28 After a knee injury, a woman was referred for a so-called MR scan. However, she did not want to wait for the scan but wanted an immediate operation. She therefore went to a private hospital and had a keyhole operation costing just under DKK 18,000. She then asked the Region to pay the bill, but the Region refused. The rules state that treatment can take place at an ‘agreement hospital’ if the region of residence cannot offer treatment within a month. It is, however, a condition that the regional hospital refers the patient for treatment at the private hospital. As the woman had gone to the private hospital on her own initiative, the Ombudsman could not help her get the Region to refund her costs. Incidentally, the Region was unable to document that the woman had been given guidance about extended free choice of hospital in connection with being summoned for an MR scan. The Region expressed its regret. The Ombudsman often does not only consider a single aspect of a case, but the case as a whole. It is therefore not unusual for him to express criticism of an authority in one respect but agree with it in another. On 20 September 2011, the Ombudsman received a complaint about the Danish School of Media and Journalism from a man whose application had been ­rejected. The man c ­ omplained about his rejection and the way his assignments had been ­assessed. With his complaint, he enclosed a rejection by the Ministry of Education dated 26 August 2010, i.e. more than twelve months before he lodged his complaint with the O ­ mbudsman. The Ombudsman therefore had to write to the man that he could not consider his complaint. A complaint must be lodged with the Ombudsman within twelve months of the decision by the highest administrative authority. For the last five years, the Ombudsman has had to reject more than 100 complaints every year because the deadline had been exceeded.