Miss G complained that she and her daughter had been removed from the GP Practice's patient list because of missed appointments. Her partner Mr W complained that although he had not missed any appointments, he too was removed.
What happened
In spring 2014, the Practice wrote to Miss G informing her that she was being removed from its list after she had missed three appointments in the previous 12 months. The Practice said that it had sent Miss G a warning after she had missed the first two (consecutive) appointments. Mr W also received a letter saying that he was being removed from the list. Miss G contacted the Practice to explain why the appointments had been missed and said it had not been made clear that she had previously missed two appointments. She asked the Practice to reconsider but it stood by its decision, even when her employers tried to intervene on her behalf.
What we found
We partly upheld this complaint. When it removed Miss G from its list, the Practice had followed its attendance policy and it had correctly issued her with a warning before it removed her.
However, the decision to remove Mr W was unreasonable. He had not missed any appointments and we did not see any other reason for his removal. It was unfair that he had effectively been removed simply because of his association with Miss G, and this was not consistent with established guidance.
Putting it right
The Practice apologised to Mr W and reviewed its removal policy to make sure that it is consistent with established guidance.
A GP practice
Kent
Came to an unsound decision
Did not apologise properly or do enough to put things right
Did not involve complainant adequately in the process
Apology
Taking steps to put things right