Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good evening everybody, could do with a bit of help please?   I own a holiday home on a park with a long leasehold which is subject to a service charge every year. Unfortunately due to having terminal cancer I have not been able to maintain these payments which are paid by letting the property throughout the summer.   Last year the park owner closed the park completely from March due to the Covid pandemic and has demanded service charges for items which should not have been incurred during closure.   Today, I have received court papers to repossess the property following the non payment of the service charges. There is no mortgage on the property, I paid cash for it. Please can anyone advise on this matter?   Thanks in advance
    • They owner on my credit file is Alpha Credit Solutions.    Before them it was Secure Trust Bank. 
    • I typed in mediation in search as above. Just looking for info. Plus my previous info is from the post in here about small claims and covid.
    • ACS are a DCA who are their actual clients stated on their letters? who is the owner stated on your credit file? you've posted in the creation finance forum is it them?    
    • The quality is excellent Tom.   I've just sacrificed half an hour of my life that I will never get back reading that load of bilge from Simon.  A few things.   For once Simon doesn't go on about appeals (although the correspondence between the two of you is in his attachments) so it's immaterial how you deal with this aspect.   Again, unlike recent VCS/Excel WSs Simon doesn't even try to defend the Unicorn Food Tax, so you can really put the boot in re double recovery.  I didn't find Jake's letter, but I did find  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419312-vcs-pcn-claimform-no-stopping-in-restricted-zone-bristol-airport-claim-dismissed/page/4/?tab=comments#comment-5081518  Look at the first page of the attachment in post 95.  VCS already employ a Debt & Litigation Manager so obviously see litigation as part of their business and already have an employee who deals with such matters without them having to spend extra money.   I love paragraph 31 " ... The Claimant robustly denies that the signage in the car park is of a prohibitive in nature ... the Defendant's vehicle was observed stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited"!!!   Your WS is succinct, to the point, and will impress a judge a hell of a lot more than Simon's garbage.  I think it would make it even clearer to the judge if you titled the sections to mention prohibition, POFA non-compliance, bye-laws, double recovery, etc., so the judge can see immediately what you're arguing.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Audio-recording your consultations with NHS doctors


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 591 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sorry – it's just that someone just message me and asked me to open this thread because they wanted to add some information.

Hello shallowthought9 and welcome to this thread. For what it is worth I think that in the light of the clearly disgraceful way your (former)  behaved it is very generous of you to contribute to a thr

Thanks for that turbooandy. I read it with interest.

 

Wonder why..its not like the DWP usually gives a **** about people and the law. I suppose that they didnt want a possible tribunal hearing to confirm an even greater right to recording than just audio recording. Or could it be that one of the commercially sensitive areas of the contract with ATOS covers this. Maybe because of your right to a family life ( such a wooly phrase) and 'There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right ' except where it ' is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety' where you could argue that it actually confirms your right on public safety.

 

Its great news tho that you managed to get something sorted out quickly :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy. Very good to hear that the DWP and\or Atos ("DWATO") are still 'at bay' on your ongoing claim. Just be ready for that 'start all over again' re-assessment to come winging its way to you.

 

One cannot be certain as to why DWATO did not continue to require a WCA to be conducted. There are circumstances in which they can decide to proceed without one, but it is very 'strange', isn't it, that they should have decided to do this, just after Andy stood his ground.

 

(Any 'new viewers' here, should be advised that Andy also made a PCT back down recently about the right to audio-record GPs appointments).

 

I expect many will know this, but this is what the current version of the 'WCA Handbook' (to which Atos is supposed to adhere) actually says about VIDEO-recording of a WCA :-

 

"Any requests by claimants to visually record an assessment should not be directly refused, but our policy in these circumstances should be full yexplained to them.

 

Such a request can only be agreed with the prior consent of the HCP, and then only if stringent safeguards are in place to ensure that the recording is complete, accurate and that the facility is available for simultaneous copies to be made available to all parties present. The recording must be madeby a professional operator, on equipment of a high standard, properlycalibrated by a qualified engineer immediately prior to the recording beingmade. The equipment must have facility for reproduction so that all parties canretain a copy of the recording.

 

The responsibility for meeting the cost of the above requirements rests with the claimant.

