Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The return under the consumer rights act of the item bought would have to be at the expense of the retailer. If the dealer themselves has arranged for an MOT at their own preferred garage – then frankly I would be prepared to cough up another 50 quid and go get another MOT at a garage of your choice. I think this would be a good move before you try anything. It's still very early days and say you are well within your 30 days. Find yourself an MOT station with a good reputation and tell them that you want them to be particularly exigent because there are questions over the condition of the vehicle. If you get MOT which fails I would point out some serious defects, then this is grist to your mill. This may seem to be a nuisance – but given that so far you have cut corners to save time and money, I think that you will have to treat this as payback time. Just because nobody took the trouble to be careful when buying the car, doesn't mean that some care and preparation shouldn't be taken when preparing to challenge the dealer and maybe to return it. If you don't want to tell your partner that you told him so, then bring him here so that he can see that we think that he's acted quite irresponsibly in the way that he has chucked his money around. Now there is a price to pay in terms of time, money, stress, uncertainty. Your partner now wants to try and cut more corners by compromising but you don't really know what you are compromising over. Get the MOT and the check-over which I've suggested so that you understand exactly what you've bought and then you could understand what sort of compromises you might be prepared to make. If the vehicle fails us MOT for some reason rather then I would be looking to recover not only the cost the vehicle, but the cost of the MOT failure, the cost of travelling to Bristol to purchase it and the cost of driving back with it. In other words, if the vehicle is worth rejecting then there is no reason why you should be out of pocket at all.  
    • Thank you for the advice.   She is just waiting to get the green light on the move and rang and spoke to them to get some details.
    • Bargain Cars Bristol (also trades as Southwest Vans and Commercials). They're around 55 miles away; Bristol is the nearest place to us which has a decent amount of car dealerships.   My partner has (and had previously), yes. He's the very opposite of me - doesn't research endlessly, doesn't always err on the side of caution. I'm not in a financial position to buy a car, but need one for a new job, so the deal was that he paid for it but I wasn't to interfere with my 'over-cautiousness'. Yes, he's regretting that now! (I have so far managed to refrain from saying 'I told you so'). If it was up to me, I'd spend 3 months researching the history of car, dealership, MOT testing garage etc before buying, which is why he usually ends up taking over.   Apologies, the dealer themselves didn't carry out the MOT, but they booked it in at a garage of their choice (which appears to be a couple of miles away from their business). Personally, I don't trust any MOT carried out by the dealer's garage of choice as there were no advisories on the car that had a blow-out either (I did report that garage after the blow-out, so hopefully it was assessed and action was taken).   The ad doesn't explicitly state that, but the dealer stated it verbally (which obviously I can't prove now). Their own website's ad is still visible here, but the one on eBay (which is the one we saw) has been deleted, and I foolishly don't seem to have stored a copy of it.   So, within the first 30 days I have the right to reject without having to accept a repair option, from day 31 up to 6 months I have to allow one repair attempt before having the right to reject? Is that correct? My OH wants to 'compromise' with the dealer and say that if they process a refund immediately, we'll return the vehicle today at our own cost, but if they are unable to refund today then they will have to collect the vehicle from us instead (in line with our statutory rights). However, this section of the CRA confuses me - doesn't this mean that we have to return it as stated on our receipt?    
    • I know this but a few COVID related problems have knocked us for six. So i'll see what the judge says tomorrow. Regarding the letter it seems they are dragging up stuff already covered and cleverly wording it and there are some points that are incorrect.
    • You absolutely can (have a negative lateral flow test, and a positive PCR).   This can also happen when someone is symptomatic, and actually has Covid (the scenario most people would consider first, and what I think you are asking about). There is a fallacy to that scenario, though : if symptomatic, they shouldn't be using the lateral flow test (which is for SCREENING of the ASYMPTOMATIC), but those people should be going for the higher sensitivity PCR as the initial test.   If used 'correctly', (both in terms of 'both samples taken correctly', and 'used for the asymptomatic'!) then it is possible for someone asymptomatic to test negative by lateral flow, and positive by PCR. There is again an inherent issue to this scenario, though : the testing (for someone asymptomatic, for most situations!) should stop when they have the negative lateral flow test, and they wouldn't need the PCR - so why would they then know the PCR result?   An exception here would be e.g. someone traveling internationally, who might get a (self taken) lateral flow test (which comes back negative, with a result within 30 mins), and then a PCR taken at the same time, which takes longer to come back, but then comes back positive ........ presumed then to be the PCR being the more sensitive test, and the 'true picture' (rather than the PCR being a 'false positive'!). In the academic scenario (or if you were a leading politician, or a titan of business willing to pay for a clearer answer ..... or an answer you prefer if it meant you could travel / not self-isolate!): one could then re-test by a different PCR that uses a different target ... which then gives the suggestion of which is the 'false' test (false negative 'insensitive' lateral flow vs. false +ve PCR!).   Where does one stop, though?. All tests have false negative rates and false positive rates, so I can create the possible (but unlikely!) scenario where there is a true negative lateral flow, with one or MORE false positive PCR's. One would tend to 'believe' the PCR's (especially if more than one!), but it would be POSSIBLE (if unlikely!) that the PCR's could all be false positive. As you get more and more positive PCR's using different targets, the likelihood diminishes, though (although this wouldn't affect other sources of error such as sample crossover [what if they tested a sample which was someone else's sample, and was in fact +ve, but it had been labelled as the first person's sample??). Again, where do you stop? cell culture? (the 'gold standard' by which the PCR and lateral flow test sensitivity and specificity should be measured, but not widely available).   None of these are new issue, or specific to COVID, though. The National Blood Transfusion Service has dealt with screening tests (albeit it, not for COVID, but for other infectious diseases) for many years. Blood samples from donations may test HIV +ve (on screening!), and then there is a whole protocol (different tests on the original sample, repeat testing by the original test methodology whilst going back to the primary sample tube, and getting a completly new sample [to ensure different people's samples haven't been inadvertently 'switched'!] if there are still concerns!) to ensure that : a) the donor isn't told "you have HIV", when they HAVEN'T but at the same time b) If the donor does have undiagnosed HIV infection, they get followed up, retested, (and then told!).   All this relies on an understanding of test specificity and sensitivity (and of what can go wrong at any point in the testing : pre-analytical, analytical, or post-analytical !), while appreciating that most people just want a test result and would consider  the report as 'gospel' : "positive means you have it, negative means you don't".........
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

