James’s story

We received a complaint from a health practitioner, James, who was the subject of a notification and had immediate action taken against him. James was concerned that the delay in Ahpra’s handling of the notification was detrimentally affecting him and that the required investigation updates had largely been ignored and lacked meaningful information.

What we found

Although we generally do not consider matters that are active with Ahpra, we made preliminary inquiries into the complaint due to the concerns about the delay and communication.

Our preliminary inquiries found significant delays in Ahpra’s investigation, which had been ongoing for two and a half years. We also found that Ahpra had not responded to James’s requests for progress updates and that the provided investigation updates could have been more comprehensive to assure him that the investigation was being progressed.

Complaint outcome

Ahpra provided James’s legal representatives with an update on the status of the investigation and acknowledged and apologised for the significant delays in progressing the matter.

Ahpra confirmed that the investigation would be prioritised and handled in conjunction with senior management. It advised that a full review of James’s case had been conducted and its approach to progressing the investigation discussed.

Finally, Ahpra acknowledged that inconsistent communication from its compliance and notifications teams in this matter was problematic and apologised for any stress this caused James. We reiterated to Ahpra the importance of providing written investigation progress updates every three months as required under the National Law.