Letters and e-mails

Letters and e-mails

Black: text from e-mails; bolded and italics: my comments; bigger font: of extra interest

__________________________

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:55:02 +0200
From: johnblog@gmx.com
Subject: inspection
To: enquiries@cqc.org.uk

To whom it may concern,

I understand there is an upcoming inspection of XXXXXXXXX Nursing Home. It might interest you to know that there is a communication book used for messages between trained staff. Two exist, one in use and one completed. Both ARE in the office and might provide useful reading.

Yours Sincerely
J.B.

This email was sent to the Care Quality Commission before their visit to XXXXX Nursing Home in September 2009. The inspector did not look for the books; they were left untouched on the shelves where they could have been found had one made the slightest attempt to find them. The manager and owner of the home had removed them from the office prior to the inspection. However, I had found them among other documents which had been packed to be taken away. I brought the books back, placed them with their backs turned so that they would be better protected from being found and removed again. For an inspector who had been told about their existence they could, however, easily have been found.

In the inspection report following the inspection this can be read: “ Prior to this inspection CQC received an anonymous email raising some concerns. We referred these concerns to the local authority’s safeguarding adults team. The planning meeting was due to take place the day after the inspection and the manager and provider were due to attend. There have been no other safeguarding alerts during the year.”

That means no later than on 25 September 2009 both the Care Quality Commission and the social services should have been fully aware of my serious concerns about extreme mismanagement. The comment (or lack of mentioning the content of the above e-mail) in the report indicates that the inspector did not look for any books (which, if she had, would have given her detailed information about serious abuse and neglect from the manager’s side)

_____________________________________________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:larsxxxxxxxxx.com]
Sent: 13 February 2010 00:48
To: NMC Fitness To Practise

Dear Sir/Madam,

I request you to investigate Ms XXXXXXX fitness to practice. Please see attachment.
Yours Sincerely

Lars Petersson


From: Claire.Carnall@nmc-uk.org
To: larsgpXXXXXXXl.com; fitness.to.practise@nmc-uk.org
CC: Jamie.Barge@nmc-uk.org
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:29:42 +0000
Subject: FW: fitness to practice

Complaint received and acknowledged. Forwarding to Jamie Barge.

Jamie- I shall print this out and pass it on to you.

Many thanks

Claire Carnall

Administrative Assistant

Fitness to Practise Department

0207 462 5832

_________________________________________________________

From: DHMail@dh.gsi.gov.uk
To: larsxxxxxxx.com
CC:
Subject: Response to your Query : – Ref:DE00000481656 – XXXXXXXXXXX
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 13:10:45 +0000

481656 from Mr Lars Petersson

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your e-mail of 12 February to Andy Burnham about the XXXXXXXXXXXXX.  I have been asked to reply on his behalf.

I was sorry to read of your concerns about the standard of care at the home and would like to assure you that the Government is keen to ensure that care home residents are well looked after.

As you are aware, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) is responsible for regulating care homes in England and ensuring that providers meet national minimum standards of care.  The CQC is an independent regulator and the Department of Health does not intervene in its internal processes.  However, in light of your concerns, officials contacted the CQC to request information on the situation.

The CQC has advised that the last Key Inspection of XXXXXXXXXXXX was undertaken on the 24 September 2009.  The home was rated as 2 Star, meaning they were providing a good level of care to the residents.  Prior to the inspection, the CQC received anonymous correspondence detailing a number of concerns regarding the wellbeing of residents.  This correspondence was used to inform the inspection process but, in addition, resulted in an immediate safeguarding referral.

The local Safeguarding Team in Surrey sent a Care Support Worker to XXXXXXXXXXXX to investigate the issues of concern raised.  However, no foundation for the concerns was found, which concurred with the findings of the key inspection.

as before: nobody ever looked for the books…. It was like inspecting a bank weeks after a bank robbery and say there are no evidence to be seen….  Yes, this home was given two stars… (in a system that starts with none and goes to three). Well done….

Since the key inspection, there have been three more referrals made to the Safeguarding Team in Surrey and these were all made by the service provider following individual incidents.  The Safeguarding Team has not contacted the CQC regarding these referrals, which would indicate that no action was taken. However, the CQC has asked its link inspector for XXXXXXX Nursing Home to make enquiries about this.

Having been made aware of the contents of your letter, the CQC has made another safeguarding referral.  Depending on the outcome of the referral, the CQC will determine what further action, if any, is required.

Thank you once again for your e-mail and I hope that this reply is helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Mclaughlin
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health

___________________________________________________________

Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 11:12:26 PM
To: dhmail@dh.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your response. I am pleased to know that you take quality care in nursing homes seriously. However, as you will have read in my complaint, this did not happen in XXXXXXXXXX despite concerns being raised directly with the CQC.

I would appreciate if you clarify who is investigating the CQC’s and social services’ failures to perform a robust safeguarding check.

Yours sincerely
Lars Petersson

____________________________________________________________________

Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 3:28:21 PM
To: larsgpetersson@hotmail.com

Our ref: DE00000489375

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your further e-mails of 9 and 16 March about the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

I note your concern about the way in which your complaint about XXXXXX Nursing Home was handled by the CQC.  However, as I explained in my previous response, the CQC is an independent regulator and the Department of Health does not intervene in its internal processes.

As the CQC operates independently of the Department of Health, responsibility for investigating complaints about the work of the CQC rests with the CQC itself.  Those who are not satisfied with the way their case has been dealt with by the CQC can request a stage two consideration of the matter. After stage two, the matter should be referred to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. Contact details for the Ombudsman are:

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
Millbank Tower
Millbank
London
SW1P 4QP.

Complaints helpline: 0845 015 4033.

Email: phso.enquiries@ombudsman.org.uk

I hope this reply is helpful.

(no of course it isn’t. The information is misleading, as this institution does not deal with local matters. Please click and read http://176.32.230.52/larsgpetersson.com/care-homes/ombudsman/  These letters are about the similar case described in part four of ABUSE UK.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Mclaughlin
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health


To jamie.barge@nmc-uk.org, claire.carnall@nmc-uk.org

From: Lars Petersson (la……m)
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 12:55:23 PM
To: jamie.barge@nmc-uk.org; claire.carnall@nmc-uk.org

Dear Sir/Madam,

In February this year I sent you a complaint about Ms XXXXXXXX, Manager of XXXXXXXX in XXXXXXXXXXX. I find the allegations in my letter (for which I can present thorough evidence) extremely serious. Still three months later I have not been contacted further, have not been asked to give further evidence. To me nothing seems to have happened. I am surprised by this.

Yours Sincerely

Lars Petersson

(I re-send the complaint as an attachment to this email)
____________________________________________

From: Hilda.Williams@nmc-uk.org
To: la…….@.com
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 15:50:47 +0100
Subject:

Dear Mr Peterson

I write in regards to your referral of XXXXXXXXX, having been passed your e-mail of today’s date.  Upon going through the same it is noted that you state you have not been contacted.  Please note a letter was sent to you dated 11 March 2010, requesting any further information you may have, as well as asking for your signed consent.  Your consent form was received, with no additional information attached.  A letter was then written to Ms XXXXXXs employers regarding this matter, and to date, we are still awaiting their response.

I will proceed to send them a reminder letter, however I wish to let you know that a guideline of up to 15 months is given (for which cases should be completed).   I am not suggesting this is how long your matter will take, as very often completion may be within a few months, however your matter is still very much much at the begining stages.

Please note, once I have received a response from the employers, I will write to you and advise as to how we will be poceeding.

I trust this answers any queries.  Should you wish to discuss anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me using the number below.

Kind Regards

Hilda Williams

Case Officer
Fitness to Practise Department

________________________________________________________

Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 6:06:19 PM
To: hilda.williams@nmc-uk.org

Dear Ms Williams,

Thank you for your quick response. I am happy you have received the consent form. Regarding additional information: my complaint is a detailed document of around 8000 words. I am happy to answer any question that will be asked further to that, but I am not in possession of anything more that I can send you. There are (or should be) two ‘handing over’ books at Sxxxx which both (together with the diary) should give sufficient background to this matter. Apart from that there are numerous witnesses.

Kind Regards
Lars Petersson
____________________________________________________

Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 4:24:44 PM
To: enquiries.southeast@cqc.org.uk

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Complaint to the Minister of Health A. Burnham about XXXXXXXXXXX, CQC and the local social services.

Mrs XXXXXXX wrote to me on 9th March 2010, informing me she (sic) had passed on to the Surrey Safeguarding Adult Team a complaint written by myself to Minister Burnham (12th February 2010)…. I am surprised that the letter to the minister of health had been passed on to Mrs XXXXX  in the first place, as the complaint not only regards abusive standards of care at above mentioned nursing home, serious neglect of duty by Manager XXXXXXXXXX and Owner XXXXXXX  but also serious neglect of duty by both the local social services and CQC Inspector XXXXXX herself…. My complaint to the minister was here passed on by one of those complained about to another….
As it is now two and a half months since I received Mrs XXXXXX’s letter and I have heard no more from anywhere else, I would now kindly ask you also to pass on this letter to the same social services with a copy to me, asking them what is happening in this case.

