§ GUIDE · LOST REFERRALS AND FOLLOW-UP

The referral was never sent,
and nobody noticed but you.

A lost letter, a test ordered on the system but never mentioned, a follow-up that was supposed to be booked. These are the easiest breaches to prove, because the paper trail shows what did not happen. They are also the claims where the money depends entirely on what the delay changed.

Judgments read

8

Breach found or admitted

7 of 8

EPX: settlement

£1.837 million

Oliver v Williams: award

£7,500

G
ClaimGavel Assistant
● Online · a referral, test or follow-up that was never arranged or never passed on · free & confidential
FREE
TELL US WHAT HAPPENED — TYPE HERE

Start typing — your likely claim, value and time limit appear here.

Describe what happened (a sentence or two) to begin.

Free · confidential · not legal adviceEngland

§ BEFORE YOU GO FURTHER

For a lost referral claim to get anywhere, these things usually need to be true

  • A clinician decided you needed a referral, test, scan or follow-up, and it never happened or you were never told. The decision is usually written in your notes.
  • The gap was long enough to matter: months rather than days before anyone picked it up.
  • The condition got worse in that gap in a way earlier treatment would probably have prevented: a cancer that advanced, an infection that spread, a baby who was not recalled in time.
  • It is within three years of the harm, or of when you first realised. De Meza shows that a 28-year gap is too late.

Oliver v Williams is the honest warning. The GP was liable for a seven-month delay in diagnosing ovarian cancer, and the award was £7,500, because the court was not persuaded the delay had shortened her life.

§ 01

Ordering a test is not enough; the patient has to know.

Shaheen v Dr Joanna Daish [2025] EWHC 3056 (KB) is the most recent of these judgments. A 49-year-old man saw his GP with breathlessness and a persistent cough. The GP ordered a chest X-ray on the computer system, but the judge found she never told him to go to the walk-in radiology department. He did not go, and he died. The court held he would have attended if told, and that he was not himself at fault for not chasing a test he did not know had been requested. Causation and the value of the claim were left for a later trial.

Oliver v Williams [2013] EWHC 600 (QB) is the same failure a decade earlier. A woman with months of bloating and bowel symptoms was urgently referred by her GP, but the judge found he never told her, and the hospital lost the letter. Nothing happened until she was diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer seven months later. The GP was liable for the delay, and the award was £7,500: £2,500 for avoidable pain and suffering and £5,000 for psychiatric injury, because the delay was not shown to have shortened her life.

§ 02

The result that nobody passed on.

Gallardo v Imperial College Healthcare [2017] EWHC 3147 (QB)

After surgery in 2001 the patient was never told his tumour was malignant or that he needed regular CT scans, and the cancer recurred undetected until 2010. The court found a continuing duty to tell him his diagnosis and follow-up needs, and awarded £27,500 general damages plus further sums for lost work, medical costs and additional surgery.

Rathore v Bedford Hospitals [2017] EWHC 863 (QB)

Swabs taken after childbirth showed chlamydia, but neither the patient nor her GP was told and it went untreated for about a year. She had repeated pain and an ectopic pregnancy that cost her a fallopian tube. The trust admitted breach; damages of £68,742 were assessed, though the court declined to attribute her later chronic widespread pain to the delay.

EPX v Milton Keynes University Hospital [2019] EWHC 1508 (QB)

A premature baby was sent home although a blood culture taken in hospital grew Group B strep. Nobody recalled her, and she developed meningitis with a severe brain injury. The claim settled for £1.837 million plus annual periodical payments of £204,000 for care. The published judgment is a costs dispute, which the claimant lost.

§ 03

Breach proved, claim lost: the causation gap.

Long v Western Sussex Hospitals [2016] EWHC 251 (QB)

After surgery for a broken femur the patient was discharged without arrangements to repeat his inflammatory-marker blood tests, and a deep infection was diagnosed later. The court found the discharge and a four-day delay in cleaning out the wound were breaches of duty, but there was no evidence they made his condition materially worse. The claim was dismissed.

Pearce v East and North Hertfordshire [2020] EWHC 1504 (QB)

A baby born breech should have had a hip scan within six weeks under the trust's own protocol. The appointment was not arranged until nine weeks and the scan at 17 weeks showed dysplasia in both hips, needing surgery. The trust admitted breach. Shortly before trial it tried to blame the mother for a missed appointment, and the judge refused to allow it.

