Tuesday 20 October: Complaint form offline

The supplier of our case management system has confirmed that they are experiencing a significant technical issue.

At present, we have no access to the case management system and we are currently unable to provide updates on existing cases.

We are planning on the basis that this could continue for a period of time including for the remainder of this week.

If you would like to check if your complaint is ready for the SPSO or enquire about making a new complaint, please complete our Complaint Checker.  

Please be assured we are doing all we can and will provide updates on our website. 

For an all service update: Service update | SPSO

Decision Report 201707816

  • Case ref:
    201707816
  • Date:
    December 2018
  • Body:
    Grampian NHS Board
  • Sector:
    Health
  • Outcome:
    Some upheld, recommendations
  • Subject:
    policy / administration

Summary

Mrs C, an advocacy and support worker, complained on behalf of her client (Mr  A) who is in the process of gender transition. Mr A heard that a consultant in the Gender Identity Clinic (GIC) was going on extended leave, with no cover being provided, and therefore requested an out of area referral. He had been advised by his psychiatrist to seek the extra-contractual referral for medical reasons. Mrs C complained that the board failed to address Mr A's request in their response to his complaint and failed to provide an adequate service.

After Mrs C brought the complaint to us, the board wrote to Mr A and apologised for not having addressed his query about extra-contractual referral when they originally responded to the complaint. They explained that they would not support a referral to another board because they were continuing to offer the same level of service as previously. Given that the board had not addressed this referral request at the time it was made, we upheld this aspect of Mrs C's complaint.

In relation to the complaint about service provision, we took independent advice from a psychiatric adviser (a medical practitioner who specialises in the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness). We found that the level of service at the GIC had not changed and that there were plans in place and enacted to cover the period of leave taken by the existing consultant. We also noted that given there were no additional risk factors identified such as major mental or physical illness, there would be no indication to go outwith the normal process followed by the board. We considered that the board had gone to significant effort to ensure their service was not adversely affected by the period of leave and provided Mr A with a reasonable service. We did not uphold this aspect of Mrs C's complaint.

Recommendations

In relation to complaints handling, we recommended:

  • When responding to complaints, staff should be confident that they have addressed all relevant matters.

We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.

Updated: December 19, 2018