 

Any request by a claimant for an assessment to be visually recorded must be declined unless the above safeguards are in place. The claimant must instead be offered the opportunity of a rescheduled assessment int he presence of a companion or other witness. If the claimant refuses to avail him/her self of this opportunity and refuses to proceed with the assessment, the HCP should return the file to the DWP with a note explaining the situation."

 

(from http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-handbook.pdf

 

at 4.1.3)

 

So, in addition to the points Zonker usefully considers, one might add the possibilities that:-

 

- DWATO cannot find an 'HCP' willing to agree be video-recorded, and\or

 

- DWATO are aware that if any claimant 'got to court' about the utterly ridiculous requirements' ('calibration' by a qualified engineer?! a 'professional operator' video-ing the WCA!?), then that is a court which DWATO would get laughed out of.

 

Just possibilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in addition to nolegions comments i think most judges are aware that home consumer products provide superior reproduction than was available not that many years ago in a broadcast setting. They may take the view that requirements by dwp are in fact an obstruction to your rights.

 

1080p camcorder and an omnidirectional studio type mic should be less than £250 to provide very good picture and sound recording.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you are right nolegion, I feel they just can't afford the Sheeple to start waking up with regards to their rights.

 

in the USA right now there is a national "TSA opt out week" where by all that pass through any airports are being encouraged to opt out of the deadly cancer causing body scanners and film their TSA body searches(groping) procedures.

Just youtube TSA opt out etc to see what i mean.

 

People need to stand up against tyranny and fight for their rights. After all in law there is something called 'A legal maxim' which basically translates to 'if you don't exercise your rights, then you don't have any rights'.

 

As i have just said over here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?371243-Wow-State-secret

i am preparing the next round of cases against the various authorities that have committed crimes against me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Here's a cheering piece relating to the USA:-

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/supreme-court-recording-police_n_2201016.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

 

It looks like UK officialdom is fast becoming identifiable as more paranoid about being caught out by recorded evidence than even our American cousins; and that really is going some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last month the GMCannounced its decision concerning a Dr V. Subbu.

 

This GP received a solicitor's letter indicating a possible claim for clinical negligence in a procedure carried out 2 years earlier, and requesting copy medical records.

 

Dr Subbu supplied the computerised clinical notes - but not until after he had significantly re-written the central record.

 

The fitness to practise panel said:

 

"You told the Panel that you were frightened by the letter from the solicitors as you had never had a clinical negligence claim made against you before. You said that you had made a mistake in failing to reflect that the amendments made had been made both retrospectively and by you.The Panel rejected this evidence. The Panel found it inconceivable that a doctor with 34 years of experience would fail to realise that not to note that a record was retrospectively amended would be construed as a contemporaneous record.

 

The Panel is satisfied that, from the circumstances you found yourself in where your note of the minor surgical procedure would be considered by solicitors investigating a potential claim of clinical negligence, you wished your amended note to appear as if made at the time."

 

…………………………………………………………………………………….

 

" This is not a case primarily relating to record keeping; it is rather about your repeated acts of dishonesty."

 

So, one dishonest doctor the less, then?

 

Naaah. 6 months suspension and could be working at your local practice next year.

 

(See:-

http://www.mpts-uk.org/static/documents/content/Subbu_Public_Minutes_Subba.pdf)

 

As long as they think they can get away with it, they will keep doing it.

 

I'm not sufficiently tech-aware to know how feasible it would be…. but could not the computerised 'audit trail' be automatically disclosed with the records produced?…including in response to DPA subject access requests?

Edited by nolegion
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the software program should, if written well, provide an audit trail of who/when and from which computer, a record was modified. The operating system will also have the ability to monitor and flag these events - and many more.

 

It is unlikely that there is a particular program in use across all GP practices or any standards set by the Dept of Health on exactly what should be audited or how long audit logs need to be kept for - at least three years if that is the cut-off date for claims on clinical negligence. Does anybody monitor or enforce this I wonder?

 

So how did they catch this doctor out? Did he admit altering the records eventually?

 

The GMC really is a pathetic organisation. I certainly wouldn't want any doctor who has proved himself so dishonest to be treating me or mine. Leopard and spots is my view. The patient is denied any knowledge of a doctor's murky past and therefore cannot make an informed choice on whether they wish to be treated by him/her.