Pennine Acute Hospitals v De Meza [2017] EWCA Civ 1711

A man treated in the early 1980s sued in 2014, saying nobody had followed up his hormone condition until a new doctor restarted treatment in 2011. The Court of Appeal found he had known enough in 1983, and that a 28-year delay had destroyed the records needed to defend the case. The claim was struck out as out of time.

§ 04

Whose job was it?

The judgments share out the duty clearly. A GP who makes a referral must tell the patient it has been made so it can be chased: Oliver. A GP who orders a test must tell the patient where and when to go: Shaheen. A hospital has a continuing duty to tell the patient the result of treatment and the follow-up it requires: Gallardo. A hospital that has an abnormal result after discharge must act on it and recall the patient: EPX, Rathore.

Courts are slow to blame the patient. In Shaheen the argument that the man should have chased his own X-ray was rejected, because he did not know it had been requested. In Pearce the attempt to blame the mother for a missed appointment came too late to be allowed.

What the breach is worth is a separate question, and it is where these claims diverge. The same failure to communicate produced £7,500 in Oliver and a £1.837 million settlement in EPX. The difference was entirely in what the delay changed.

§ 05

What helps a claim.

  • A copy of your GP record. The coded entries show the referral or test request and its date, and whether anything followed.
  • Hospital letters and referral correspondence, including what was in your file but never sent.
  • Any letter, text or call you received, or did not receive, about the appointment.
  • The diagnosis when it was finally made, including the stage or severity, which is what the causation experts compare.
  • Our guide on getting your medical records explains how to obtain all of this.

§ THE JUDGMENTS BEHIND THIS GUIDE

The eight judgments behind this guide.

Breach was found or admitted in seven of the eight. The money followed only where the delay was shown to have changed the outcome.

Claimant succeeded

Shaheen & Anor v Dr Joanna Daish

[2025] EWHC 3056 (KB)·2025·Liability decided at trial

A 49-year-old man saw his GP with breathlessness and a persistent cough; the GP ordered a chest X-ray on the computer system but the judge found she never told him to go to the walk-in radiology department. The court held he would have attended if told and was not himself at fault.

Ordering a test is not enough; the patient must be told clearly what to do. Courts are slow to blame patients for not chasing a test they did not know had been requested.

Claimant succeeded£7,500

Oliver v Williams

[2013] EWHC 600 (QB)·2013·Liability and damages decided at trial

A woman with months of bloating and bowel symptoms was urgently referred by her GP, but the judge found he never told her and the hospital lost the letter, so nothing happened until she was diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer seven months later. The GP was liable for the delay but only £7,500 was awarded because the delay was not shown to have shortened her life.

A GP must tell the patient an urgent referral has been made so it can be chased. Damages for delayed cancer diagnosis are limited to what the delay actually caused, which may be modest.

Claimant succeeded

Gallardo v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust

[2017] EWHC 3147 (QB)·2017·Liability and damages decided at trial

After surgery at Charing Cross Hospital in 2001 the patient was never told his tumour was malignant or that he needed regular CT surveillance, and the cancer recurred undetected until 2010. The court found a continuing duty to inform him of his diagnosis and follow-up needs which the Trust failed to discharge.

Hospitals must tell patients the result of their treatment and the follow-up they need; failing to communicate a cancer diagnosis and the need for monitoring is negligent.

Claimant succeeded£68,742

Rathore v Bedford Hospitals NHS Trust

[2017] EWHC 863 (QB)·2017·Damages assessed at trial

Swabs taken after childbirth showed chlamydia but neither the patient nor her GP was told, and it went untreated for about a year; she suffered repeated pain and an ectopic pregnancy requiring removal of a fallopian tube. The trust admitted breach; the court accepted the ectopic pregnancy and a period of pain disorder were caused by the negligence but rejected the claim that her later chronic widespread pain was.

Failing to pass on an abnormal test result is a clear breach, but the claimant still has to prove which later problems flowed from it. Long-term pain conditions are hard to attribute to a delayed diagnosis.

