Tag: complaints

Posted on by

Regulator’s notifiable events regime could be delayed

Regulator's notifiable events regime could be delayed

The Department for Work and Pensions launched its consultation in September last year, and experts warned at the time that the new notifiable events regime, which sets out the types of event trustees and employers are obliged to inform the regulator about, could be more impactful than its controversial criminal powers.

The DWP proposed adding two new employer-related notifiable events: the first was the sale, by an employer, of a ‘material proportion’ of its business or assets, defined as accounting for 25 per cent or more of its annual revenue or the gross value of its assets.

The second was “the intended granting or extending of a relevant security by the employer over its assets”, an arrangement where, should the employer become insolvent, a secured creditor would be ranked above the pension scheme in a priority list for debt recovery.

The draft regulations explain that ‘relevant security’ is a level of security of more than 25 per cent of the employers’ consolidated revenues or its gross assets.

The extent of the changes, and the significant penalties for non-compliance, led the Association of Consulting Actuaries to call in October for “comprehensive guidance” to be published before the new regime is introduced.

Non-compliance could result in a fine of up to £1mn and, where false or misleading information has been provided, prosecution under the Pension Schemes Act 2021.

Despite the potentially significant implications of the new events, which were expected to come into force on April 6, the government has yet to publish a response to the consultation, which closed in October. 

In a blog post, law firm Herbert Smith Freehills’ regional head of practice Samantha Brown, partners Michael Aherne and Rachel Pinto, and professional support consultant Tim Smith noted that the changes “have been trailed for some time”.

They said: “The government has still not issued a response to its consultation and the final amending regulations are still awaited. It is unclear what has caused this delay.

“The proposed changes to the pensions notifiable events regime have been trailed for some time. Therefore, we still expect changes along the lines of those set out in the government’s consultation to be introduced. However, we cannot be certain when this will be.”

The DWP has been approached for comment.

Posted on by

CCTV footage did not uphold hospital’s version of events

CCTV footage did not uphold hospital's version of events

Enda Craig was taken by ambulance to Letterkenny University Hospital at around 1am on May 11, 2019. He was suffering from atrial fibrillation, a condition that induces an irregular and often very rapid heart rhythm. The condition can lead to blood clots. When it strikes, the impact of the faster heartbeat can be extremely frightening. It was his fourth time being admitted for this condition. Mr Craig is 74. At the hospital, he was placed on a trolley in a cubicle behind a curtain to await examination.

Various tests were taken while he was in the cubicle. After thirty-eight minutes, he says the curtain was “pulled back by a female uniformed staff member who entered the cubicle and addressed him aggressively”. This was the clinical nurse manager (CNM) on duty. She told him the cubicle was required for another patient. Mr Craig said he was a patient waiting to be examined. The CNM, according to Mr Craig, asked if he was refusing to leave. He agreed to relocate to a row of seats near the nurse manager’s station. The CNM insists she acted entirely professionally in the exchange.

He was moved to a row of seats near the nurse manager’s station. 

A report compiled by the hospital on what happened thereafter described how Mr Craig “walked up and down the treatment area of the ED (Emergency Department) on a number of occasions passing close to where the CNM was sitting at her desk”. He “stood and leaned towards the CNM and pointed his finger into her face for 34 seconds.” 

CCTV footage

The report, based on CCTV footage stated that the CNM “is seen to recoil backwards and lift her hands in a defensive manner.” There was no audio with the CCTV footage, but the report stated that Mr Craig walked past the nurse’s station nine times over the following 15 minutes which “caused a sense of anxiety among members of the clinical staff present in the ED at that time.” 

The CNM stated: “I was very anxious and upset at the verbal abuse and the intimidation I had felt while [we were] trying our best within our limited resources to care for the patients and others.” 

Mr Craig went home later that morning, his condition having been diagnosed as “low risk”. He made a complaint to the hospital over how he had been treated. The hospital appointed an emergency medicine consultant to investigate the complaint. The consultant compiled a twenty-five page report based on CCTV footage and interviews with a number of witnesses. Mr Craig’s complaint was not upheld and the report presented him as being unreasonable and aggressive. Mr Craig denied this and said that some witnesses had not been interviewed.

There followed a protracted process in which Mr Craig requested a whole raft of documents, many through Freedom of Information. At one point, he received a copy of the CCTV footage. 

“I was later told that I never should have got that,” he says. “But I had put in for a lot of stuff and that came back in some of it.” 

The footage did not correlate with how it had been analysed and presented in the complaint investigation.

Complaint to ombudsman

Mr Craig complained to the Ombudsman over how his case had been dealt with. After another protracted period, the Ombudsman reported back to him last December. “We are not entirely convinced that some of the key comments in the hospital’s initial complaint response to you could be supported by the relevant recorded CCTV footage,” investigator Willie O’Doherty reported to him.

In addition, in response to a number of questions, the hospital informed us that it is unclear as to which witnesses were consulted and on what basis they were chosen. Furthermore, it has emerged that a number of key witnesses were not consulted about the complaint.

The letter went on: “Your calm tenacity – and patience – in pursuing matters and seeking improvements has achieved a positive outcome, not just in terms of you receiving an apology, and the retraction of the initial report, but also in the fact that your complaint has provided an opportunity to put things right for other patients and families.” 

Enda Craig received an apology and his complaint was praised for providing an opportunity to put things right for other patients and families.
Enda Craig received an apology and his complaint was praised for providing an opportunity to put things right for other patients and families.

A spokesperson for the Saolta Hospital group, of which Letterkenny is a member, said that on foot of the Ombudsman’s request, the group is undertaking a review of the hospital’s complaint handling processes.

“Listening to the experiences of those who use our services can provide unique insights into standards of care and offers opportunities to improve the quality and safety of health services in a way that will deliver measurable benefits for patients and service users.” 

Mr Craig has received his apology. His condition has seen him return to the hospital since the fateful night of May 2019.

“I got on fantastic,” he says of the visit. 

Members of staff came in to take a look at me. They must have heard I was the boy who made the complaint, they were tripping over me to look after me. 

“I sent a letter to the hospital afterwards thanking them.”