Thank you for your kind help
Yours Sincerely

Lars G Petersson

______________________________________________

Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:54:47 PM
To: dhmail@dh.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Paul,

Ref:DE00000489375

I have heard nothing further from CQC or the social services about the above case. You write that ‘ the CQC is an independent regulator and the Department of Health does not intervene in its internal processes.’ Does that actually mean that they are not responsible to any other authority than themselves and that they and their inspectors cannot be held responsible for neglect of duty? It would be of interest to me and the following up of this case to know precisely the (new) minister’s and the ministry’s opinion about this matter and what action they will be taking (if any). To me it does not really sound like a safe ‘safe guarding’ system put in place to protect vulnerable people. After all, despite the extremely serious allegations in my complaint, absolutely nothing seems to have happened. Months have passed with the accused person still in charge of these frail people, and I, the complainant, have not even been asked for an interview….(!!)
Looking forward to your answer to this

Sincerely

Lars G Petersson

____________________

From: BusinessTeam.SouthEast@cqc.org.uk
To: larsgpexxxxxxx.com
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 12:07:17 +0100
Subject: Response Letter – XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear Mr Lars Petersson

Please find attached a response letter from our compliance manager Sarah Seaholme, regarding your concerns about XXXXXXX Nursing Home.

_____

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for raising your concerns regarding low standards of care at xxxxxxxxxx Nursing Home in xxxxxxx. The information that you supplied was very helpful and gave us more understanding of the key issues of concern.

Due to the nature of the concerns, we referred the concerns to the Surrey Safeguarding Adults team in Guildford. They are responsible for making decisions or investigating concerns relating to safeguarding adults in Surrey.

The Care Quality Commission is aware that your concerns are currently still being reviewed and we are awaiting the findings from the investigation. The Care Quality Commission will then decide if any further action is necessary.

I note that you would like to receive updates from the safeguarding review and will send your request to Surrey Safeguarding Adults team. The contact number of the team is 0300 200 1005.

I would like to thank you again for raising your concerns, if you would like to discuss any of these issues, please do not hesitate to contact me at sarah.seaholme@cqc.org.uk.

————–

If you have any questions please feel free to make contact on the details provided.

Regards

Delroy Philogene
Business Services Administrator
…….CQC South East Region
Telephone: 020 7448 9323
Internal: 3323

____________________________________________

Sent: Wednesday, 16 June 2010 4:07:06 PM
To: larsgpxxxxxxxcom

Our ref: DE00000508318

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your further e-mail of 28 May about the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

I was sorry to read that you had not had any contact from the CQC following the Department’s referral of your previous letter.  However, I understand that the CQC has now written to you with an update of the situation and I hope that this was helpful.

You also ask how the CQC can be held responsible for failures of duty.  As I explained in my previous reply, the Health Service Ombudsman has the power to investigate complaints against the CQC which cannot be resolved through the CQC’s internal complaints procedure.  Contact details for the Ombudsman are available at the link below:

http://www.ombudsman.org.uk.
Yours sincerely,

Paul Mclaughlin
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health

Again: it is indeed interesting that this man, answering the public on behalf of the government, is unaware of the fact that a matter like this is not under the jurisdiction of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. These two letters (concerning my complaint about another home – part four of my book ABUSE UK) explain why:

http://176.32.230.52/larsgpetersson.com/care-homes/ombudsman/

______________________________________________________

From: larsgXXXXXXXcom
To: businessteam.southeast@cqc.org.uk
Subject: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:22:50 +0100

Dear Sir/Madam,

Both my extremely serious allegations about XXXXXXXXXXX Nursing Home as well as my complaints about CQC, social services and NMC’s complete failures in investigating the case have now been left untouched for almost a year. I request you to inform me precisely what you have done, if anything. Please, keep to the actual complaint and the issues raised there. I am aware of your intensive supervision of the place AFTER my complaint. However, sorry, to place officers there to observe what is going on afterwards has nothing to do with proper investigation. It would be equivalent to placing a police officer in a bank after a bank robbery. Yes, it will prevent a new robbery, but it will do nothing to retrieve the money robbed in the previous heist, and it will not bring the robber to justice. I request you pass this on to the social services and ask them for an explanation as well.

This is just to inform you: I will not let this case go.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

‘Almost a year’ was actually an understatement. Since “John Blog’s” first e-mail 14 months have passed… And NOTHING has been done. The manager and owner are still there. Nothing has changed.

 12 November 2010

Dear Mr Weir-Hughes,  (Head of Nursing and Midwifery Council)

In the post yesterday to me, a registered nurse, there was a letter from you personally and a guidance for nurses and midwives in how to raise and escalate concerns. I must allow myself to say, I am not impressed by NMC’s handling of those concerns I have had and still have. To make it short (please read the attached document, NMC will have the original letter with all names and details) I find it provocative to receive such an information knowing that extremely serious allegations made by me over misconduct by a nursing home manager in Surrey seems to have been given NO serious attention whatsoever from NMC’s side. Your staff member (below) Hikldad Williams has informed me that it can take about 15 months to look into a matter like mine where I accuse a registered nurse/manager (and can provide evidence) of causing severe suffering and death due to unbelievable neglect in duty. I have never been interviewed about my allegations – not by your organisation, not by the Care Quality Commission, not by social services, and not by the ministry of health. NOBODY has asked to talk to me….
The only thing that has come out of this is that I personally has been made unemployable. I had one more job after leaving this place, but after they found out that I had made this complaint about the other home they cancelled my contract. I have evidence for the reason behind that decision as well. There has NEVER been a complaint about my personal conduct as a professional. In part four of my book ABUSE UK I describe another home with serious neglect and abuse. I complained about them as well, but a sham of an investigation cleared the home. I, as the complainant, was NEVER interviewed by the ‘investigators’….
Yes, I can tell you, Mr Weir-Hughes, why nobody who wants to work within this system and needs to provide for his/her own living can allow themselves to complain about abuse (when committed by home owners and managers). I did so, and now me and my wife live of her income alone. I am still registered with NMC, but there will be no point in renewing that when the fee comes up to be paid next time.
I hope you will forgive me for finding your booklet a complete waste of money. With my background I find it provocative. As long as your organisation does nothing to protect people like me how can you expect me to respect and believe in your good intentions?

(Referral to NMC 26583)

Yours Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

___________________________________

From: la……@om
To: advice@nmc…………………………..@cqc.org.uk
Subject: IMPORTANTHead of NMC in person
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:20:32 +0100

Dear Mr Weir-Hughes, (Head of NMC),   (copy of this letter to CQC, the Ministry of Health and The Guardian)

I have noted the sudden swiftness in responding and ‘acting’ in the case I presented to your organisation in the beginning of this year…. In an immediate (!) posted reply to my e-mail yesterday (copied and attached to this email with name blackened out because this e-mail will also be sent to the media) your assistant Ms Williams writes that she has NOW received confirmation of Ms X’s registration details and that she NOW, when checking them on the register (she has obviously not done that before…), has found out that the nursing home manager’s registration with NMC has lapsed…. I take this as a confirmation that NOTHING has been done this far to investigate this extremely serious matter…. – in itrself extremely serious.
Let me inform yourself about following: I recieved Ms William’s letter on your behalf at 9.30 this morning. At 9.45 my wife telephoned the nursing home and asked for Ms X. From the nurse in charge it was 

confirmed that the manager is still in post,

that she does not work Saturdays but will be back on Munday. This is the person whoes registration with you as a registered nurse has ‘lapsed’. This is the person I accuse of such serious neglect of duty that people reading the description in my book http://chipmunkapublishing.co.uk/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=1582  (which part five is an anonymous account of the events and corresponds to the complaint I have submitted to your organsiation, to social services, to the Care Quality Commission and to the Ministry of Health – of course with no response) have compared it with manslaughter.

May I add following: I am not impressed by your organisation’s effectiveness and devotness. Unfortunately, this is what happens to whistleblowers. I  care about people, but my career in care is over, as I am unemployable due to this complaint (would you think Ms X would write me a reference?). At the same time Ms X works as manager for the home where she has caused so much suffering. Now even if she is no longer registered as a nurse…. Interesting ideed.

I would be interested in knowing how you can explain all this.

Yours Sincerely
Lars G Petersson
______________________________________

From: Lars Petersson (lar….mail.com)
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:23:04 PM
To: businessteam.southeast@cqc.org.uk

Dear Sir/Madam,

Both my extremely serious allegations about XXXXXXXXXXX Nursing Home as well as my complaints about CQC, social services and NMC’s complete failures in investigating the case have now been left untouched for almost a year. (14 months, correction) I request you to inform me precisely what you have done, if anything. Please, keep to the actual complaint and the issues raised there. I am aware of your intensive supervision of the place AFTER my complaint. However, sorry, to place officers there to observe what is going on afterwards has nothing to do with proper investigation. It would be equivalent to placing a police officer in a bank after a bank robbery. Yes, it will prevent a new robbery, but it will do no nothing to retrieve the money robbed in the previous heist, and it will not bring the robber to justice. I request you pass this on to the social services and ask them for an explanation as well.

This is just to inform you: I will not let this case go.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

________________________________________________________________________

From: enquiries.sharedservices@cqc.org.uk
To: lar……@om
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:56:56 +0000
Subject: RESTRICTED

Hello Lars,

Thank you for your email. I understand that you have concerns, and appreciate you taking the time to let us know.

To enable us to look into this further and assess what we can do to help, would it be possible for you to please reply to this email with the full name and address of the care service involved?

In the meantime, you may find the following link useful :

http://www.cqc.org.uk/contactus/howtoraiseaconcernorcomplaint.cfm

This outlines how we can use the concerning information given to us, and alternative routes to progress your complaint if it’s an area we have no regulatory influence over.

I look forward to helping you further with this very soon.

