Page 1445 - 10. 2nd half 2018 New 26-05-21 No Table

• Thank you for passing on your concerns in your conversation and initial email with
Angela Hague on 30th July 2018, and subsequently with Rachel Yona on 10th August
2018. You raised some key questions relating to information governance and the sharing
of information regarding your son.
• Please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in our response to your queries, which
was due to there being a separate ongoing investigation within the Trust regarding the
matters you have raised.
• Your concerns have been investigated and I am now in a position to respond to your
complaint.
• Your concerns were investigated by Rachel Yona (Enfield Adult Mental Health
Community Services Manager) and involved interviews with staff and a review of your
son’s clinical records.
• You stated that a report written by Angela Hague regarding your son, dated 15th June
2018 and 19th June 2018, had been presented in court on 26th June 2018. You stated
you had not had prior access to these reports and explained that you had considered the
court case and the assessments by Angela Hague were separate processes.
• Please be assured that we have looked into this matter and I can confirm the report
used in court was not a formal report, but rather a response by Angela to a request for
information. The Trust I had communicated to the Council Legal Services that we would
not be providing a report for the Court and it was recommended they commission an
independent report if this were required.
• However as part of the investigation, it has been highlighted that this communication
was only shared verbally with the Council Legal Services, and the position of the Trust
was not clarified in writing.
• During our communications with the Council Legal Services it was asked whether your
son had engaged in his recent assessment, and it was for this reason the information
presented in court was given. Our investigation found that the information which was
sent was not a limited, direct response to the question posed to the Trust; I sincerely
regret therefore that information was overshared and as such this aspect of your
complaint is upheld.
• This is a matter we have taken very seriously; I would like to offer you our sincere
apologies that your son’s information was used for anything other than it’s intended use
whilst in the hands of the
Chairman: Mark Lam
Chief Executive: Jinjer Kandola
2278,
Trust, and assure you that we fully understand our role in ensuring the security and
safekeeping of records relating to all of those in our care. We have completed a full
internal incident investigation into this matter, and I would like to assure you that all due
processes and actions have been taken in relation to this breach.
• I understand that you also were concerned about the processing of your son’s
information by the Court and the Local Authority. We are aware your son did not give
consent for his records to be used in Court, and I can confirm the Trust also did not give
consent for the sharing of information by the Local Authority with the Court. Our
investigation found that the London Borough of Enfield requested to know if your son
had engaged in treatment. As part of the legal proceedings the Court had asked for an
assessment of your son’s capacity to litigate and capacity to understand the meaning of