 

Radio 4's Today discussed taking into account the psychological damage to a victim when sentencing occurs for burglary etc. The GMC should take note.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The GMC is indeed a pathetic organisation, and for the purposes of this thread I will never forget that although it now has had to mend its ways, few years ago it tried NOT to listen to covertly recorded evidence of malpractice.

 

I think that identified its real priorities as between patient and doctor well-being, once and for all.

 

In the Subbu case, the GP came unstuck because the record he changed was written by the practice nurse in the first instance. She knew allabout the later changes and told the practice manager. Then examination of the 'audit trail' revealed all.

 

It's not clear from the case report, though, who actually alerted the GMC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodness me, Nolegion, that's an early posting. Do you suffer from insomnia?

 

Interesting article . I can accept that supply and demand levels could determine the time of day of a recording, but not the date. Also it depends on mains electricity in the vicinity, so outdoor recordings would be excluded.

 

I'm loving the possibilities that new technolgies bring. Apparently we all have a unique smell that does not depend on what we consume or what we apply externally. It's as accurate as a fingerprint. There could be odour scanners at airports and the like to detect criminals and other known ne'er-do-wells. I'm not sure how your odour is extracted initially.

 

Also MRI imaging of the brain during questioning - I think the technology is either already there or nearly so - will be able to detect whether we are telling the truth, we 'think' we are telling the truth, or we are blatantly lying. We may yet find out the definitive truth behind Iraq/WMD from Messrs Blair and Campbell. Oh, sweet justice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Article from the USA which concludes:-

 

"…recordings offer a fantastic opportunity to improve patients’ adherence and informed decision-making, and these beneficial effects should be applauded."

 

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/11/05/prca1105.htm

 

I have heard, for a long time and many times, explanations from doctors to the effect that the reason patients' and doctors' 'recollections' of events are so often so very different, is that 'the "average patient" doesn't remember the half of what is actually said in a consultation.'

 

Now, on some occasions that may be true. In others, the organised patient's detailed memory of what happened to him or her may be a great deal more accurate than that of, say, a hurried GP making scant notes.

 

What I find grimly ironic, is that, basically through the advance of 'pocket-technology', these medics own (usually defensive) analysis of the inaccuracy\insufficiency of patients' recall, now comes homes to roost as an extremely potent argument for NOT trying to be difficult about patients wishing to take a recording home.

Edited by nolegion
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just recieved a letter from the dermatoligy dept unit notifying ME that seeing that i missed an appointment on Nov 1st they will NOT send me another appointment eventhough I told them the following day as to why I missed the slot .....they told me i'd been totally removed and so i asked for an urgent apt last week and they sent me this reply this morning.....you know me Andy I'm still trying and trying to get the biopsies taken but keep coming up against NHS brickwalls and iffy GP's NOT doing what I ask of them.....I have a solicitor waiting in the wings to rip into them now ....she's offered me their private doctor but due to not having any funds I cant see how they will let me see their doctor for free mate.

 

roll on the republic

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just recieved a letter from the dermatoligy dept unit notifying ME that seeing that i missed an appointment on Nov 1st they will NOT send me another appointment eventhough I told them the following day as to why I missed the slot .....they told me i'd been totally removed and so i asked for an urgent apt last week and they sent me this reply this morning.....you know me Andy I'm still trying and trying to get the biopsies taken but keep coming up against NHS brickwalls and iffy GP's NOT doing what I ask of them.....I have a solicitor waiting in the wings to rip into them now ....she's offered me their private doctor but due to not having any funds I cant see how they will let me see their doctor for free mate.

 

roll on the republic

 

or of course you could just checked whether your GP recieved a similar letter (asGPsare usually informed of DNA to clinics etc) and would they please re-refer you ... or is that too much like taking responsibility for your own actions for CAG ?

 

Repeatedly offering DNAers further appointments has been identified as a significant cause of lost appointments in secondary and tertiary care.

Link to post
Share on other sites
or of course you could just checked whether your GP recieved a similar letter (asGPsare usually informed of DNA to clinics etc) and would they please re-refer you ... or is that too much like taking responsibility for your own actions for CAG ?

 

Repeatedly offering DNAers further appointments has been identified as a significant cause of lost appointments in secondary and tertiary care.

