreciate how difficult it can be to raise a complaint about the care a loved one received before they died and to keep pursuing this while trying to grieve their loss. We would like to take this opportunity to share our sincere condolences with Mr A.