Kind Regards,
Tracy Eales
Shared Services Officer

Customer Services – Correspondence

Care Quality Commission
03000 61 61 61
Email: enquiries@cqc.org.uk

___________________________________________________________

To enquiries.sharedservices@cqc.org.uk

From: Lars Petersson (lar….@om)
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 1:40:19 PM
To: enquiries.sharedservices@cqc.org.uk

Dear Ms Eales,

I find it quite extraordinary that you need to ask me for that information after almost a year (14 months) of ‘supervision’ (BUT NO INVESTIGATION) into this nursing home and the practise of its manager. As you will know I have also complained about your institution’s total lack of action. To help you get started: again… it is about XXXXXXXXXXXX Nursing Home in XXXXXXXXX and it is about the owner and the manager there. You will have all details in your files.
Thank you
Sincerely
Lars G Petersson
______________________________

From: Enquiries@cqc.org.uk
To: la……@om
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:31:44 +0000
Subject: 2010SSCOM079 RESTRICTED

Our ref:  2010SSCOM079

Date:  17 November 2010

Dear Mr Petersson

I write to acknowledge receipt of your email dated 13 November 2010 received by the  Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Your complaint is currently being investigated and either myself or a colleague will be in touch with you shortly regarding your correspondence.

Yours sincerely

Tracey Forester

Head of Shared Services

_____________________________

From: la……..@om
To: enquiries@cqc.org.uk
Subject: RE: 2010SSCOM079 RESTRICTED
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:28:44 +0100

Dear Mr Forester,

Thanks for confirmation. In the meantime: please confirm that Ms XXXXX (as stated on your website d.d) is still registered as manager of XXXXX Nursinghome. I presume you have been informed by NMC that this person’s registration as a nurse has lapsed.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

______________________________

From: xxxxxxxxx@cqc.org.uk
To: lar..@om
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 17:23:28 +0000
Subject: xxxxxxxxxx

20th November 2010

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you for your email of the 12th November regarding your ongoing concerns relating to xxxxxxxxxxxx  Nursing Home.  The concerns related to low standards of care at the home which you had identified whilst working as a night nurse. The concerns had been documented in the home’s handover book.

We wrote to you on Tuesday 9th March 2010 and informed you that in view of the nature of your concerns we would refer this information on to Surrey County Council to be reviewed by the safeguarding adult’s team. Meetings have been held by the safeguarding adult’s team and Diana Jones Team Manager Guildford Social Care Team wrote to you on Thursday 5th August 2010 to confirm that your concerns were being investigated by their team.

Sarah Seaholme, Compliance Manager wrote to you on Friday 28th May 2010and explained that we would decide if further action was required following the findings of the safeguarding investigation.  The Care Quality Commission does not investigate individual complaints. However, where necessary, action will be taken to ensure the safety of people who use services and to drive improvement where poor standards are identified. Surrey safeguarding adult’s team are responsible for making decisions or investigating concerns relating to safeguarding adults in Surrey.

On Thursday 10th June 2010 we visited ccccccccccc Nursing Home to complete a key inspection of their service.  In summary we found some shortfalls in procedures and practices in the home and gave requirements for improvement in the following areas, documentation, individual choices, medication procedures, arrangements for activities, menus and supervision during meal times, infection control and management arrangements. The report from this unannounced inspection is available on our website at www.cqc.org.uk . 

All providers are required to meet the ‘Essential standards of quality and safety’ to comply with the section 20 regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008, a copy of the standards can be found on our website.  xxxxxxxxxxx Nursing Home will be regularly monitored for compliance.

As requested we have forwarded your email to Surrey safeguarding adult’s team.

We would like to thank you again for informing us of your concern regarding xxxxxxxx Nursing Home. If you would like to discuss the content of this email please do not hesitate to contact me at the contact details at the foot of the page.

Yours sincerely

Mrs xxxxxxxxxxxx  ( I have crossed over the name as this is the very same inspector I complain about to the minister of health for negligence in duty. Note that she in this letter acknowledges the handing over books…. Still, she has never documented that she has looked for them, read them, provided the social services with them and/or taken them into account in any other possible way.)

Compliance Inspector

_______________________________________________

To: cynthia.bower…….     (copy to NMC)  subject: Flawed investigation of serious abuse
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 13:18:24 +0100

Ms Cynthia Bower
Chief Executive
Care Quality Commission

Dear Ms Bower,

I made a complaint on 12/02/10 (attached) about both abusive care/nursing management at xxxxxxx Nursing Home in xxxxxx,xxxxx as well as a negligent CQC inspection. This complaint has not been investigated. I, the complainant, was not interviewed.

I also reported Ms xxxxxxx, the home’s manager, to the NMC for gross misconduct.

The NMC informed me (months later…) that Ms xxxxxxxxxx is not currently on the NMC register (see attached letter from the NMC). I informed the CQC of this fact (see below). There has been no response from CQC to this information.

Today my wife telephoned Ms xxxx on 02xxxxxxx9 at 10.09 hrs to make an enquiry re xxxxxx Nursing Home. Ms xxxx (the inspector I accuse of neglect) confirmed to my wife that Ms xxxxxxxxx is the CQC registered home manager. In addition,  Ms xxxx confirmed to my wife that Ms xxxxxxx is a registered nurse and must be on the NMC register.
I am deeply disturbed about the CQC’s failure to investigate serious abuse of the vulnerable.
Looking forward to prompt action.

Yours Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

__________________

now NMC all of a sudden reacts….  Before this letter (addressed to the CQC…) they have done absolutely nothing about this matter since they were contacted by me first time on 13 February 2010 -almost ten months ago…. (se above)

> From: Suzie.Loader@nmc-uk.org
> To: la………@om
> CC: Dickon.Weir-Hughes@nmc-uk.org
> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 17:26:28 +0000
> Subject: FW: Flawed investigation of serious abuse
>
> Dear Mr Petersson
>
> You recently copied Dickon Weir-Hughs into an email which has been forwarded onto myself.
>
> Please be advised that I have reported your concerns regarding Xxxxxxxxx Nursing Home in Xxxxxxx to the police as advised by the Director Fitness to Practise. Police reference P1XXXXX21.
>
> Yours
>
>
> Suzie Loader
> Interim Head of Case Management
> Fitness to Practise

However nothing seems to happen. The manager is still there two weeks later and for me this letter arrived:

From: la……..om
To: dickon.weir-hughes@nmc-uk.org
Subject: Regarding complaint about manager in Surrey
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:59:41 +0100

Chief Executive Dickon Weir-Hughes
Nursing and Midwifery Council
23 Portland Place
London
W1B 1PZ

Dear Dickon,

I have written to you once before (12 November 2010) in response to your letter to me (and all NMC registered colleagues) regarding raising concerns about abuse.

You write that you ‘understand the challenges that nurses and midwifes can face’ and you talk about the responsibilities we have according to the code of conduct ‘to make the patients our first priority’. You continue to state that ‘this includes managing risk by properly raising or escalating a concern promptly to someone in authority, no matter where you work’. Sounds all very good, but, as a nurse yourself you will be aware that theory and real life unfortunately are two completely different things.

Myself I have learned this fact the hard way because I have done exactly what you as head of NMC in your letter advised me to do: I have raised extremely serious concerns with both NMC, social services and the Care Quality Commission. And, as none of these organizations have shown the slightest interest in even talking to me, I have even asked the Ministry of Health to act – of course with the same poor result. However, one thing has indeed happened in the year that has followed my raising of this concern: I have been made unemployed. My last employer found out I had complained about the previous one and cancelled my employment. This is now about ten months ago. A whistleblower is – surprise – not popular within the establishment of nursing homes…. This is where I find myself today. For various reasons this state of unemployment is difficult to do anything about. One of them is the following: if I ever should try and find a new job I would need (as a statutory requirement) a reference from the very same person I have accused of mismanagement and neglect causing (among other things) painful deaths….  I am confident you will understand that problem.

A little update: may I remind you that this person is still there doing the same job all this time later. This is, allow me to say so, indeed a bit surprising. After having done nothing about my complaint for months, NMC finally – after my repeated requests – looked into the files and found out that the manager’s NMC registration had lapsed and that your organisation therefore no longer could investigate her case. Following that, on being informed by me that she is still in office, I was told that NMC had reported her to the police. This is now one month ago and the manager is still there…. She is still registered as manager of the home by CQC; she is still acting in her position as usual, and the social services have informed me that their investigation has been completed, that they have no concerns, and that they will not let me see their report….

In February my own registration with NMC will expire. I need your personal expert advice around that. What do you recommend me to do? Should I pay to remain on the register though I have, due to having done precisely what your letter requests me to do, an extremely reduced chance of ever getting a job? Or, should I take the full consequence of having followed your advice and just retire – though I have no personal income of any kind. Have you ever thought about the consequences this advice to act against abuse can and will have for anybody who would take it seriously and actually do something? 

Dickon, let me make this absolutely clear, I am not interested in the usual formalities from assistants and secretaries such as ‘we are taking this seriously’ and/or ‘we are grateful for you having brought this important question to our attention’. Just as little am I interested in reading that ‘you have given it on to Ms X or Mr Y and that the issue will be given full consideration in due course or in fullness of time’….  What I want is a serious personal response, and what I want is action. I want to know what precicely you will be doing to protect people like myself and others who (unaware of the consequences) will blow whistles in the future. Also, for a start and as evidence of you being serious, I would request you waive my fee in February so I can remain on the active register in the vague hope that I will be employed again. And, I want you to tell me both how I can explain to any future employer why I cannot get a reference from the above mentioned manager as well as how I legally can get around that problem, as such reference is a statutory requirement. Last but not least, please advice me how this person can remain as a registered manager for a nursing home though all governmental parties and watchdogs have been informed for months that she is no longer even on the NMC register.

