GP refused to see me after I made a complaint 2 years againt him

[Purpleflowers 2]

2 years ago I made a complaint against a GP at my surgery....the reply I received was the GP could not recall the events (in the complaint) because the GP see so many patients a day and the complaint I sent was 12 months after the event.

 

Now to what happened recently....

 

1. I had a appoointment at 10am with the same GP I had made a complaint againt over 1 year ago...I booked myself at reception and waited, waited when it was 10.20 I asked at receptionion when would I been seent, as my appointment was at 10am. A receptionist told me 'There has been an emergency of some kind with a patient...so that has caused a delay and your appointment will now be moved to another GP' - I asked why the appointment was moved and was told 'sorry I cannot tell you' and you will be seen soon.

 

2. 10.30am and still not been seen so I asked another receptionist, she checked the computer system and told me the GP (name) has refused to see me because I made a complaint against him over 12 months ago and now my appointment was being moved to a different GP and I had to wait. I told the receptionist this was wrong and the GP had to be impartial as a GP and he was making this personal by not seeing me.

 

3. Eventually I was called and saw a different GP and explained to him what happened and the GP I had originally had an appointment with had refused to see me because of a complaint I raised against him over 12 months ago. The GP I was with was shocked and surprised and told me that GP should not have refused to see me

 

NOW I need your help to write a complaint, please can you help me

[Hammy1962]

A complaint 12 Months after the event.....................

 

Complaints about GP's are taken very seriously. Its not surprising he wouldn't want to see you alone, maybe with a chaperone, but not alone.

 

So you intend to complain again................................

 

You had best be careful or the Practice will strike you off and then you might be stuck. Just see another GP at the same Practice and move on.

 

H

[BazzaS]

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by BazzaS

[Manxman in exile]

21 hours ago, stephrayner said:

 

NOW I need your help to write a complaint, please can you help me

 

What have you got to complain about?  You saw a GP didn't you?

 

Why on earth would you want to complain about not being seen by a GP you've previously unsuccessfully complained about?

[honeybee13]

I agree with the previous comments. If I'd complained about a GP,  I would prefer to see someone else.

 

HB

[ericsbrother]

the list of emergencies that could ahve cropped up would be quite long, the GP may have made a house call to a dying person in a care home just as they shuffled off this mortal coil and they are them obliged by law to see out the rest of the necessaries. Now as said, no-one can give you any information that is someone else's personal data so the anodyne response you got would be normal.

If the GP had indeed refused to see you that is within their rights, no-one has to suffer abuse of any sort and unfounded allegations  may well fall into that area.

 

you are lucky that the practice still has you on their books. Where my wife works a druggie tried to attack her and kick in a door into the office and originally the police said no furhter action and the patient remained on the surgery books. The next time he came in he was ordered to find another GP as his wasnt going to entertain abuse of their staff regardless of the lack of police action. The GP had waited to tell the person face to face so it was clear that this was a final decision.

[Purpleflowers 2]

23 hours ago, BazzaS said:

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

1 receptionist told me the previous patient that had gone to see the GP I had originally been booked to see had taken longer than expected so my appointment was delayed and would now be changed to see another GP.  BUT I saw that patient leave the surgery after he was called to see the GP within 10mins, which means this receptionist did not want to tell me the real reason - which was because I had made a justified complaint against the GP.

 

When this receptionist had gone, another receptionist took her place and after waiting over 40 mins, I went over to her and asked what the delay was, she checked the computer notes and said that GP did not want to see me because of the complaint I had raised months ago, which was justified.

 

This receptiionist told me from reading the notes on the computer system the reason the GP refused to see me was due to the justified complaint.

 

Then when I eventually was called into see the other GP (after waiting 1hr 15mins) who my appointment had been transferred to, I mentioned the issue to him and he was shocked at the attitude of the other GP.

