Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have been living with my partner since 2013. But after the birth of our son in 2014 things became unstuck. We were living together but I was making plans to move out, even viewed properties etc and therefore began claiming CTC and WTC to ensure that I could afford to go it alone. Eventually we worked it out but it has been on and off for years. In addition to this, I was in a lot of debt, had lost my job and knew that (selfishly) I needed the tax credits to keep my head above water.  My partner has no idea that I was claiming and if he finds this out he will leave me for sure. The house, the bills, everything is in his name. I work but I dont make enough money to contribute to the house as well as pay all my existing debts (my partner doesn’t know about half of these either). I  once had a bailiff call at the house and I had to tell him about it. He was so angry and mortified (as was I) and I just feel like I am bringing so much shame onto our family. I have been living this lie for 6 years and I couldn’t find a way out of it. I know I have made a huge mistake. I just want to pay it back and try to move on from it. I’m worried that I will have to go to court, prison, or they will want to speak to my partner about it. I really don’t want him to know about this because it’s so shameful. From my estimations it could be between 28-30K. I have absolutely no idea how I will pay it back, as we wouldn’t be able to claim any further credits as a joint claim because he earns too much money.  I haven’t eaten or slept in days. I feel physically sick and I just can’t cope with the guilt and humiliation. I did make false claims and now I’m worried I will pay the ultimate price and lose everything I have.    
    • Hi All,   Hoping for a little help and advice please.   This company Link Financial are chasing me for a debt that I had as a credit card with Royal Bank of Scotland. Out of the blue and having no correspondence from RBS a few year back this company claimed I now owed them the sum of money. I have written in response stating I do not acknowledge any debt to Link financial and asked them to supply evidence of liability. I also requested a true copy of the alleged agreement, a full statement of account, a signed true copy of assignment and any other documents referred to in the agreement. I also enclosed  a £1 payment for the credit agreement request and clearly stated that this £1 payment under no circumstances should be set aside for any alleged debt and if the documentation can't be supplied the fee should be returned.   Link's response was just a small statement of account with credit agreement number, account number (same as the RBS number), date of agreement and transaction sheet where they had taken the £1 fee off the debt value after I asked them not to. There was no true copy of assignment, true copy of alleged agreement or evidence of liability.   For reference, In 2009 my debts started to mount after my wife I had lost a child and we weren't at work for months, so ended up paying the mortgage on a credit card. Eventually it got too much and the RBS took me to county court in 2011 where I received a CCJ and then RBS was granted a charging order on my property which is in my name only. I was ordered to pay a monthly fee.    I received my first letter from Link in 2016 just stating, we have not written to you in some time as we have had to locate your address. We would like to discuss your intentions regarding the outstanding balance on  your account. I had no correspondence from RBS about this so I thought this was a scam company.  Unbeknown to me I also realised the monthly payment to the RBS had stopped being taken directly from my account.   After a few letters backwards and forwards about me disputing Link and this debt today 26th February 2021 I have now received another letter from Link stating. As you are aware a charging order on the beneficial interest you have in the property at.........has been secured. They are now seeking payment and will accept monthly payments on the account in accordance with my current financial situation. If I chose not to settle in full or fail to complete and return the form below or contact them within 7 days they will take further legal recovery action. There is a little boxed section at the bottom monthly or weekly payments for me to fill in and send off.   I'm really at my wits end now of what to do next. I have two years left on my mortgage and finding it really hard to get through that two year financially, especially since this pandemic has really hit home money wise. The last thing I need is the family home to be taken away especially with a 10 year old in the home.    I really appreciate any help and guidance. Thank you.    
    • OK lets pick out a few words in the ramble   Free energy?  Slavery?  Constructive manslaughter?  Weaponised energy of 5g Biowarfare Only wearing medical masks for criminal intent   Please may I suggest an extra layer of foil on the tin hat?    Oh and FYI there is no class action in the UK... 
    • i thought that was the point of mediation, to show them that you think they havent got a case to go to court with? I realise you know far more about this type of thing than i do though, but i thought that not fulfilling the CCA properly - ie by not supplying t&c - was an automatic fail at court for them.   I dont know what to do now -   @Andyorchcan i have your thoughts too please   the hassle just makes you feel like giving in to them
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • 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
      • 33 replies

GP refused to see me after I made a complaint 2 years againt him


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 651 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

2 years ago I made a complaint against a GP at my surgery....the reply I received was the GP could not recall the events (in the complaint) because the GP see so many patients a day and the complaint I sent was 12 months after the event.