I hope you will forgive me for saying that I am not impressed by the handling of this matter. There are a lot that needs to be looked into. Indeed, there are many more whistles which need to be blown; we might need a full trumpet section.

Kind Regards

Lars G Petersson

(all relevant correspondence, including this letter, can be found on http://176.32.230.52/larsgpetersson.com/care-homes/abusive-manager-in-surrey/letters-and-e-mails/ )

_______________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars…..l.com
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 13:28:06 +0000
Subject: RE: Regarding complaint about manager in Surrey

 

Dear Mr Petersson
Thank you for your email. Professor Weir-Hughes is away from the office at the current time and I am acknowledging your email on his behalf.
Please be assured that I will bring the matter to Professor Weir-Hughes’ attention when he returns to the office next week.
Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

Office of the Chair and Chief Executive

_____________________________________________

Reply to my MP who had requested the report to be sent to me:

____________________________________________

One more e-mail to Dickon, chief executive of Nursing and Midwifery Councel:

Dear Dickon,                                                                            (17th January 2010)

Further to my emails to you of 12th November 2010 and 4th January 2011  I would appreciate a response.

Your assistant Mr Pinto wrote back to me on 4th of January saying that you were “away from the office at the current time” and that he would bring the matter to your attention when you return to the office next (now last) week. I am sure you appreciate the fact that the deadline for my renewed registration is approaching quickly and that I therefore urgently need you to respond to my question about how – in my position as an unemployed whistleblower with no income – to stay on the active register. And, not least, I need your advice with regard to how I can get a (statutory) reference from the very same manager I have accused of serious abuse (abuse which has not been investigated either by CQC or the local social services). As I wrote in the previous letter, all correspondence around this matter of abuse can be read on my website http://176.32.230.52/larsgpetersson.com/care-homes/ .

I remain in the hope of a swift personal response.

With kind regards

Lars G Petersson

 ___________________________________
…and one more:
To: dickon.weir-hughes@nmc-uk.org
Subject: Regarding complaint about manager in Surrey‏
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:39:57 +0100

Dear Dickon,

Further to my emails to you of 12 th November 2010, 4th January 2011 and 17 January 2011 I continue to wait for your response. My registration is running out end of this month. All questions remain. Please act now.

Regards
Lars G Petersson

Dickon’s reply:

To: dickon.weir-hughes@nmc-uk.org
Subject: nursing manager in Surrey
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 21:04:14 +0100

Dear Dickon,

Thank you for your reply to my emails. I am not surprised by the lack of support. After all, theory and real life very often are two completely different things. This case is a very good example of this.

When you write ‘we exist solely to safeguard the health and wellbeing of the public…’ I hope you realise that the rest of your letter shows how you completely misinterpret how this aim could be reached. It should not be necessary to remind you that the only way to achieve that goal is to protect whistleblowers. By supporting the silencing of  people like myself, you actively help preventing others to speak out in favour of safeguarding the vulnerable.

I wish to stress the following, and if you in any way disagree with what I say, please explain why I should have misunderstood your statements and how.

You claim you have read the Care Quality Commissions report on XXX Nursing Home ‘following their unannounced inspection in June 2010’. You also state that ‘prior to this inspection the CQC had received a letter of complaint raising some concerns about the home’. Firstly, I presume you mean the inspection in September 2010. I also hope you understand that it sounds fairly ridiculous to speak about an ‘unannounced’ inspection – as the inspectors arrival was (over)due and the preparations (and tiding up) had gone on for months – a special clerk had even been hired to update and clean out all paper works. Only the precise day was unannounced. Sorry, but we need to be serious about this; we need to get the details right; we need to know what we talk about, and, not least,  we need to be honest and avoid equalising rules with real life.

By claiming you have read the report and accept the ‘investigation’ process, you also agree to having read my original complaint. However, please be aware, in the report there is no mentioning of any anonymous complaint only of an anonymous email. Of course, as this email informes the investigator that very important information can be found in the home’s handing-over books (regarding the performance of the – at that time still NMC registered – manager) I also take it for granted that you have looked into that email as well, and not least asked to see the books – the same books which the investigator did not look for, though they, as the email disclosed, had been hidden away by the management and contained highly incriminating information.

Having done all that, I am surprised that that you are happy to advice me that the continued employment of the person in question as home manager is solely a matter for the home owner to decide upon and that you ‘are not able to comment on’ that. You state in your letter that you are aware of all this and that this, according to you, does not constitute a problem. That means that you seem to claim that the NMC’s role is limited to nurses who act as nurses and who are registered with the NMC and not to nurses who act as nurses and who are not – all this though it is illegal to act as a nurse without being registered with your body. I am surprised to read that, to say the least. 

Regarding what you write about my own situation I understand the following: You avoid to answer the crucial question about whistleblowers and references from the last employer. By doing so you declare that you are not interested in the fate of those who follow your advice and raise concerns. As a nurse yourself, though it might be a while since you tasted the music, you should know that your assurance that employers are breaking the law if they harass employees for raising concerns (and that one therefore should be protected) has very little to do with the real world. And, as in my case, what about those who, because of standing up, no longer have a job and – because of the reference system – no chance of ever getting one? You cannot answer that question and therefore you avoid it. Fair enough, it’s human, but, if I may say so, below the standards one would expect from the leader of NMC.

Sorry, Dickon, your last comment wishing me well in ‘deliberating on’ my ‘future as a registered nurse’ I wish you at least could have left out. No, I am no longer deliberating on that, but I do deliberate on how best to take all responsible people to account – all those failing to act and only protecting their own jobs. The British public deserve better than so; after all they pay your salaries. None of them want to rot in their nursing-home beds in their own mess with bedsores right into their bones just because of abusive managers/home owners and failing government bodies.

Kind Regards

Lars G Petersson

__________________________________________________________

Accusations 20.05.11

Referred to Fitness of Praxis NMC

____________________________________________________________

From: lars..@com
To: fitness.to.practise@nmc-uk.org
Subject: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 17:38:24 +0200

23 May 2011,

NR………………..7/2010

Dear Mr Bryan,

Thank you for your letter of 20 May 2011. At this point I will not go into details of these numerous, unfounded allegations against my person. I see them as a negative response to my serious allegations against Xxxxxx (the manager) and Yyyyyy (the owner) and find that they will all have to be seen in greater context with my original complaint to the minister of health. However, that would be a process I would be very happy to participate in, on condition of course that all relevant documents and witnesses are allowed to be presented. Three of the worst individual cases are for example left out of Ms Yyyyyy investigation of herself and Xxxxxxx: the findings are only mentioned to be in not included ‘separate reports’ (prepared by Xxxxxxx herself…). Another serious personal issue has been completely omitted…..

If you decide to go ahead with this after reading this initial email, I will return before 20 June 2011 with an extensive report and response to all detailed allegations as well as with a list of documents which need to be presented for the committee. I trust you will understand that, due to the magnitude of the task, I will not undertake that work before I am reasonably sure that the process will go on.

However, just a few details which might make some bells ring: in order to consider the most obvious of the discrepancies I will ask you to consider that Ms Yyyyyy in her undated letter includes allegations against my person regarding my time at Cxxxxx in Sxxx. All information she presents here must be classified as unsubstantiated hearsay – from an owner of a home which deputy manager I have officially complained about for extremely serious abuse and from Xxxxxxx, the nurse, head of care turned manager whose negligence in Ms Yyyyyy own home I later complained about.

I think it might be useful to remember that Xxxxxxx was instrumental in inviting  me to join her at the Pxxx home – as we both had worked with the then Manager BB. That does not sound like we had any ‘altercation’ at Cxxxxx…. Who would deliberately bring an enemy with her to a new workplace? It might also be useful to remember that the Cxxxx home presented Ms Yyyyyy with a reference for my move to Pxxxx like Ms Yyyyyy’s home presented my last employer in H…e with the same. Not least the last reference must indeed (in the light of the shortly after following letter of 10 March 2010) be seen as an extraordinary irresponsible act….

In an email to me on 12 November 2010 Hilda Williams writes – approximately nine months after my complaint to you about the manager’s practise and only in direct response to an email from me to your CEO – that ‘it appears as if Ms Xxxxxxx’s registration has lapsed’. Ms Williams therefore explains that NMC has no jurisdiction over this manager and is unable to investigate. May I refer to the undated letter (but written after 28 September 2010) in which Ms Yyyyyy refers to Xxxxxxx’s PIN code without mentioning that her registration as a nurse might have lapsed (or is about to).

As you might be aware of, my own registration has also lapsed. I was shortly employed by a home in H…e, but my employment there ended in February 2010 after only two-three weeks. The alleged reason for this was that the company ‘had not received my full CRB’ (which they had and which has been confirmed by these authorities; there was nothing outstanding), that I could not stay over at the site between shifts (though that had been previously agreed as a condition for taking on the post) and that the journey, according to their area manager, was too long for me (sic.). I have my own idea about the reason for this sudden decision.

No complaint was ever made against me, but due to this cancelled employment I am now unemployable – as it is fairly unlikely that Ms Xxxxxxx will give me another reference (as is legally required)…. Due to that I am out of work since over a year, have no income and have let my own NMC registration lapse. I therefore assume that you (just as in the case with Manager Xxxxxxx, who is still in the same post…) might have no jurisdiction over me.