 

The GP that refused to see me, has lots of negatives reviews online as well, so his behaviour is not out of the blue so to speak

 

I want an explanantion from the practice manager why the GP refused to see me, why I had to wait over 40 mins before being told there was a delay, why the surgery did not tell me before the GP did not want to see me, when the surgery themselves made the appointment for me to see him

 

I want a detailed reply as to the actions of this GP

 

 

[Purpleflowers 2]

3 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

the list of emergencies that could ahve cropped up would be quite long, the GP may have made a house call to a dying person in a care home just as they shuffled off this mortal coil and they are them obliged by law to see out the rest of the necessaries. Now as said, no-one can give you any information that is someone else's personal data so the anodyne response you got would be normal.

If the GP had indeed refused to see you that is within their rights, no-one has to suffer abuse of any sort and unfounded allegations  may well fall into that area.

 

you are lucky that the practice still has you on their books. Where my wife works a druggie tried to attack her and kick in a door into the office and originally the police said no furhter action and the patient remained on the surgery books. The next time he came in he was ordered to find another GP as his wasnt going to entertain abuse of their staff regardless of the lack of police action. The GP had waited to tell the person face to face so it was clear that this was a final decision.

23 hours ago, BazzaS said:

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

1 receptionist told me the previous patient that had gone to see the GP I had originally been booked to see had taken longer than expected so my appointment was delayed and would now be changed to see another GP.  BUT I saw that patient leave the surgery after he was called to see the GP within 10mins, which means this receptionist did not want to tell me the real reason - which was because I had made a justified complaint against the GP.

 

When this receptionist had gone, another receptionist took her place and after waiting over 40 mins, I went over to her and asked what the delay was, she checked the computer notes and said that GP did not want to see me because of the complaint I had raised months ago, which was justified.

 

This receptiionist told me from reading the notes on the computer system the reason the GP refused to see me was due to the justified complaint

 

They was never an emergency because the 2nd receptionist told me from checking the computer the real reason for the delay was because the GP refused to see me. My complaint was justified and GP's are supposed to be neautral regardless of a justified complaint made against them.

 

Does this mean if anyone on the NHS makes a justified complaint against a GP, they will all be refused from seeing that GP again for an appointment at their surgery!!!!

 

 

 

[king12345]

It's all hearsay.

If you complain they'll deny everything. 

You better move on and make sure you book your future appointments with gp of your choice, you can do this.

[Manxman in exile]

16 hours ago, stephrayner said:

 

 

I want a detailed reply as to the actions of this GP

 

 

 

You can want what you like but you're not entitled to anything.

 

Why do you want to see a GP you've previously made an unsuccessful complaint about?  Can you please explain that?

 

If you are so certain your unsuccessful complaint was "justified", why did you not carry it further with the CCG and/or GMC?

 

And why wait for 12 months to make a complaint?  What?

 

Is there something more behind all this?

 

EDIT:  If I were the GP I can perfectly understand them not wanting you as a patient if you've previously complained about them.  Think about it.

Edited May 21, 2019 by Manxman in exile
Addition

[think about it]

Okay, just seen this and thought I’d stick a oar in.

 

If your (old) GP feels that the therapeutic relationship is damaged to the extent that they’re unable to treat you then they’re perfectly within their rights to have a colleague see you. It would appear, in spades, that this is likely the case given the strength of your reaction to a relatively minor occurrence. If that wasn’t / isn’t the case and there was indeed an emergency then the GP concerned did you a favour by not making you wait any longer. 

 

There’s a common misconception that once a patient has left the consultation room that the GP is free to start work on the next patient. If indeed it was an emergency the GP could have well instructed the person to travel directly to a local hospital whilst they call ahead to arrange urgent investigations or treatment which takes time. And please be assured, 40/50 minutes on the telephone to a hospital trying to track down the consultant or ST1 responsible for a particular speciality isn’t uncommon.

 

By all means ask the PM for an explanation, it’s likely to be very simple. A clear breakdown of therapeutic relationship.  

[ericsbrother]

you say the complaint was justified. Does this mean the complaint was formally upheld or does justified merely fit into "I think that it was deserved and an going to ignore what the official response says"

 

BTW the receptionist wont be able to see a reason on the ICE as you describe, that will require the doctor to send a messagepal or task across and TBH they wouldnt read that out to you. They might paraphrase but the doctor is usually their employer so not in their pay grade to comment on their boss's decisions when it is something contentious.