The response

resources were stretched and had to be deployed to best effect by M as the team manager ... you did have the right to support from the CMHT, but that this was difficult to provide due to the capacity within the team at that moment
Was it, then “to best effect” to leave me without support at such a difficult time? Your response seems to suggest it was, and I find this very offensive. In previous replies from my complaint I have been told that M was trying to ensure that I did not become dependent on CMHT support, and that I did not need support because I had all the tools I needed to cope with any situation, as a result of my psychotherapy. Which of these three statements, then, is a lie? They cannot all be true!
There is no mention of the fact that my informal concerns expressed to M were never passed on. If the CMHT was truly so lacking in capacity, was this information provided to managers? Was a “failure of care” message passed on regarding their “inability” to provide me with support? This would support the assertion that the problem was lack of capacity rather than lack of willingness.

you were left without support in S’s absence, reliant only on email support from M...M did the best she could to provide you with support
How can you say this when no support was provided and my Care Plan was ignored? The emails I received from M can in no way be described as supportive.

It is regrettable that a face to face meeting between yourself and M could not have been arranged
Who is to blame for this? Not me – I tried as hard as I could to get a face to face meeting. Where is the apology?

Being abandoned by Mu, my initial care co-ordinator:
Unfortunately, we could find no record in the clinical notes as to why this relationship ended...
From the clinical notes, I could not find any link between this and the fact that you had made a complaint in 2005.
No, because the team failed to keep those clinical records! However, the circumstantial evidence points to the fact that I was not provided with support and my support was removed. There is no evidence of an explanation for this so how can you discount my explanation without an alternative explanation?

...the decision was made that you would be provided with a replacement care co-ordinator once a permanent member of staff had been recruited
Not true. Email exchanges in my notes reveal the resistance of the Bedford East team to providing any support for me, despite the repeated insistence on this support by my psychologist. To say that the decision was made to provide support is at best misleading and at worst inaccurate.

A critical issue that you identified is the timing whereby the Trust issues response letters, and in conversation with me you have raised the distress caused by the second formal response letter to your complaint being received on a Friday, resulting in significant upset to you over the weekend, with no readily available means of support to help you to cope.
Having highlighted this as an issue, how is it that you sent this report to me too late in the day for me to be able to contact my CPN? Also, how could you have sent the earlier email which indicated that there would be delays to the report but gave no indication of when I could expect to receive it. This caused me immense distress.

The PALS officer sought advice from Trust colleagues on whether your request (for a copy of the Complaints Policy) could be complied with.
Which Trust colleagues did she seek advice from? Why did they not know? Why was R herself not familiar with the key features of the FOIA – surely as a person dealing with enquiries from the public this was something she should have know about?
I do not feel it was a deliberate attempt to prevent you from having the information ,
This statement is contradicted by the fact that R was previously very happy to supply me with policies – if she did not need to seek advice about the CPA policy, why did she suddenly feel it necessary over the Complaints policy?

The report does not address key issues which I was promised would be addressed. These include:
Why was I refused a copy of my own Care Plan by M?
Why was the annotated copy of my Care Plan not included in my records?
I raised the impartiality issue in my response to the first complaint and it was not addressed then. Why did nobody pick up on this?
No attempt has been made to address how and why such inappropriate letters were signed off by senior Trust staff – this was promised at the meeting.
No mention of the fact that my informal concerns expressed to M were never passed on. If the CMHT was truly so lacking in capacity, was this information provided to managers? Was a “failure of care” message passed on regarding their “inability” to provide me with support? This would support the assertion that the problem was lack of capacity rather than lack of willingness.

Equally, there is no evidence of steps which are to be taken to ensure things which happened to me do not happen to others:
What steps are to be taken to improve communication?
How will it be ensured that, in future, investigations are carried out by managers who are not involed in the case?