In case this was not known to you before now I would kindly ask if you will consider this matter and inform me of your decision before I start undertaking the time-consuming work writing a thorough response to the allegations against my person, making a list of necessary documents which need to be presented and consider witnesses. If I need to be on the register in order to be subject to an investigation which purpose would be to decide on taking me off it I would (due to the importance of this extended case of serious abuse of vulnerable people) be more than happy to consider re-applying for registration – this of course dependent on being exempted from paying your fee. I think that last request would be a most reasonable thing to ask for – as I have no intention to return to nursing but only would like to facilitate your investigation.

Last but not least: I appeal to anybody involved with this to get the details right. This would help avoid mistakes and confusion. In your letter, page 3. 14.a, I am accused of not following ‘Nightingale Lodge policy’. I have no recollection of working in a home with that name.

Sincerely

Lars G Petersson

__________________________________________________________________________________

From: David.Bryan@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 11:05:11 +0100
Subject: RE: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan

Good morning Mr Petersson,

My sincere apologies for the delay in replying to your email.

As with any referral to the NMC that proceeds to the Investigation Committee stage the NMC are not in a position to cancel a Committee meeting and any response from a registrant is to be considered at this meeting.

I am aware there has been other cases for which you have referred registrants Xxxxxxx and Yyyyyy, however this particular referral against your person, in line with NMC procedure will need to be heard/progressed seperately from these other cases.

If you would like me to, I will ensure the panel see your below email when they sit on 6 July 2011, or if you prefer, as stated below you are welcome to send a more detailed response for which I will put to the panel.

Once again apologies for the delay in this response.

Kind regards

David Bryan

Case Officer

Nursing & Midwifery Council

__________________________________________________________________________________

From: lars..@com
To: david.bryan@nmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:55:43 +0200

Dear Mr Bryan,

I warmly welcome a sincere, thorough, independent investigation into this whole matter. If you need any further information from my side before the panel’s meeting please let me know. You are very welcome to present the panel with this exchange of emails. Please remind them that I, as I say below, am willing to consider reapplying for registration if that is a precondition for the investigation to go ahead.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson
_______________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: 11 July 2011 16:40
To: NMC Fitness To Practise
Subject: FW: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan
Dear Mr Bryan,

I acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 8 July 2011.

You write that ‘the panel’s role is not to resolve conflicts especially where the allegations are denied’. I am not aware of any conflict that needs being resolved. I have made a complaint against this manager and the home’s owner. There has been no investigation into these specific complaints. The Investigation you provided me with shows that the owner and manager investigated themselves.

You write that ‘this is best dealt with by way of a investigation by the lawyers to gather the facts’. I agree on that and will welcome the chance provide you with a list of documents to be looked at and witnesses to be interviewed. This will follow.

My representative’s details?  I have no representative and will be unlikely to afford legal advice as I have been made unemployable and have no income – all due to whistleblowing about care home abuse, following NMC’s recommendations. However, I might be able to get some help from UNISON as my two years status as non paying inactive member has not yet run out. If so I will inform you.

You kindly write that I can contact you if I have any questions. I still have the same question as I asked in my previous e-mail.

1. Ms Yyyyyy’s home is X-home. I understand that the complaint against me is based on her letters. In order to prepare my defence I need to be informed about p4,14.a. Please give me some more details about that statement. I need the correct name of the institution (never worked in a place called ‘Nighinggale’), and I need to be presented with a proper complaint from there, if there is one. I would find it odd if that complaint is built up exclusively  on hearsay knowledge presented by Ms Yyyyyy.

2. Before I start the extensive work on preparing my response to these allegations I ask you to inform me of the basic jurisdiction in this case. As I have declared before, I am no longer registered with NMC, I do not work as a nurse and have no intention to do so in the future.  I have been told by your organisation that Manager Xxxxxxx cannot be investigated by NMC because she has let her registration lapse after my complaint was made (though she is still in the same position…). Therefore, I am surprised that you have jurisdiction to investigate me. As said before, I welcome an investigation into all this, but I do want to be sure that you have the jurisdiction to investigate a non registered person before I start working on my defence. And, if so, I would appreciate if you would explain the different approaches to our cases.

Thank you in advance for a prompt and clear answer to that last question.

Yours sincerely
Lars G Petersson

_______________________________________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:larsgpetersson@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 12:38 AM
To: contactcentre1@surrey.pnn.police.uk <contactcentre1@surrey.pnn.police.uk>; Dickon Weir-Hughes
Subject: Unregistered Nurse
Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to report that Ms Xxxxxxx, manager at X-home is practising as a registered nurse. However, her RGN  registration with the NMC (which is mandatory in order to practise as a registered nurse) has lapsed since November 2010.

According to numerous recent telephone calls to the home, a number of staff nurses, including the clinical nurse manager, state that Ms Xxxxxxx is still working as a registered nurse. It is my understanding that Ms Xxxxxxx, by keeping her staff uninformed about her own legal status as a professional nurse, is breaking the law.

Yours sincerely

Lars G Petersson

_____________________________________________________________________________
From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To:
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:27:33 +0100
Subject: RE: Unregistered Nurse

Dear Mr Petersson

Further to your recent email to the NMC, I am responding on behalf of Professor Weir-Hughes.

I wonder if you would be in a position to provide further information about the individuals that you have spoken to about your concerns. As you would expect, we would anticipate that any registered nurse who is concerned about the registration status or practice of any nurse would raise their concerns with the appropriate authorities, inlcuding the NMC.

Further information, such as the names of an individuals you have spoken to about this matter, would enable us to investigate this matter further.

As I understand it though, Ms Xxxxxxx is not currently on the NMC register and I gather that she does not hold any nursing responsibilities at the home at the current time. My information is that there are two clinical nurse managers who are responsible for the clinical aspects of the work of the home.

Any information you are able to provide would be most helpful

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

Office of the Chair and Chief Executive

___________________________________________________

From: lars..@com
To: peter.pinto@nmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: Unregistered Nurse
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 22:30:35 +0200

Dear Mr Pinto de Sa,

Thank you for your kind reply to my email and for asking for further details. It is correct as you write that Ms Xxxxxxx is no longer on the register. Subsequently to my complaint to the NMC in February (attachment: X-home Complaint 120210) about her fitness to practise Ms Xxxxxxx let her registration lapse, and I was told about that by Ms Williams in a letter of 12 November 2010 – eight months after having complained about her. I am surprised that Ms Xxxxxxx was allowed to let her registration lapse, and, as I will prove, continue to work as usual – including letting her staff remain in the belief that she acts in the capacity of not only an administrative manager but, as before, as a manager who is also a registered nurse.

Due to having lost any chance of again working as a nurse (due to whistle blowing about Ms Xxxxxxx), I refrained myself from renewing my registration as that was to expire on 28th February 2011. Shortly before that date I received a reminder which also included the ‘Nursing and Midwifery Council Notification of practice (NoP). In that form (Step 1. A) I was asked to confirm by ticking off that ‘I am not aware of any matter which could give rise to an allegation against me’. I ticked that box (and sent back the form) with good conscience, as I at that time had not yet been made aware of X-home’s owner Ms Yyyyyy’s complaint about me – which is now being investigated despite I am no longer on the register….  On that background I am surprised that Ms Xxxxxxx can have let her registration lapse (including having ticked that box?) in the middle of an investigation process which she was fully aware of was taking place not only from NMC’s side but also (allegedly) from social services – hereby stopping the investigation of her fitness to practise. In her complaint about me Ms Yyyyyy confirms the date (3.3.10) on which she (and consequently also Ms Xxxxxxx) was made aware of the complaint about them.

Back to your question: evidence that I have been given and of which I am in position proves beyond doubt that a number of nurses, also the clinical nurse manager, are in the firm believe that Ms Xxxxxxx still holds the same position as ever – manager and registered nurse. Not least because of all concerns expressed in my complaint against her (attached) I am deeply concerned about the fact that this manager is still acting as usual. As you will understand, Ms Xxxxxxx does not do hands on nursing, but nursing is, as you will be fully aware of, much more than medication, wounds and injections. Ms Xxxxxxx is still conferring with the residents’ GP after her medical rounds, and, this is extremely worrying, she is on call out of hours for junior nurses’ and agency nurses’ support. Knowing this institution well, after two and a half year working there, it is difficult for me to see that Ms Xxxxxxx’s role can be separate from decisions over nursing matters. Ms Xxxxxxx has on numerous times shown that she has difficulties knowing her professional boundaries. The incidence with the dangerous company car is a good example, but there are others (risk assessment and my comments are attached). Please see attached documents.

I am willing to share the evidence for my allegations above upon request. Please contact me on telephone 020 85343151 to arrange further.

Yours sincerely
Lars G Petersson

_______________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:52:53 +0100
Subject: RE: Unregistered Nurse

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you again for your email dated 17 July 2011.

I have reviewed the material which you have sent, which dates between 2008 and 2010.

While your email makes reference to your concerns that Ms Xxxxxxx may be working as a registered nurse (or allowing others to believe that she remains as a registered nurse) from the material which you have sent to me, I can see no evidence to support this claim.

You state that you have ‘evidence’ that a ‘number of nurses, also the clinical nurse manager, are in the firm believe [sic] that Ms Xxxxxxx still holds the same position as ever – manager and registered nurse. I would appreciate sight of this information.

To enable us to consider this matter further – and you acknowledge that practising as a nurse while unregistered is a serious matter with potential legal implications – I would ask you to send any evidence that you have about this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director


 

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:45:52 +0100
Subject: RE: Unregistered Nurse

Dear Mr Petersson

Following your most recent approach to the NMC, I have spoken with colleagues at the Care Quality Commission. They inform me that they have undertaken a recent review of the nursing home in question, including the arrangements for nursing management and the role of Ms Xxxxxxx as the manager of the home. They have reported that they have no concerns in either regard.

