Receiving a complaint as a regulated health professional can feel stressful given the potential for findings of misconduct and harm to professional reputation. Stress can understandably intensify when the College takes a prolonged time to investigate the reported concerns.
The RHPA’s 150-Day Timeline for College Complaint Investigations
The Regulated Health Professions Act (RHPA) has set the timeline of 150 days for Colleges that regulate health professions to investigate and dispose of a complaint. However, this time limit is not applied strictly. Courts have confirmed that this timeline is only a guideline. Colleges are only required to provide written notice of the delay and an expected date of disposition, usually around 60 days from the date of the written notice. As such, timelines for investigating complaints are often unpredictable.
For instance, in the case of Young, the Divisional Court reviewed a case where it took the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) of the College of Nurses over four years to dispose of two reports. The applicants argued that the delay prejudiced their ability to respond to the allegations because some witnesses could no longer be interviewed and certain documents were no longer available.
How the Court Addressed Delay Concern
The ICRC failed to address the submissions that the delay was inordinate and an abuse of process. The applicants also argued that they were prejudiced by the ICRC contacting their current employers, which caused distress, anxiety and stigma. In addition, they questioned the need for remedial action given that they continued practising without any further incidents for several years.
In this case, the Divisional Court took issue with the ICRC’s failure to engage with the inordinate delay concerns. As a result, the Court quashed the decision and sent it back to the ICRC for a reconsideration. However, the case in Young did not lead to a stricter adherence to the 150-day timeline mandated by the RHPA, or clearer guidelines for conducting more efficient investigations.
In a more recent case, the Divisional Court clarified that delay must be inordinate and must have caused significant prejudice to be deemed abusive or manifestly unfair.
In the case of R.S., the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB) concluded that a delay of over 3 years to dispose of the complaint was not an abuse of process because there was no evidence to show the delay caused significant prejudice to the professional.
Why a Three-Year Delay Was Not Found to Be Unfair
The HPARB explained that unnecessary investigation delays should not be taken lightly, as delay can have a negative impact on the parties and the public interest. The RHPA provides clear timelines for College investigations, but they are directory, not mandatory. Professionals also have the option of requiring that HPARB inquire into the investigation’s delay pursuant to s. 28(5) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, which may lead to the HPARB taking over the investigation itself.
Nonetheless, the HPARB explained that in the case of R.S., the College’s investigation was active and extensive, and the College required additional time to gather the relevant information, including responses from the professional in question. Therefore, the delay was not found to amount to an abuse of process or procedural unfairness. The Divisional Court in this case concluded that the HPARB decision was reasonable.
In conclusion, investigations of complaints or reports do not have strict timelines, and lengthy delays may not necessarily amount to an abuse of process. Colleges have flexibility in investigating reported concerns if they abide by requirements of the RHPA and send appropriate notice to the health professional involved.
Contact a Lawyer if You Are the Subject of a Complaint or Report
If you are the subject of a complaint or report, contact a lawyer so they can protect your rights and ensure you are not prejudiced by inordinate delay.