 

Now to what happened recently....

 

1. I had a appoointment at 10am with the same GP I had made a complaint againt over 1 year ago...I booked myself at reception and waited, waited when it was 10.20 I asked at receptionion when would I been seent, as my appointment was at 10am. A receptionist told me 'There has been an emergency of some kind with a patient...so that has caused a delay and your appointment will now be moved to another GP' - I asked why the appointment was moved and was told 'sorry I cannot tell you' and you will be seen soon.

 

2. 10.30am and still not been seen so I asked another receptionist, she checked the computer system and told me the GP (name) has refused to see me because I made a complaint against him over 12 months ago and now my appointment was being moved to a different GP and I had to wait. I told the receptionist this was wrong and the GP had to be impartial as a GP and he was making this personal by not seeing me.

 

3. Eventually I was called and saw a different GP and explained to him what happened and the GP I had originally had an appointment with had refused to see me because of a complaint I raised against him over 12 months ago. The GP I was with was shocked and surprised and told me that GP should not have refused to see me

 

NOW I need your help to write a complaint, please can you help me

Link to post
Share on other sites

A complaint 12 Months after the event.....................

 

Complaints about GP's are taken very seriously. Its not surprising he wouldn't want to see you alone, maybe with a chaperone, but not alone.

 

So you intend to complain again................................

 

You had best be careful or the Practice will strike you off and then you might be stuck. Just see another GP at the same Practice and move on.

 

H

42 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, stephrayner said:

 

NOW I need your help to write a complaint, please can you help me

 

What have you got to complain about?  You saw a GP didn't you?

 

Why on earth would you want to complain about not being seen by a GP you've previously unsuccessfully complained about?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the list of emergencies that could ahve cropped up would be quite long, the GP may have made a house call to a dying person in a care home just as they shuffled off this mortal coil and they are them obliged by law to see out the rest of the necessaries. Now as said, no-one can give you any information that is someone else's personal data so the anodyne response you got would be normal.

If the GP had indeed refused to see you that is within their rights, no-one has to suffer abuse of any sort and unfounded allegations  may well fall into that area.

 

you are lucky that the practice still has you on their books. Where my wife works a druggie tried to attack her and kick in a door into the office and originally the police said no furhter action and the patient remained on the surgery books. The next time he came in he was ordered to find another GP as his wasnt going to entertain abuse of their staff regardless of the lack of police action. The GP had waited to tell the person face to face so it was clear that this was a final decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, BazzaS said:

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

1 receptionist told me the previous patient that had gone to see the GP I had originally been booked to see had taken longer than expected so my appointment was delayed and would now be changed to see another GP.  BUT I saw that patient leave the surgery after he was called to see the GP within 10mins, which means this receptionist did not want to tell me the real reason - which was because I had made a justified complaint against the GP.

 

When this receptionist had gone, another receptionist took her place and after waiting over 40 mins, I went over to her and asked what the delay was, she checked the computer notes and said that GP did not want to see me because of the complaint I had raised months ago, which was justified.

 

This receptiionist told me from reading the notes on the computer system the reason the GP refused to see me was due to the justified complaint.

 

Then when I eventually was called into see the other GP (after waiting 1hr 15mins) who my appointment had been transferred to, I mentioned the issue to him and he was shocked at the attitude of the other GP.

 

The GP that refused to see me, has lots of negatives reviews online as well, so his behaviour is not out of the blue so to speak

 

I want an explanantion from the practice manager why the GP refused to see me, why I had to wait over 40 mins before being told there was a delay, why the surgery did not tell me before the GP did not want to see me, when the surgery themselves made the appointment for me to see him

 

I want a detailed reply as to the actions of this GP

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

the list of emergencies that could ahve cropped up would be quite long, the GP may have made a house call to a dying person in a care home just as they shuffled off this mortal coil and they are them obliged by law to see out the rest of the necessaries. Now as said, no-one can give you any information that is someone else's personal data so the anodyne response you got would be normal.

If the GP had indeed refused to see you that is within their rights, no-one has to suffer abuse of any sort and unfounded allegations  may well fall into that area.

 

you are lucky that the practice still has you on their books. Where my wife works a druggie tried to attack her and kick in a door into the office and originally the police said no furhter action and the patient remained on the surgery books. The next time he came in he was ordered to find another GP as his wasnt going to entertain abuse of their staff regardless of the lack of police action. The GP had waited to tell the person face to face so it was clear that this was a final decision.

