Private Eye has been running a series of articles exposing the disingenuous way that the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) handles complaints. The first was in issue 1641 on 24 Jan – 6 Feb 2025.

When describing their experiences with the ombudsman to Private Eye, Naomi and other complainants spoke of a combative response, inexplicable delays, poor communication, an unmanageable burden of proof, endless emails and, ultimately, the NHS body’s word carrying far more weight than theirs.

In response to this criticism, a PHSO spokesperson simply sidestepped the damning accusations and spun a few numbers to make it look like the organisation was doing a better job than it actually was.

A PHSO spokesperson said: “Demand for our service has increased substantially in recent years and we have helped thousands of people get justice. Between April 2020 and March 2024, we saw a 48 percent rise in the number of cases accepted for consideration.”

Firstly, ‘accepted for consideration’ does not mean ‘given a full investigation’. It simply means that the complaint was not rejected within the first week. The choice of dates aptly demonstrates the way organisations such as PHSO use data to spin a more positive story. During the Covid period from 26 March 2020 until 1 July 2020, the PHSO stopped processing complaints leading to an artificially low number of cases accepted for consideration in that financial year. Using April 2020 as the baseline allowed them to make the (artificially) high 48 percent increase claim.

Following this article, many more people came forward with their stories to Private Eye. In Issue 1462 – PHSO says no, Private Eye exposed the devious ways PHSO avoids investigating valid complaints.

Carlier told the Eye: “Their stock response seems to be, the answer’s no, what’s the question?”

The article states that only 115 complaints were fully upheld last year – a mere 0.3 percent of the 37,000 submitted. With such a low uphold rate, many dissatisfied people are keen to tell their stories to anyone who will listen.

The Eye has been flooded with similar stories from users who say the overwhelmed PHSO seems keener to bat away grievances rather than resolve them or ensure lessons are learned.

In 2014, under CEO Katherine Murphy, The Patients Association released the first of three reports into the failings of the Health Service Ombudsman. The following quote is from the introduction to their second report released in 2015.

When Rachel Power took over in 2017, all three reports were removed from the Patients Association website but can still be seen here. It is clear from the recent Private Eye exposure that nothing has changed at PHSO. In fact, things are likely to be much worse as the uphold rate has declined since 2017.

Time then for a full, government-backed inquiry into the ability of the Health Service Ombudsman to improve patient safety by holding bodies to account and recommending appropriate action plans so that lessons are learned. Step in Dr Penny Dash with her proposed patient safety investigation.

This review will:

  • map the broad range of organisations that impact on quality (and therefore have links to safety), but will not examine them in detail
  • focus on 6 key organisations overseen by the Department of Health and Social Care, which have a significant impact on safety

Unfortunately, we have learnt that the 6 key organisations do not include the work of the Ombudsman. Of course, should the inquiry find that any or all of the 6 key organisations are failing to deliver on patient safety this would, by default, be critical of the Ombudsman who has the job of holding these bodies to account.

In 2023/24 it can be seen that the Department of Health and Social Care had 19 complaints made against them with zero receiving a full investigation. If we include complaints made against the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in 2023/24, CQC being one of the 6 key organisations, we see a similar story. 58 complaints received, 3 given a detailed investigation with just 1 partial uphold to date. If this data were relied upon, there would be no need for an expensive enquiry but Dr Penny Dash has already found the Care Quality Commission to be a failing organisation.

The Dash review finds significant failings in the CQC, which it says ’has lost credibility in the health and social care sectors’. It finds that the CQC’s ability to identify poor performance and support quality improvement has deteriorated. The review says this has undermined the health and social care sector’s capacity and capability to improve care. 

It would appear that the CQC is not the only body that has difficulty identifying poor performance but without inclusion in the review, PHSO will manage, once again, to escape accountability. Just like Macavity, the Napoleon of Crime!

Macavity, Macavity, there’s no one like Macavity,

There never was a Cat of such deceitfulness and suavity.

He always has an alibi, and one or two to spare:

At whatever time the deed took place—MACAVITY WASN’T THERE!

And they say that all the Cats whose wicked deeds are widely known

(I might mention Mungojerrie, I might mention Griddlebone)

Are nothing more than agents for the Cat who all the time

Just controls their operations: the Napoleon of Crime!

T.S. Eliot