GP Negligence prescribed sleeping pills which caused urine retention and an indwelling catheter to be put in - Quality of life ruined by GP negligence!!


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, linzie said:

Does complaitn need to be raised to the hospital being made to wait 6 hours plus in A&E given my brothers age, dementia, with blood passing through the catheter into the catheter bag. After bloods taken being told to wait for Dr to arrive to bladder scan urine levels in bladder before/after catherer removal but no scan was done no dr showed up. Nurse came removed the catheter. Patient went home, overnight urine rentention happened again. Back to hospital for urine drainage with catheter and a new catherer put inside patient but no bladder scan done again to check if bladder completely empty or if the bloody urine or any debri left in bladder.

 

 

Sorry, what bit are you complaining about?.

 

The 6 hour wait in A&E once the catheter was in?. What would you have preferred instead?

(If they'd sent him home with the catheter in? - would you then be complaining that they didn't give him a trial without catheter.....)

If they'd waited less time? would you then be complaining that they removed it too soon, and the retention was bound to recur?

 

I've answered already about the bladder scan (or lack thereof).

 

It seems to me that your current mindset is that they are "damned if they do, and damned if they don't"

 

For the hospital, why not approach PALS? again, not as a complaint, but wanting to understand what happened ; if you calmly ask questions you may find they help you come up with the right questions, for you to get answers (and it might even turn out you then find you don't need to complain......)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

HB, you called?   For there to be medical negligence there must be: a) a duty of care, b) a breach of that duty of care, c) harm resulting, and d no intervening act or e

The CCG (for out of hours or secondary care) or NHS England (for primary care, within hours) are the commissioners.   The Commisioners can look at an initial complaint (as can the practice),

Hi   Does the relative that you state has Dementia had that formally diagnoised by the Hospital and not just a GP at the Surgery saying it?   What is the name of the Sleeping Pills

Posted (edited)

Hi BazzaS, I wasn't in a good mood when I wrote post 47. I read your post feeling the same way as you, first step find out what happened behind the decision to use sleeping tablet X and if it was noted in the records or not by the Gp.