I had been to see my GP twice since my failed appointment and what I did not know until later this afternoon is that ANYONE is allowed three fails but in my case I failed due the massive headaches that I get due to the horrible lump thats formed at the nape of my neck and is just ONE problem that has come through since I first reported the initial lump in my neck and shoulder almost FOUR years ago. I have now been offered an apt for 7th of January and will not be failing to go to that one reguardless of the headaches due to I can not get biopsies done untill I have seen a dermatologist.......it's a joke the way that the NHS is these days of too many suits and not enough bib n brace.

So for today I have had to threaten legal action to get seen again due what it breaks down to .......a secretary who got the hump with me when i queeried as to WHY I was placed at the bottom of the pile when my GP re-requested a fresh appointment and then yet again last week I re-requested the appoinment be classified as URGENT and then today I get the letter to say I would not be given a new appointment FULL STOP

to re-cap for you zippygbr.....I recieved the letter at aprox 10.15 am so i called the department to queerie it and was told sorry thats it so I then contacted the general hospital PALS 4 times and got an answering machine each time...next was to re-call the dermatology unit and re-complain then I complained to MY GP only to be told that the GP was out of the office so next was to call the main hospital matron and HE finally got the gist of it and then he hammered home to certain people that I would be taking things to a legal level by close of day today and hey presto the new appoinment was given to me at aprox 2pm today.......Pals then called me back to tell me that the ONE missed appointment is NOT the way it works but three missed ones is.

I know I have been and still am being lied to at my GP's and by certain individuals at my hospital and I am keeping ALL of the letters sent to me for when this kicks off more in the new year due to MY body is telling me there's more wrong with my health than what has been told to me up to now.

I can NOT have the biopsies done untill I have seen the dermatilogist and as for the start of you're reply up to the brackets........I did re-check with my GP I had to due to it's all a bit secret between some GP's who are going to be in a lot of trouble in the new year and at least two-three consultant mates of theirs.

I cant go on here with divulging more of my plans but I will just add that I am NOT an idiot I am an ill man who's paid into the system for over 45 years and this is what I get out of it....bull**** smeared over by more bull****

 

ps I have two audio recordings of lies being told to me ....one is from one of the GP's and another from an ultra sound scan operator both from this year

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had been to see my GP twice since my failed appointment

 

and did you mentioned your DNA to that appointment at that time?

 

and what I did not know until later this afternoon is that ANYONE is allowed three fails

 

What gives you that impression ?

 

but in my case I failed due the massive headaches that I get due to the horrible lump thats formed at the nape of my neck and is just ONE problem that has come through since I first reported the initial lump in my neck and shoulder almost FOUR years ago.

 

and your evidence for the assertion that this lump 'causes' the headaches?

 

I have now been offered an apt for 7th of January and will not be failing to go to that one reguardless of the headaches due to I can not get biopsies done untill I have seen a dermatologist.......it's a joke the way that the NHS is these days of too many suits and not enough bib n brace.

 

what clinical question do you hope will be answered by these Biopsies?

 

and who has recommended that Biopsies are the appropriate intervention-especially as you claim not to have been seen by a Dermatologist ...

 

The Health Service does not exist to undertake investigations or procedures at the whim of patients,there needs to be a clear clinical benefit to undertaking the investigation or procedure,the risks need to be outweighed by risks of not doing anything and for some expensive, highly specialist and/or time consuming investigations the cost /benefit analysis unfortunately comes in to it.

 

So for today I have had to threaten legal action to get seen again due what it breaks down to .......a secretary who got the hump with me when i queeried as to WHY I was placed at the bottom of the pile when my GP re-requested a fresh appointment and then yet again last week I re-requested the appoinment be classified as URGENT and then today I get the letter to say I would not be given a new appointment FULL STOP

 

Urgent appointments are there for Clinically Urgent problems not to appease people who DNA .

 

to re-cap for you zippygbr.....I recieved the letter at aprox 10.15 am so i called the department to queerie it and was told sorry thats it so I then contacted the general hospital PALS 4 times and got an answering machine each time

 

There are only so many Staff in PALS and tasking one or more of them to solely be in the office to answer phone calls may not be the most appropriate use of time if it means face to face meetings involving a variety of people could not be held...

