An independent provider in the Wealden area

6. Mr B complains that AJM did not provide him with a new wheelchair in an appropriate timeframe and did a faulty repair on his wheelchair on two occasions.

7. Mr B says his wheelchair fell apart and he fell out of his wheelchair on two occasions. He says he felt unsafe and worried about using his wheelchair. He says this limited him as he has been hesitant to leave his house. He says this experience caused him distress and worry daily.

8. As outcomes, Mr B would like a financial remedy.

9. Mr B has been using a wheelchair for over 20 years after he was diagnosed with paraplegia. Paraplegia is a type of paralysis that primarily affects the legs and lower trunk. At the time of the events complained about, Mr B had been using a wheelchair that had been issued to him in 2021.

10. Mr B reported problems with his wheelchair in June, September and October 2024. The engineers at AJM’s workshop initially repaired Mr B’s wheelchair and replaced the faulty castor bearings (which enable the wheel to rotate) and scissor breaks (a type of wheelchair brake mechanism that uses a scissor-like structure to lock the wheels in place).

11. In November 2024, the engineers concluded that Mr B’s wheelchair was damaged beyond repair. A prescription for a replacement wheelchair was therefore made.

12. The ICB changed wheelchair providers in April 2025. By this time, AJM had still not provided Mr B with his replacement wheelchair.

13. Mr B’s replacement wheelchair was provided by the new providers in May 2026.

16. Before we decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen.

Repairs of wheelchair

17. Mr B complains AJM carried out two poor repairs on his wheelchair, which did not fix the issues. He says he initially reported concerns on 6 June 2024, in a clinic appointment. AJM made repairs to Mr B’s wheelchair, fitting in new castor bearings and brakes.

18. In September 2024, Mr B reported a problem with his wheelchair, particularly that the castors on his chair were vibrating.

19. Section 3.2.9 of the service contract says the service is responsible for all repairs and maintenance of electrical and mechanical wheelchairs and associated equipment supplied.

20. We have seen evidence AJM repaired Mr B’s wheelchair in June 2024. We understand Mr B is unhappy with this repair. From what we have seen, AJM has acknowledged this only resolved the issue temporarily.

21. In November 2024, the engineers concluded Mr B’s wheelchair was damaged beyond repair, and he needed a new wheelchair. AJM carried out a further temporary repair in December 2024.

22. We recognise Mr B is unhappy with the repairs carried out by AJM. We have seen evidence AJM attempted to repair Mr B’s wheelchair, in line with its service contract, but Mr B’s wheelchair was unfortunately damaged beyond repair, and he required a new chair.

23. Therefore, we do not see indications of failings in AJM’s repair of the wheelchair. We therefore do not take further action on this aspect of Mr B’s complaint.

Delays in providing a replacement wheelchair

24. On 4 November 2024, Mr B’s wheelchair was reviewed in a clinic appointment. At this appointment, the engineers considered his previous repairs only resolved the issue temporarily. They said Mr B’s wheelchair was damaged beyond repair and he needed a new chair issued. AJM completed Mr B’s replacement wheelchair prescription after this appointment.

25. To help us understand what should have happened after Mr B’s wheelchair was ordered, we have looked at its contract with the ICB. This outlines the timescales for AJM to provide NHS funded services for people in the ICB’s area.

26. The service contract between AJM and the ICB says that the service aims to improve the pace of the delivery of adult’s wheelchairs, to ensure 92 percent of all adults receive their wheelchair and any associated accessories within 18 weeks from the date of referral. This is an NHS England suggested minimal target.

27. The contract says the service aims to improve the stock control and procurement of wheelchairs, accessories, parts and bespoke seating, so that basic stock items are handed over within two weeks of prescription, orders from suppliers are handed over within six weeks of prescription, and bespoke items are handed over within a maximum of 12 weeks of prescription.

28. For urgent referrals, it says the assessment and prescription will be completed within two weeks from the date the referral was received. For routine referrals, it says the assessment and prescription will be completed within six weeks from the date the referral was received.

29. AJM assessed Mr B and completed the prescription within the timeframe specified in the contract. It did not, however, provide Mr B with his replacement chair in line with the maximum waiting time of 12 weeks for bespoke items, which would have been by 27 January 2025. It also did not provide the replacement chair within NHS England’s minimal target of 18 weeks from the date of referral, which would have been by 3 March 2025.