23 hours ago, BazzaS said:

What harm have you suffered?

What outcome do you want?.

 

All the original GP needs to say is that they were delayed anyway, (since it appears this was the case, since you were told this!) and they were concerned that due to your previous complaint, and the ongoing delay that day, that they thought it best you were seen by a colleague instead, not only to reduce your delay, but also to avoid an uneasy interaction that might have made it harder for you to receive good care.

 

If they hadn't had arranged for a colleague to see you, or you'd been denied being seen by them if they were dealing with emergency appointments and there was no-one else available for emergency appointments, then you'd have grounds to complain: on the basis that your care had been impacted.

 

If the GP is able to present it as "care not impacted, in fact it was done to ensure quickest & best available care": you'd have to show harm (and not just the delay, which may have been present no matter what, and may even have been reduced by you seeing someone else if the original GP was running late due to dealing with an emergency).

 

The receptionist mentioned an emergency, and it isn't surprising they won't give details of another patient. Do you have any grounds to suggest that not only has the original GP said "I won't see them" but that the receptionist has colluded by lying about there having been an emergency?

 

If there was an emergency: you are on to a non-starter.

 

If you are claiming there wasn't an emergency : not only are you going to have trouble proving it, but why would the receptionist risk their own career by colluding?.

 

 

 

1 receptionist told me the previous patient that had gone to see the GP I had originally been booked to see had taken longer than expected so my appointment was delayed and would now be changed to see another GP.  BUT I saw that patient leave the surgery after he was called to see the GP within 10mins, which means this receptionist did not want to tell me the real reason - which was because I had made a justified complaint against the GP.

 

When this receptionist had gone, another receptionist took her place and after waiting over 40 mins, I went over to her and asked what the delay was, she checked the computer notes and said that GP did not want to see me because of the complaint I had raised months ago, which was justified.

 

This receptiionist told me from reading the notes on the computer system the reason the GP refused to see me was due to the justified complaint

 

They was never an emergency because the 2nd receptionist told me from checking the computer the real reason for the delay was because the GP refused to see me. My complaint was justified and GP's are supposed to be neautral regardless of a justified complaint made against them.

 

Does this mean if anyone on the NHS makes a justified complaint against a GP, they will all be refused from seeing that GP again for an appointment at their surgery!!!!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all hearsay.

If you complain they'll deny everything. 

You better move on and make sure you book your future appointments with gp of your choice, you can do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, stephrayner said:

 

 

I want a detailed reply as to the actions of this GP

 

 

 

You can want what you like but you're not entitled to anything.

 

Why do you want to see a GP you've previously made an unsuccessful complaint about?  Can you please explain that?

 

If you are so certain your unsuccessful complaint was "justified", why did you not carry it further with the CCG and/or GMC?

 

And why wait for 12 months to make a complaint?  What?

 

Is there something more behind all this?

 

EDIT:  If I were the GP I can perfectly understand them not wanting you as a patient if you've previously complained about them.  Think about it.

Edited by Manxman in exile
Addition
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, just seen this and thought I’d stick a oar in.

 

If your (old) GP feels that the therapeutic relationship is damaged to the extent that they’re unable to treat you then they’re perfectly within their rights to have a colleague see you. It would appear, in spades, that this is likely the case given the strength of your reaction to a relatively minor occurrence. If that wasn’t / isn’t the case and there was indeed an emergency then the GP concerned did you a favour by not making you wait any longer. 

 

There’s a common misconception that once a patient has left the consultation room that the GP is free to start work on the next patient. If indeed it was an emergency the GP could have well instructed the person to travel directly to a local hospital whilst they call ahead to arrange urgent investigations or treatment which takes time. And please be assured, 40/50 minutes on the telephone to a hospital trying to track down the consultant or ST1 responsible for a particular speciality isn’t uncommon.

 

By all means ask the PM for an explanation, it’s likely to be very simple. A clear breakdown of therapeutic relationship.  

My views are my own and are not representative of any organisation. if you've found my post helpful please click on the star below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you say the complaint was justified. Does this mean the complaint was formally upheld or does justified merely fit into "I think that it was deserved and an going to ignore what the official response says"

 

BTW the receptionist wont be able to see a reason on the ICE as you describe, that will require the doctor to send a messagepal or task across and TBH they wouldnt read that out to you. They might paraphrase but the doctor is usually their employer so not in their pay grade to comment on their boss's decisions when it is something contentious.

 

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...