Did you leave a message ?

 

...next was to re-call the dermatology unit and re-complain then I complained to MY GP only to be told that the GP was out of the office

 

and I Presume Practice staff or the Practice Manager were physically incapable of taking a message ?

 

so next was to call the main hospital matron and HE finally got the gist of it and then he hammered home to certain people that I would be taking things to a legal level by close of day today and hey presto the new appoinment was given to me at aprox 2pm today.......Pals then called me back to tell me that the ONE missed appointment is NOT the way it works but three missed ones is.

I know I have been and still am being lied to at my GP's and by certain individuals at my hospital and I am keeping ALL of the letters sent to me for when this kicks off more in the new year due to MY body is telling me there's more wrong with my health than what has been told to me up to now.

 

Three DNAs before re-referral required is extremely generous generally one DNA is enough at alot of hospitals due to the costs of DNAs and the delays DNAs cause in getting people seen

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats true but then they dont know the pain or lack of night sleep and anyway I have reported the post I dont see why someone who knows nothing about the way Iv'e had to fight for everything so far and with MY heart condition etc should have had to fight to get this far and still not to have had any hope of biopsies to try to get to the bottom of it....it's a disgrace really to have paid into it all my life and yet get as nowhere as yet as i have.

The GP's I see now is top notch he's on my said whereas the others who have as far as I'm concerned has misdiagnosed mefor almost four years have tried to block me.....remember a few months ago I was sent a disclaimer to sighn when i requested MY medical records....yeah ofcourse I'll sign it.....who the hell do they think i am....it's part of my evidence for any claims i will be lodging against them thats why I was advised by andy to record all my future visits to the GP's and hospital and yet here I was just this morning trying to get MY point across and then this person decided it was their route to have a pop at me without even knowing me or perhaps bothering to even check up on any of my previous posts about this and how long it's been going on for

Link to post
Share on other sites

Burlyb. I am sorry to learn that you are still having to struggle against the system. And, particularly if 'up against it' like you, in my view keeping proceedings recorded is an entirely sensible precaution.

 

Times are changing, and maybe at an accelerating rate.

 

Here's a Canadian article from yesterday, which includes:

 

"Patient advocacy groups like the Patients' Association of Canada think videotaping is a legitimate tool to keep hospitals on their toes".

 

http://www.cbc.ca/whitecoat/blog/2012/12/19/big-brother-is-watching-secret-recordings-of-mds/

 

And frankly the author's couple of counter-arguments, as regards covert recordings, amount to the flimsy square-root of nothing at all. As he states: it's inevitable.

 

The more patients are ill-treated - or maybe just left to perceive they are ill-treated by pitiful medical communication skills - the more they will record in whatsoever fashion flaming-well suits them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI again nolegion turbo pre warned me of some problems I'd really have and he was right and it all came to a new problem yesterday when i recieved a NEW letter from the dermotology dept telling me that due to my not keeping to an appointment on 1st of November I would NOT be given a new appointment.....they didnt recon with ME nor my take NO for an answer attitude....they climbed down and I now have the much needed aptment for the 7th of January and this time come hell or high water I will be there due to I need to get past dermatology to get to the biopsy......I think I am being pulled along at a slow rate so I'll see how quick the referal time will be and if it's what I consider too long then I do have a solicitor waiting to move on it with their private doctor.....I aint laying down any more they can do one.....wish I had NOT forgotten my dictaphone in june when I had to see yet another consultant about the lump on my breast bone when he got in my face and wagged his finger and semi shouted that IT will not be scanned.....it got scanned a while later but it rettles me when we have to fight and threaten them due to at the end of the day .....I know my body and my pains and you wouldnt believe how many letters I have here now claiming theres nowt wrong with me....we shall see in due course ....we shall see

 

ps thank you for your input and have a great xmas and new year...cheers again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear your still having problems with your numb doctors burlyb.

A friend of mine only today was telling me that he had surgery to remove a lump from his neck. It was an inflamed lymph node, that's all i know. Still he seems to have not had any problems yet regarding it.

 

However, im still fighting on trying to sort the legal claims out. Remember, a hidden camera is your best friend in the end.

Once i have secured my legal angles with my own healthcare, i will be glad to publish my footage which is quite shocking i assure you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...