In the circumstances, I repeat my earlier request to you to provide further information about your concerns.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

________________________________________________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: 26 July 2011 12:22
To: Peter Pinto
Subject: FW: Unregistered Nurse

Dear Mr Pinto,

I have informed you that, as late as June 2011, registered nurses at X-home – including the clinical nurse manager – were still in the firm belief (hope I got the spelling right this time) that Manager Ms J. Xxxxxxx (who is – among other things -on call out-of-hours to assist junior nurses and agency nurses) is acting not only in her capacity as a manager but also as an NMC registered nurse. In a cooperative way I therefore provided you with my telephone number. I accept that you did not use that opportunity to contact me. Therefore I will advise you to get the same evidence yourself just by, as I have repeatedly written, phoning the home out of hours (when Ms Xxxxxxx is not there herself) and ask the nurse-in-charge a simple question. For months they have repeatedly confirmed to the public that this manager is an RGN.

Apart from that, please have a look at this email below sent by me to Ms Bower, Chief Executive CQC. She never replied to that. Inspector Gxxx, who is mentioned in the text, was copied in, but she never replied either. NMC, also copied in, in fact did. By not challenging the statement in the email, Ms Gxxx acknowledged that the statement is accurate. On December 2, 2010, at least three weeks after Ms Xxxxxxx’s registration with you had lapsed (I was informed on November 12 that she was no longer on the register, and I do not know how long she hadn’t been), the inspector told the public that Ms Xxxxxxx was a registered nurse.

In regard to the very serious non investigated allegations against this manager, I am shocked by the fact that she is allowed to continue to be in charge of this home with all what that implicates.
Yours sincerely

Lars G Petersson

Email refered to from: Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 13:18:24 +0100

_________________________________________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 15:37:22 +0100
Subject: RE: Unregistered Nurse

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you for your email dated 26 July 2011.

I am afraid I can only summarise the content of my earlier responses to you:

Ms Xxxxxxx is not currently on the NMC register

  • The CQC have undertaken a recent review of the home and have confirmed with me that Ms Xxxxxxx is not undertaking any role at the home which requires her to be registered with the NMC.

In the circumstances, and at the risk of appearing to be unhelpful, I am not clear how much further I can assist you with your concerns.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

Office of the Chair and Chief Executive

 


 

From: David.Bryan@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 17:27:26 +0100
Subject: RE: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your email.  I understand you have been liaising with Peter Pinto, Assistant Director regarding the case of Xxxxxxx.  I regret to inform you that I am unable to discuss with you matters arising from that case and advise you to send any future correspondence to Mr Pinto.  My role as Case Officer is to progress your current case that is with the NMC and I am more than happy to assist and respond to you with any queries you may have regarding the allegations made against you.

Once the panel have made a decision I, as a Case Officer am unable to question their findings, however you will be asked to submit a response once the NMC’s lawyers have completed their investigations.  In regards to point 1 (below) you enquire about page 4, 14a.  Unfortunately I am unable to clarify or give you more details about this statement.  I am unable to question documents received from the referrer, however it is open to you to state that you have never worked in ‘Nightingale’ in your response and a future panel of the Investigating Committee will take this into consideration.

As you know your case is currently being investigated by our lawyers on direction of the Investigating Committee and this can take up to 13 weeks to complete.  On receipt of the full investigation report the case will be put back before the Investigating Committee and you will be invited to provide a response then, which the panel will take into consideration.

If you have any further questions regarding the complaint against you, please do contact me.

Kind regards

David Bryan

Case Officer

Nursing & Midwifery Council


 

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: 04 August 2011 18:11
To: David Bryan
Subject: RE: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan

Dear Mr Bryan,

You keep telling me that I can ask questions. I have done so. In fact I have asked about following now in, as I recall, two emails and in one recorded letter. However, I am still waiting for an answer. Maybe you can provide me with one now.

Before I start the extensive work on preparing my response to these allegations I ask you to inform me of the basic jurisdiction in this case. As I have declared before, I am no longer registered with NMC, I do not work as a nurse and have no intention to do so in the future.  I have been told by your organisation that Manager Xxxxxxx cannot be investigated by NMC because she has let her registration lapse after my complaint was made (though she is still in the same position…). Therefore, I am surprised that you have jurisdiction to investigate me. As said before, I welcome an investigation into all this, but I do want to be sure that you have the jurisdiction to investigate a non registered person before I start working on my defence. And, if so, I would appreciate if you would explain the different approaches to our cases.

Thank you in advance
Sincerely

Lars G Petersson


 

From: David.Bryan@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 10:29:29 +0100
Subject: RE: NR………………..7/2010 for David Bryan

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your email.  I can confirm the NMC do have jurisdiction to Investigate the allegations made against you.

Any comments that you wish to make in regard to the case of Xxxxxxx, as stated in my previous email should be directed to Peter Pinto, Assistant Director.

Kind regards

David Bryan

Case Officer

Nursing & Midwifery Council


 

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 09:33 PM
To: Dickon Weir-Hughes
Subject: Personal letter for Dickon Weir Hughes
Dear Dickon,

I am puzzled that David Bryant says NMC has jurisdiction over me despite the fact that I am no longer on the NMC register and do not work (as a consequence of whistle blowing). This is rather baffling in light of Hilda Williams letter to me of 12 November 2010, clarifying that you cannot investigate Ms Xxxxxxx (the person I whistle blowed about), as she is no longer on the register – and therefore NMC has no jurisdiction over her (though she is still in the same post). This letter from Ms Williams to me arrived around nine months after NMC had already started the investigation into her case with (at least) two letters to her employer. It appears that NMC do not act in an equitable manner. Any explanation?

Yours sincerely
Lars G Petersson

____________________________________________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 12:52:08 +0100
Subject: RE: Personal letter for Dickon Weir Hughes

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you for your email dated 7 August 2011.

Professor Weir-Hughes is away from the office at the current time, hence my acknowledgement.

Given his role as the NMC registrar and the procedural need to keep him seperate from involvement in individual FtP cases, I am afraid that Professor Weir-Hughes is unable to enter into correspondence with you about your assertions regarding the ongoing fitness to practise issue.

I am aware that you have been in communication with my colleague, David Bryan, and that he has responded.

I contacted you about your allegations regarding Ms Xxxxxxx on 26 July 2011.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

_________________________________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: 11 August 2011 11:45
To: Dickon Weir-Hughes
Subject: FOI request

Dear Dickon,

When did Ms Xxxxxxx’s NMC registration lapse.
NMC reg: 8….E
This is an FOI request.
Yours sincerely
Lars G Petersson

______________________________________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:15:53 +0100
Subject: RE: FOI request

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you for your email.

I am responding on behalf of Professor Weir-Hughes to confirm that your FoI request has been passed to the appropriate NMC department.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

 


 

From: lars..@com
To: dickon.weir-hughes@nmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: FOI request
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 14:16:35 +0200

Dear Dickon,

I am still awaiting a response to my FOI request of 11 August 2011 11:45. It is now 21 days. Please advice.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson


 

From: Christine.Simmons@nmc-uk.org
To: lars..@com
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 14:48:35 +0100
Subject: Freedom of Information Response FOI/2011/212

Dear Mr Petersson

I write in response to your email of 11 August 2011 in which you ask, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA), for the date when Xxxxxxx’s (PIN 80…E) registration lapsed.

I can confirm that Ms Xxxxxxx’s registration has lapsed but I consider that the date on which this lapsed is exempt under Section 40(2) Personal information of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA) as it is personal data of a third party and to disclose the information would breach the Data Protection Act 1998, in particular the first data protection principle which states that “personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully…”. In this case the processing would be disclosure.

If the NMC were to provide information relating to a particular individual we would be disclosing information which constitutes the personal data of that person and this would contravene the Data Protection Act.

I also have to take into account that the FoIA is applicant blind and any information disclosed under the Act is a disclosure to the public in general. We are obliged to treat all requesters equally and if we were to provide information to one requester we would be obliged to provide the same information to any other person making a similar request. In addition the NMC has no control over how disclosed information will be used.

I have carefully considered your request. However, if you are not satisfied with this response you have the right, under Section 50 of the FoIA to appeal against this decision. You should submit your appeal within 28 days by writing to:

Dickon Weir-Hughes

Chief Executive and Registar

Nursing & Midwifery Council

23 Portland Place

London W1B 1PZ

Your appeal will be investigated in line with our internal complaints procedure which is attached. If you are not satisfied with the outcome, you should then submit a letter to the Information Commissioner by writing to:

The Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Mrs Christine Simmons

Records Manager

Records and Archives Department

020 7681 5483


 

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars..@com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 09:47 PM
To: Dickon Weir-Hughes
Cc: Christine Simmons
Subject: Freedom of Information Response FOI/2011/212
Dear Dickon,

In accordance with Section 50 of the FoIA, I appeal the decision below.

I feel this information is in the public interest. Any patient/resident/professional colleague has a right to know if the person who was providing and/or supervising nursing care at any given time is on the live nursing register.

The investigation of my complaint about Ms Xxxxxxx was interrupted months after the process had started. She is still in the same position, doing the same job.

I trust you will provide me with information requested.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

________________________________________________________________________

From: To: lars..@com
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 14:48:35 +0100
Subject: Freedom of Information Response FOI/2011/212

Dear Mr Petersson

I write in response to your email of 11 August 2011 in which you ask, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA), for the date when Xxxxxxx’s (PIN 8…E) registration lapsed.

