Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Sally7216

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I dont honestly think he has the energy to take on anymore stress fighting this. We cannot afford to get an independent urologist report done as he's had to retire due to this and other health issues if they are just going to come up with the same old truck and noting the statute time bar and the fact that if by some miracle he got compensation the solicitor we have would demand some of that. I hadnt replied before because he just had sepsis and pneumonia. Got over that and I've just dropped him at hospital for planned surgery (tongue biopsy). He's not well with severe copd/emphysema so i guess he has to live with it.
  2. A bladder scan was done to establish it was full. The 3.2 came from what immediately came out once he was cathertised. We know he drank the 2 litres as instructed so it never came out until it was released.
  3. I emailed NHSLA never received a reply
  4. Thankyou for that advice we will look into doing that.
  5. I ask is it worth pursuing as after waiting for 18 months for an extremely slow 'no win, no fee' solicitor to get their act together and get a medical report from a 'specialist' sorted. The advice received is we wouldn't have above 50% chance of winning so advised to let it go. Now we only have until Oct this year left due to time limitation. Firstly the report is not factual and many assumptions have wrongly been made. The basics of what happened are as follows. Oct 2014 my husband went into complete urine retention one evening. A call to 111 service at midnight got us a gp call back at 2am whereby he was advised to drink 2 litres of water and if no better contact either gp in morning or go to A & E. No attendance to him was offered only a phone consultation. If he had been attended it would have been clear he had a lot of urine already 'stuck' and to put more pressure on his bladder by introducing a further 2 litres would cause further harm. At 9.30am the following morning he went to A & E in excruciating pain and a bladder with 3.2 litres in it which was stretched so far it has been rendered useless ever since and he remains with a catheter in place. Yes he had noticed as many older men do a decrease in urine output prior to this and yes his prostate is enlarged but up until that night had never given him cause for concern. In his medical records for the visit to A & E it is stated he arrived with 3.2 litres of urine in his bladder but tge 'specialist urologist' who this solucitor got to review his notes says "whilst there is much mention of 3.2 litres in his bladder I would say it was more likely to have been around a litre after viewing A & E notes".... Where he has arrived at this rubbish we know not. Unless he sprung a leak out of another orifice on the way to A & E. We are both of the opinion the medical profession certainly stick together over negligence. This is a 65 year old man who now has had to give up his job because of this due to frequent infections caused by catheters and leaking embarrassing moments on train travelling to work everyday. Even the out of hours 111 service admitted that in future they would send a gp out if a patient presented like this again. Also they conveniently lost recording of advice given to us the night we phoned for advice althougg they retained paper record...
  6. Ok i wasn't aware of that. I thought in state schools teachers had that in their contract.
  7. Thankyou King12345 I will tell him. Your help has been invaluable.
  8. His grievance wasn't mentioned as such as we were reminded to stick to the facts of what had happened. He does have an appointment on Thursday for that to be discussed with the Principal. For now I've told him to keep his trap shut and keep his head down for last three months. So fingers crossed he will leave it.
  9. Outcome was verbal warning which stays on file for 6 months but he will still be eligible for pay rise (company policy says if you have a warning against you you're not eligible) but that won't apply to him. I think he'll actually be retired by then not that they know that yet as you don't have to retire at 65 there. Thank you everyone who gave helpful advice on here. We will make a donation x
  10. I think he's ok. He had to teach at 11am so didnt get too much chance to chat about it afterwards. Felt like a trial
  11. Well. I've just arrived back from London from this disciplinary hearing. Don't know the outcome yet but will do within 24 hours apparently. All recorded
  12. In his line manager's statement she stated she wished for mediation. It's the HR woman that was there too that brought this whole thing to the attention of the Principal. She has always been obstructive in nature so will be wanting the worst possible she can get him on along with the Principal. We are going to go through the whole thing tomorrow and prepare notes of what he said etc.
  13. Also just to say he never used any abusive language as in swearing or made personal comment to these people.
  • Create New...