Claimant succeeded£1.84M

EPX (A Child) v Milton Keynes University Hospital NHS Trust

[2019] EWHC 1508 (QB)·2019·Appeal decision

A premature baby was sent home although a blood culture taken in hospital grew Group B strep; staff did not recall her and she developed meningitis with severe brain injury. The claim settled for a lump sum and annual payments; this reported judgment concerns a costs dispute, which the claimant lost.

Failing to act on a positive blood culture after discharge can lead to a multi-million-pound settlement. Note the published judgment is about costs, not the merits.

Claim failed

Long v Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust

[2016] EWHC 251 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial

After surgery for a broken femur at St Richard's Hospital, Chichester, the patient was discharged in April 2008 without arrangements to repeat his inflammatory-marker blood tests, and a deep infection was diagnosed later. The court found this discharge and a four-day debridement delay were breaches of duty, but there was no evidence they made his condition materially worse, so the claim was dismissed.

Discharging a patient without arranging follow-up blood tests can be a breach of duty, but compensation depends on showing the delay actually worsened the outcome.

Mixed outcome

Pearce v East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust

[2020] EWHC 1504 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial

A baby born breech by caesarean should have had a hip ultrasound within six weeks, but the appointment was not arranged until nine weeks and, after rescheduling, the scan at 17 weeks showed hip dysplasia in both hips, needing surgery. The Trust admitted breach but, shortly before trial, sought to blame the mother's missed appointment; the judge refused the late amendment.

Babies born breech need a timely hip scan, and a trust's failure to arrange one within its own protocol was admitted as negligent. Defendants cannot raise new causation arguments on the eve of trial without good reason.

Claim failed

The Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust v De Meza

[2017] EWCA Civ 1711·2017·Appeal decision

A man treated in the early 1980s sued in 2014, saying no one followed up his hormone condition until a new doctor restarted treatment in 2011. The Court of Appeal found he had known enough back in 1983 and that a 28-year delay had destroyed the records needed to defend the case.

Where very long delay means the records that would show what actually happened no longer exist, the court will usually hold the claimant to the deadline. Realising only years later that better treatment existed does not by itself restart the clock.

Browse the whole case library →

Contains information licensed under the Open Justice - Licence v2.0. Judgments from Find Case Law, The National Archives. Summaries are ours; amounts only where printed in the judgment.

§ QUESTIONS

Common questions

My GP says he referred me but the hospital never received it. Who is responsible?

Potentially both, and the records will show which. In Oliver v Williams the GP was liable because he never told the patient the referral had been made, so nobody could chase it when the hospital lost the letter. A solicitor will obtain both sets of records before deciding who to pursue.

I was never told my test result was abnormal. Is that negligence?

Usually yes, if the result needed action. Rathore v Bedford Hospitals and Gallardo v Imperial both found a duty to pass on results and follow-up needs. The harder question is what the delay caused, which decides the value of the claim.

The delay was about six months. Is that enough for a claim?

It depends on what happened in those six months. Oliver v Williams involved seven months and produced £7,500 because the cancer's course was not shown to have changed. EPX involved days and produced a settlement of £1.837 million. Length matters less than consequence.

How much are lost referral claims worth?

Anything from a few thousand pounds for avoidable pain and distress to multi-million-pound settlements where a child was not recalled in time. The judgments on this page span exactly that range. Nobody can estimate honestly until the medical evidence on what the delay changed is in.

I only found out years later that the follow-up had never been arranged. Is it too late?

The three years usually run from when you first knew, or ought to have known, that something had gone wrong, not from the original failure. But De Meza shows the limit: a 28-year gap was struck out because the claimant had known enough at the time and the records no longer existed. Our guide on late claims explains the rules.

Should I complain first?

A complaint can produce an explanation and the records quickly, and the duty of candour means the trust should tell you what went wrong. But the complaints process cannot award compensation and does not pause the three-year limit.

This guide is general information about the law in England and Wales, not legal advice about your case. ClaimGavel is run by Costart Projects Ltd on behalf of Tomlin & Partners, a specialist medical negligence firm regulated by the SRA. The free assessment on this page is an AI overview to show you roughly where you stand; a solicitor confirms the position in a free, no-obligation conversation.