I can confirm that Ms Xxxxxxx’s registration has lapsed but I consider that the date on which this lapsed is exempt under Section 40(2) Personal information of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoIA) as it is personal data of a third party and to disclose the information would breach the Data Protection Act 1998, in particular the first data protection principle which states that “personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully…”. In this case the processing would be disclosure.

If the NMC were to provide information relating to a particular individual we would be disclosing information which constitutes the personal data of that person and this would contravene the Data Protection Act.

I also have to take into account that the FoIA is applicant blind and any information disclosed under the Act is a disclosure to the public in general. We are obliged to treat all requesters equally and if we were to provide information to one requester we would be obliged to provide the same information to any other person making a similar request. In addition the NMC has no control over how disclosed information will be used.

I have carefully considered your request. However, if you are not satisfied with this response you have the right, under Section 50 of the FoIA to appeal against this decision. You should submit your appeal within 28 days by writing to:

Dickon Weir-Hughes

Chief Executive and Registar


 

From: opssupport@ico.gsi.gov.uk
To: lars..@com
CC: casework@ico.gsi.gov.uk; Calum.Liddle@ico.gsi.gov.uk
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:01:39 +0000
Subject: [Ref. FS50419504]

Dear Mr Petersson

Please find attached an electronic version of the decision notice dated 9 January 2012. I have copied below the covering letter:

9 January 2012

Dear Mr Petersson

Freedom of Information Act 2000: Section 50(1)

Nursing and Midwifery Council

Please find enclosed a Decision Notice issued under section 50(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. This Decision Notice relates to your complaint about a request for information that you submitted to the NMC on 11 August 2011.

 The complaint has been carefully considered, and in this case the Commissioner has found in favour of you with regards to the outstanding information. The enclosed Decision Notice sets out the reasons for this decision.

If you disagree with any aspect of the attached Decision Notice, you have the right to appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). Contact details for the First-Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) are included in the Decision Notice.

The Decision Notice includes details about you and the public authority. This is to ensure that there is no doubt as to the request for information to which the Notice relates. The Commissioner will publish the decision on the ICO website, but will remove all names and addresses of complainants.

Although public authorities may choose to reproduce this Decision Notice, the Commissioner would expect that they would take similar steps. The Commissioner considers that these may be necessary in order to comply with the requirements of the Data Protection Act.

I hope the above information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Calum Liddle

Case Officer

________________________________________________________________________

From: lars..@com
To: peter.pinto@nmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: Freedom of Information Response FOI/2011/212
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 09:20:12 +0100

Dear Mr Pinto,

As you will know, the Commissioner of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 has decided in my favour regarding disclosure of the date of Ms Xxxxxxx’s lapse of registration (attached for your convenience). Please inform me of the date with no further delay. Thanks.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

_______________________________________________________________________________

From: lars@……….com
To: opssupport@ico.gsi.gov.uk
Subject: RE: [Ref. FS5xxxxx504]
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:13:57 +0100

Dear Mr Liddle,

Thank you for your letter of 10 January 2012. I have still not heard from the NMC regarding this issue. I still have not received the information requested. The 35 calendar days from the decision notice expired yesterday.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson
_________________________________________________________________________

From: casework@ico.gsi.gov.uk
To: larsgpetersson@hotmail.com
Subject: NMC DN[Ref. FS50xxxx04]
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:29:52 +0000

16 February 2012

Dear Mr Petersson,

Thank you for your email of 14 February informing us that the NMC has not complied with our decision notice.

Mr Liddle is currently on leave but coincidentally a letter has arrived for him from the NMC dated 9 February, confirming it will be complying with the notice.

It has also confirmed that it has reviewed its internal procedure for handling requests regarding lapsed registration dates. In future, not only will its staff confirm whether a registrant has lapsed, they will also confirm the date of the lapse.

It may be therefore that you have now heard from the NMC. Should this not be the case I would suggest you wait a week and contact us again if it has still not complied.

Yours sincerely,

Pam Clements
Group Manager, Complaints Resolution

______________________________________________________________________________________

From: lars@om
To: peter.pinto@nmc-uk.org
Subject: Sxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxursing Home
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:47:50 +0100

Dear Mr Pinto,

Thank you for your letter of 15 February 2012 in which you confirm the date on which Manager XXX’s registration with the NMC lapsed. Unfortunately you only complied with the Commissioner of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 after the stipulated 35 calendar days had expired and after you had been reminded about your duty in accordance with the law, but I welcome this information as it is crucial to the further investigation of this case and NMC’s handling of it. Thank you.

Further to this we need an explanation to the following:

………………………………………………………………………………………………
From: Hilda.Williams@nmc-uk.org
To: lars…..@.com
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 15:50:47 +0100
Subject:
Dear Mr Peterson
I write in regards to your referral of XXXXXXXXX, having been passed your e-mail of today’s date.  Upon going through the same it is noted that you state you have not been contacted.  Please note a letter was sent to you dated 11 March 2010, requesting any further information you may have, as well as asking for your signed consent.  Your consent form was received, with no additional information attached.  A letter was then written to Ms XXXXXXs employers regarding this matter, and to date, we are still awaiting their response.  
I will proceed to send them a reminder letter, however I wish to let you know that a guideline of up to 15 months is given (for which cases should be completed).   I am not suggesting this is how long your matter will take, as very often completion may be within a few months, however your matter is still very much much at the begining stages.
Please note, once I have received a response from the employers, I will write to you and advise as to how we will be poceeding.
I trust this answers any queries.  Should you wish to discuss anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me using the number below.
Kind Regards   
Hilda Williams
Case Officer
Fitness to Practise Department
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 6:06:19 PM
To: hilda.williams@nmc-uk.org

Dear Ms Williams,
 
Thank you for your quick response. I am happy you have received the consent form. Regarding additional information: my complaint is a detailed document of around 8000 words. I am happy to answer any question that will be asked further to that, but I am not in possession of anything more that I can send you. There are (or should be) two ‘handing over’ books at XXXXd which both (together with the diary) should give sufficient background to this matter. Apart from that there are numerous witnesses.
 
Kind Regards
Lars Petersson 
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

This email exchange took place only 12 days before Ms XXXXX’s registration expired…. As you will be aware of, and which is obvious when reading the 18 May 2010 email from Hilda Williams, the investigation into XXXXXXX’s conduct had started from NMC’s part with letters to her employer. Thereafter months pass and only after a new reminder I am told on 12 November by the same Ms Williams that ‘it appears as if Ms Xxxxx’s registration has lapsed. This means we will be unable to proceed with your referral….’

I am sure you understand that this handling of this case, and your subsequent attempt to withhold important information, give reason to extremely serious concerns. There are a lot of questions to be asked, but let me start with the following. When a nurse chooses to let her registration lapse, she/he has to declare on a written notification to your office that ‘I am not aware of any matter which could give rise to an allegation against me’. Did Ms Xxxxx really sign that? If not, why didn’t she? If she did, why did you let her? It is indeed remarkable, despite an ongoing investigation into her fitness to practise this manager/nurse was allowed to let her registration lapse, avoid an investigation into serious allegation of abusive negligence towards vulnerable nursing home residents and – even more astonishing – continue in her post as usual to this very day.

I am looking forward to read your explanation to all this. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Lars G Petersson

_____________________________________________________________________________________

This was the response. Something like  ‘Allright we failed, please go away’:  Admittance of incompetence.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Here a few emails between the offices of my MP John Cryer (after he had written to (Nurse) Anne Milton, MP for the area where the home is located and also junior minister of the Department of Health, asking her to take action. No she wasn’t that keen on that…

From: COLEBY, Sarah
Sent: 21 March 2012 08:28
To: CRYER, John
Subject: Your letter to Anne of 5 March

Dear John

Anne has been away from Westminster for a few weeks, but asked me to thank you for your letter of 5 March.  She says:  “I do know XXXXXX (Nursing Home, my addition).  I have passed your letter back to the Dept of Health, but many thanks for raising this issue with me.  I imagine that it will be Paul Burstow who gets back to you.”

Best wishes

Sarah.

Sarah Coleby

Office of Anne Milton MP

Member of Parliament for Guildford

_________________________________________________________

From: SEATONDB@parliament.uk
To: Sarah.Coleby@parliament.uk
CC: lars…on@om
Subject: RE: Your letter to Anne of 5 March
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 13:41:18 +0000

Dear Sarah,

Many thanks for your response.

However, we had already approached the DoH in recent times, and I think a copy of Mr Burstow’s reply should have been enclosed with the letter (apologies if not- can send separately). I don’t imagine he will respond differently if our letter to Anne is simply forwarded.

The main reasons for approaching Anne were, a) the Home falls within her constituency, so naturally Mr Petersson’s quite serious allegations would be of concern to her; and, b) her privileged access to the DoH may help Mr Petersson in obtaining the further action he has been pushing for: i.e. an investigation into the conduct of the alleged negligent parties, rather than, as he sees it, a wiping clean of the slate with no accountability for those involved.

I am confident that Mr Petersson would be more than happy to discuss the matter with you- for that reason I have copied him into this email.

Kind regards

Dave Seaton

Senior Caseworker to John Cryer MP

020 8989 5249

877 High Road Leytonstone, London E11 1HR

__________________________________________________________

From: Sarah.Coleby@Parliament.uk
To: SEATONDB@Parliament.uk
CC: lars..@.com
Subject: RE: Your letter to Anne of 5 March
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:44:05 +0000

Dear Dave,

Many thanks.  As Mr Cryer will be aware, Ministers have to keep very separate their work in a Government Department and their work as a constituency MP.  It was for that reason that Anne passed his letter on to the Department correspondence team.  I note that in this case there is an added complication in that the home about which Mr Cryer’s constituent Mr Petersson has concerns is situated in Anne’s constituency – and I will make sure that she is aware of your email and the points you are making.  However, the appropriate way forward is for Mr Petersson to continue to correspond with Mr Cryer as his MP.  I will discuss your email with Anne tomorrow when I see her, and if she has anything to add, she or I will be in touch.