30. We therefore see indications of failings as AJM did not provide Mr B with his replacement wheelchair within the timeframe set out in its contract with the ICB. We consider the impact of this later in our report.

Contract transfer to a new provider

31. The ICB extended its contract with AJM until 31 March 2025. During this time, AJM was required to fully engage in a transition plan with the incoming provider. This was to ensure there was an uninterrupted wheelchair service equipment supply and service delivery until the contract expired on 31 March 2025. General condition 18 of the service contract includes:

• providing complete and accurate patient data and waiting list information • ensuring that the stock/equipment is fully transferred to the incoming provider as per list provided by AJM, as part of the tendering process • ensuring that all equipment is ordered and issued to patients ensuring service continuity, as required under the contract • ensuring outstanding patient backlogs are fully documented and transferred to the incoming provider • preventing any disruption to patient care due to service transition.

32. When the service transferred to a new provider on 1 April 2025, AJM had not issued Mr B with his replacement wheelchair in line with the exit arrangements set out in the service contract.

33. We have seen evidence the new provider was not provided with Mr B’s new equipment in AJM’s transition. Due to the delays Mr B experienced, the new provider opened a new referral and placed a new order for Mr B’s replacement wheelchair in May 2026, and Mr B received this the same month.

34. We have therefore seen further indications of failings in AJM’s service during the transition to the new provider. There are indications that AJM did not act in line with its contract agreements with the ICB during this time, and this added to the overall delay in Mr B receiving his replacement wheelchair. We consider the impact of this below.

Impact

35. When we see evidence of something going wrong, we look at what impact this has had on the person involved.

36. Mr B has unfortunately had to use a faulty wheelchair for an extended period. Mr B told us his wheelchair has broken down on several occasions, and he has fallen out of his wheelchair. This resulted in Mr B feeling worried about leaving his house, in fear of his wheelchair breaking down again.

37. This has impacted Mr B’s independence. Mr B has told us he felt hesitant to leave his home and it prevented him from doing things he would normally enjoy. Mr B has told us of the worry, frustration and distress this experience has caused.

38. We cannot consider the full period of time Mr B waited for his replacement chair, as after the service transferred to the new wheelchair provider in April 2025, AJM was no longer responsible for Mr B’s care. We do, however, recognise AJM had a requirement which it did not meet - to ensure all equipment was ordered and transferred to the incoming provider, and to prevent any disruption to patient care.

39. We think AJM caused an additional significant delay in Mr B getting his replacement wheelchair during the transition process to the new service provider.

40. We consider AJM needs to take steps to remedy the impact it caused Mr B. Our NHS Complaint Standards say organisations should identify suitable and appropriate ways to put things right for people when things go wrong. This can include a financial remedy.

41. As an outcome, Mr B is looking for a financial remedy. We have reviewed our guidance on financial remedy and reviewed similar cases. Following this review, AJM has agreed to pay Mr B £1500 to remedy the impact it caused. We consider this is appropriate, in line with our NHS Complaint Standards, and Mr B has also agreed to this resolution.

Conclusion

42. We appreciate how difficult it was for Mr B during the time he was waiting for a replacement wheelchair. We are pleased to hear he considers this matter is resolved.

1. We have carefully considered Mr B’s complaint about how AJM Healthcare (AJM) managed his NHS funded wheelchair provision. Mr B specifically complains about the poor repair of his previous wheelchair and the delays in providing a new replacement wheelchair.

2. We have not seen indications of failings in the repair of the previous wheelchair. We have however seen indications of failings in the delays in providing Mr B with a replacement wheelchair. We consider AJM did not follow the terms of the contract it had with Derby and Derbyshire Integrated Care Board (the ICB), because it did not provide the replacement wheelchair within the maximum waiting time set out in the contract.

3. Whilst Mr B was waiting for a replacement wheelchair, the ICB contract moved to a different wheelchair provider. We see indications of failings at this time as AJM did not meet the exit arrangements set out in the service contract and did not provide Mr B with his replacement wheelchair before the contract moved.

4. AJM has looked at the service it provided for Mr B and acknowledged the impact these events will have had on him. It has offered to pay £1500 in recognition of this. Mr B confirms he considers this puts things right for him.

5. We are sorry to read about the challenges Mr B faced when he was waiting for his replacement wheelchair. We appreciate how difficult will have been for him. We think the actions AJM has agreed to take to put things right for Mr B are in line with the NHS Complaint Standards and we are pleased to hear he is satisfied with the outcome.