Representative of the group Dr Oliver Sutherland said the apology was meaningless.
"It fails on two counts. Firstly, in terms of the process assurances were given that there would be some dialogue or consultation with the forum and hopefully with survivors before it was concluded. But actually, none heard anything or even were aware of it until it appeared on the rather obscure website of the Royal College."
He also said it failed in terms of content and didn't specifically address individual abuse that occurred within the regime that was operating at the hospital.
"Overall it's an insult and very disrespectful to the survivors," he said.
The apology had been picked up by an advocate by chance and had mostly addressed the work of the Royal Commission and did nothing to address the particular pain and damage that was done to survivors, Sutherland said.
He said survivors had been deeply disappointed by what they saw as a false apology and that a substantive apology should have been issued.
"It's interesting because the Royal College had waited for 46 years. They knew what was happening from 1977 and they've waited this time and now suddenly slipped something on to their website, which nobody knew was coming and which fails miserably."
"Real apologies for needed for real abuse and the real harm that was suffered, not a sort of a half-baked apology that slims lightly over the surface and doesn't mention the real abuses that occurred."