 

Lets get an explanation and medical records first then go from there.

 

This is the letter I have written requesting an explanantion.

 

Please can you provide an explanation why GP1 (name here) on xx/xx/xx, GP2 (name here) on xx/xx/xx and GP3 (name here) on xx/xx/xx prescribed (medication) to my brother? What was the rational behind the prescripton?

 

Is this letter good enough does it need tweaking?

 

Is a cover letter needed that your writing on behalf on a relative to request an explanation the surgery might refuse under GDPR regulations

Edited by linzie
Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned this earlier in the thread and I think BazzaS did as well.

 

You can't just write to the surgery and ask for information on your brother. It would be like me writing to your GP and asking about your medical records.

 

HB

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this good enough for cover letter requesting data on brothers behalf

 

Consent form

(for another individual to gain access and / or to discuss my medical record)

 

 

Patient details

Patient name

 

 

Date of birth

 

 

Address

 

 

 

 

 

Postcode

 

 

 

I am a patient of Medical Centre and understand I need to give consent for another individual to have access to my medical records and/ or to discuss my medical requirements. I understand the contact details of the individual will be recorded on my medical record.

 

Signature of patient/ guardian:

Relationship to patient:

 

Date:

 

 

Contact details for the individual who I wish to grant access

Full name

 

 

Telephone number

 

 

Relationship to patient

 

 

 

Then the letter below goes with the consent form

Subject Access Request Access

 

Date of request XX/XX/XXXX

To: F.A.O. the Practice Manager. Milton Medical Centre

Please accept this as a formal request for ALL DATA whatever format you may hold this in whether it be written, computerized etc. relating to (insert full name, Date of Birth, Full Address).

If any records are redacted could you provide clarification as to why this has been done and under which parts of the Data Protection Act/General Data Protections Regulations you are relying on to do this. If you redact any of the record please could you provide a summary of what you have redacted?

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then for requesting explanation for the medicine, send the same cover letter but with a letter requesting an explanation

 

Please can you provide an explanation why GP1 (name here) on xx/xx/xx, GP2 (name here) on xx/xx/xx and GP3 (name here) on xx/xx/xx prescribed (medication) to my brother? What was the rational behind the prescripton?

 

I'd like to get both the medical records request and letter for explanation for medicine tweaked this weekend then send to Gp

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet again : does your brother have capacity to sign such a letter?. If not, it would be a nullity - as if it wasn’t signed.

 

I’ve already explained this previously.

it could be as simple as the practice asking him what his wishes are … what do you think would happen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I haveh ad a good re read of your Topic and do agree with BazzaS  that you need to take a step back from this and I can appeciate that you are not happy with the treatment that your relative has been given due to the sleeping pill being prescribed.

 

You mention the wait at the hospital of over X hours but you do not say if this relative went to a certain department with a GP letter or whether this was via the hospital A&E Department.

 

If it was via the Hospitals A&E Department you need to bear in mind the following:

 

1. This was during COVID-19 and protetions will be in place to protect both Medical Staff and Patients coming to A&E

 

2. The A&E Department will Triage every single Patient coming to that Department as to who needs instant medical treament to those who can wait a certain period but as this can be a fast flowing Department the Triage System can change minute by minute dependent on the amount of Casualties/Patients they have to treat.

 

IMO you need to approach this from the beginning as to why your relative was prescribed that specific medication with there medical condition and that GPs reasoning at that time. (was this fully discussed with that relative at that time, as you say they have capacity to sign a letter, did they understand what the GP was saying at the time about this medication and did they agree to the GPs decision to prescribe this medication if they have capacity and were the possible side affects explained)

 

My concern is you state they have Dementia then state they have capacity to sign a letter but we are unaware of what type of Dementia the relative has i.e. is it early onset Dementia as you need to be very careful if they have memory loss issues with stating they have capacity to sign a letter when there is no Power of Attorney nor Deputyship in Place for that relative.

 

 

  • Like 1

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

From my reading of it, the 6 hours wait in A&E was 6 hours after the catheter had been sited, not a 6 hour wait to be treated.

 

There are a multitude of possible reasons for this delay, indeed : it might have been part of a deliberate treatment plan.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...