Best wishes

Sarah.

Sarah Coleby

Office of Anne Milton MP

Member of Parliament for Guildford

House of Commons

London

SW1A 0AA

There we are: ‘However, the appropriate way forward is for Mr Petersson to continue to correspond with Mr Cryer as his MP,’ she wrote. Basically, please keep him busy yourself until he goes away.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 BACK TO MR PINTO AND NMC:

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars@com]
Sent: 18 May 2012 08:20
To: Peter Pinto
Subject: Date of joining the NMC register

Reference: FS50419504  Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice Date: 9 January 2012

Dear Mr Pinto,

Referring to the above FOIA decision, I request also to be told the date Ms Xxxx (NMC reg: 8XXXE) first joined the NMC register as a RGN.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

____________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars@com
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:21:38 +0100
Subject: RE: Date of joining the NMC register

Dear Mr Petersson

The information that you requested is as follows:

Register entry

Start date

Registered Nurse – Adult 30/12/1996
Registered Nurse – Adult (Level 2) 09/08/1988

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

__________________________________________________________

From: Lars Petersson [mailto:lars@com]
Sent: 04 June 2012 17:58
To: Peter Pinto
Subject: RE: Date of joining the NMC register

Dear Mr Pinto,

Thank you very much for your kind help with information regarding Xxxxx’s first entering the registration. Will you please also inform me of any periods in between her starting date and her final leaving of the register in 2010, periods in which she has not been on the register. Thank you. This is important for the ongoing investigation to which I have been asked to respond no later than 8 June, end of this week.

Kind regards
Lars G Petersson

___________________________________________________________

From: Peter.Pinto@nmc-uk.org
To: lars@com
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:49:35 +0100
Subject: RE: Date of joining the NMC register

Dear Mr Petersson

Upon reviewing your recent request, it has come to my attention that I have inadvertently shared incorrect information regarding the registration dates of Ms  Xxxxx. I am extremely sorry for this oversight on my part.

For confirmation, Ms  Xxxxx first joined the register on 8 May 1982. Once again, I am sorry for this error.

Your request for information about the dates when Ms Xxxxx lapsed from the register is being considered under the Freedom of Information Act and a response will be with you shortly.

Yours sincerely

Peter Pinto de Sa

Assistant Director

___________________________________________________________________________________

From: lars@com
To: peter.pinto@nmc-uk.org
Subject: RE: Date of joining the NMC register
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:15:36 +0200

Dear Mr Pinto,

I am not impressed by your handling of the data in this case. After being told by the Freedom of Information Act to disclose the date asked for – and that failure of doings so would be considered as contempt of court – you, obviously, disclosed the wrong dates. Now you give me a new date, but delay the requested disclosure of (allegedly) lapsed periods of registration in the time that has passed in between. You will understand that this (correct) information is essential for the case brought against me as response to my complaint about Ms Xxxxx to the (at the time) Secretary of State Andy Burnham – as I question her credibility. To spare me having to report this error of yours back to the Freedom of Information and ask them to interfere again, I will request you, with no further delay, to disclose all requested (correct) dates. If doing so you might, at long last, convince me that I am in possession of credible information. I will also ask you for a credible explanation of your error. What information were you giving me? Somebody else’s? After all, your work is to look into and punish suspected errors of others. To me it doesn’t seem like NMC expect the same standards from their own employees.
Sincerely
Lars G Petersson


From: lars@xxxm
To: carolyn.preston@ombudsman.org.uk
CC: seatondb@parliament.uk
Subject: EN-147944/0018
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 12:35:25 +0100

Dear Ms Preston,

Please see attached letters.

Sincerely

Lars G Petersson

(Reply from CQC. My response to this reply in my final letter to the Ombudsman.)

Redacted Letter to ombudsman 80213

________________________

From: larsgpe@.com
To: carolyn.preston@ombudsman.org.uk
CC: seatondb@parliament.uk
Subject: RE: EN-147944/0018 Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:30:18 +0200

Dear Ms Preston, (copy to John Cryer MP’s office)

RE: EN-147944/0018

Some weeks ago, probably a couple of months, you or somebody else from your office telephoned me and let me know that the matter I had raised would not be investigated by the Ombudsman because I was not personally affected (!!!).
Of course I had expected that; in no way I was surprised. I knew I wasn’t ‘affected’ – though I, sorry for going on about that, have lost my right to earn my living. I couldn’t help tell you (or your colleague) that I actually have lost job, career, all income – all because being a whistleblower (something the Secretary of State says is the duty of health staff  – if necessary). I know that nothing politicians say when it comes to things like this is seriously meant, but it does upset me that you have the cheek to say I am not affected.
I knew from the beginning that this would be the outcome from your side, but accepted to complain to you as it was suggested by my MP John Cryer. You could have told me your final decision right away without letting me first spend hours writing other formal documents building up my case.
Anyway, so it was, and then you rang to explain. After being given a rant like above you said you would discuss the issue with your lawyers. Of course I do not expect anything to happen. I know all involved in this matter try to drag it out as much as possible, so that in the end the issue can be dismissed as history and the ranting old geezer as somebody not worthy of being taken seriously.
But I actually do expect that a governmental body, when they dismiss complaints, at least WRITE to the complainant. I know this is a controversial issue. After all, my MP has claimed to the Ministry of Health that it is about allegations of criminal neglect amounting to manslaughter. When it comes to even older geezers and especially, as in this case, in most cases old women, such alleged manslaughter seems not to be of much concern. Some of these people died painful deaths because of disgraceful neglect of the accused manager. She still works as usual and nobody has ever investigated my allegations. I have not even been asked for an interview….

Still, you owe me a letter.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

____________________________________________

Ombudsman decision 300413

(My short comment to this letter: I have no recollection I have ever used the word ‘outrage’, but I think it is an outrageous letter that speaks for itself. It is extremely patronising, and though they all the time knew I was a staff member they needed to consult lawyers and senior staff before they could dismiss me precicely for being that… )

________________________________________________

From: lars@.com
To: carolyn.preston@ombudsman.org.uk; amanda.hogan@ombudsman.org.uk
CC: seatondb@parliament.uk
Subject: FW: EN-147944/0018
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 23:22:11 +0200

Dear Ms Hogan,

Thank you for your prompt response to my email to your colleague yesterday. I emailed your office Friday and received your letter Saturday. That is good service. Your letter includes basically what I had expected apart from some surprising statements. No I am not ‘reassured’, but I am sure you have considered your reply ‘very carefully’, and, as you claim you legal team has been consulted, I am surprised about some of its content.

Sincerely
Lars G Petersson

——————————————————————–

From: Amanda.Hogan@ombudsman.org.uk
To: lars@com; Carolyn.Preston@ombudsman.org.uk
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 10:35:00 +0100
Subject: RE: EN-147944/0018

Dear Mr Petersson

Thank you for your email. I was unaware of the email you sent on Friday 30 May, as my colleague Carolyn Preston does not work on Fridays so would not have seen your email yet. It appears that our correspondence crossed over. May I once again apologise for the time it took to inform you of our decision. Your complaint was considered by several areas of our office, before reaching our decision, unfortunately this meant that it took longer than usual for us to write to you.

As I have explained in my letter, if you think our decision is wrong, you can request a review. Please complete a ‘What to do if you think our decision is wrong’ form, which is available on our website: www.ombudsman.org.uk. Alternatively, you can contact me for the form. You will need to submit your review request form to us within three months of the date of this letter.

Yours sincerely

Amanda Hogan

Assessor

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

_________________________________________

Of course I am ‘reassured’ by that. Or am I?  The short was: My MP had asked me to ask the Ombudsman to look at the matter. They asked me for information; I wrote a new report outlining the case. All this time, despite all these documents which were already there, despite they very well knew all the time that I was a whistle blowing member of staff and not an affected patient, they let me do all this writing before they decided that I could not complain as I had not been authorised to do so by the (dead) residents and I was not myself a patient. As a whistle blowing member of staff I had no rights to have my complaint about these conditions, which had led to painful deaths, investigated. So much for whistle blowing. Thereafter my MP has offered to help with an appeal. I know this is pointless, will only cost taxpayers more money and will only result in the same. The Surbiton case shows the same. http://176.32.230.52/larsgpetersson.com/care-homes/kingston-upon-thames/ombudsman/ But, one thing all this writing does: it makes a case like this getting older and older and in the end they all will get rid of me. I have asked John Cryer to bring this up politically. I have repeated this request after this final Ombudsman decision. Thereafter I have heard no more from John Cryer, MP. His Labour colleague Andy Burnham was the secretary of state for health at the time my original complaint was sent on, cascaded down from from DoH to the owner of the home and the manager I accuse of extreme neglect in office – for those to investigate and free themselves. But also Tory ministers of health have after the change of government been involved in this cover up – among them the MP for the constituency where the home is located, a former nurse who is also junior minister of health in Cameron’s government. Nobody is holding these people to account. There seems to be no political party that is interested. One day they might find themselves in one of these nursing home beds. One day they might find themselves with rotting bedsores into the bones. That day they might remember that they all did everything to get rid of me….