NHS legal fees bill

[Dixy]

Yet again it emerges the enormous amount taken from the NHS budget in legal fees.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51180944
In the case quoted the baby died because of a virus, better communication with the parents would have been so much easier without the threat of legal action.

[piquet]

I work in the industry, seriously you read the cases and each time the trust has denied anything went wrong, rather then just saying sorry and asking them how to put it right

The result is they hit a wall, so go to a solicitors, and suddenly it's 25k in work done just to get to the point that the trust would have been if they'd just put their hands up, trust me most of the cases is so obvious its gone wrong

It'll keep getting worse until the management start being open

[Four Litre]

Not at all surprised. Issues I've had over the years have shown the NHS in a very poor light. Lost notes on everything (supposed to be digital) One of the doctors I saw may as well of trained in Voodoo as he barely had an understanding of his "specialty" My mum fell and broke her wrist, they just put it in cast without even thinking to aligning it, leading to her wrist fusing at the wrong angle. She had to pay nearly £10k to get it re-broken and set months later. Being old she didn't want to make a fuss, so didn't report it.

I bet the bill would be significantly more if people came forward instead of brushing it off. Sadly I think its the only way to improve things.

[Si1295]

complaining to the NHS goes something like this

“Can you explain how this went wrong?”

“Are you going to sue?”

“No”

“Then fk off”

[The Surveyor]

piquet said:

I work in the industry, seriously you read the cases and each time the trust has denied anything went wrong, rather then just saying sorry and asking them how to put it right

The result is they hit a wall, so go to a solicitors, and suddenly it's 25k in work done just to get to the point that the trust would have been if they'd just put their hands up, trust me most of the cases is so obvious its gone wrong

It'll keep getting worse until the management start being open

We are all told by our insurance companies that if you have an accident, don't admit fault. The same advice is given to health professionals, don't admit liability,....

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

[anonymous-user]

The Surveyor said:

piquet said:

I work in the industry, seriously you read the cases and each time the trust has denied anything went wrong, rather then just saying sorry and asking them how to put it right

The result is they hit a wall, so go to a solicitors, and suddenly it's 25k in work done just to get to the point that the trust would have been if they'd just put their hands up, trust me most of the cases is so obvious its gone wrong

It'll keep getting worse until the management start being open

We are all told by our insurance companies that if you have an accident, don't admit fault. The same advice is given to health professionals, don't admit liability,....

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

Life changing consequences in. My mother had a bad back, and after a week, she went to her GP. She was running a fever. GP put her on morphine, sent her home. 2 days later, pararplegia. Emergency spinal decompression saved her life, but not her legs. She had a staph infection, build up of pus compressed the spinal cord, cutting off the blood supply. Morphine depresses the immune system, allowing an existing infection (the fever) to run riot (2 days from walking to not). The GP failed to ask questions, or consult notes. While a year in hospital being taught not how to use a wheelchair, and being told she will need a hoist for the rest of her life (she drags herself about), developed bed sores because the hospital never turned her.

So, you're out of hospital, and life savings have gone because you've had to get a wetroom fitted before you can be discharged. And the council will take 6 months to decide if they are going to fund it. And you can't make a retrospective claim. So you consult with a medical claims specialist. The bed sores claim is very clear, because there is photographic evidence. Its undeniable. Therefore the solicitor will take the case on, as their fees will be very likely covered. As for the larger claim, well, bit more complex. They send the details to your house insurer's legal people , who say time is not a factor in spinal injuries (eh), so they won't fund it. Solicitor won't take it on. Case is dead.

So when people say its because of so-called ambulance chasers are somehow making frivolous claims and burdening the system, that is not true. They're not going to take on a case they think they might not win. And most patients, in that situation, with little in the way of assets themselves, are really not going to go it alone, even if they feel they have a strong case. I was someone previously very defensive of the medical establishment, but I have seen so many examples of malpractice, incompetance, belligerant behaviour, and on occasion, criminal behaviour (theft of patient belongings), I am no longer so.

[Four Litre]

MX5Biologist said:

The Surveyor said:

piquet said:

I work in the industry, seriously you read the cases and each time the trust has denied anything went wrong, rather then just saying sorry and asking them how to put it right

The result is they hit a wall, so go to a solicitors, and suddenly it's 25k in work done just to get to the point that the trust would have been if they'd just put their hands up, trust me most of the cases is so obvious its gone wrong

It'll keep getting worse until the management start being open

We are all told by our insurance companies that if you have an accident, don't admit fault. The same advice is given to health professionals, don't admit liability,....

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

Life changing consequences in. My mother had a bad back, and after a week, she went to her GP. She was running a fever. GP put her on morphine, sent her home. 2 days later, pararplegia. Emergency spinal decompression saved her life, but not her legs. She had a staph infection, build up of pus compressed the spinal cord, cutting off the blood supply. Morphine depresses the immune system, allowing an existing infection (the fever) to run riot (2 days from walking to not). The GP failed to ask questions, or consult notes. While a year in hospital being taught not how to use a wheelchair, and being told she will need a hoist for the rest of her life (she drags herself about), developed bed sores because the hospital never turned her.

So, you're out of hospital, and life savings have gone because you've had to get a wetroom fitted before you can be discharged. And the council will take 6 months to decide if they are going to fund it. And you can't make a retrospective claim. So you consult with a medical claims specialist. The bed sores claim is very clear, because there is photographic evidence. Its undeniable. Therefore the solicitor will take the case on, as their fees will be very likely covered. As for the larger claim, well, bit more complex. They send the details to your house insurer's legal people , who say time is not a factor in spinal injuries (eh), so they won't fund it. Solicitor won't take it on. Case is dead.

So when people say its because of so-called ambulance chasers are somehow making frivolous claims and burdening the system, that is not true. They're not going to take on a case they think they might not win. And most patients, in that situation, with little in the way of assets themselves, are really not going to go it alone, even if they feel they have a strong case. I was someone previously very defensive of the medical establishment, but I have seen so many examples of malpractice, incompetance, belligerant behaviour, and on occasion, criminal behaviour (theft of patient belongings), I am no longer so.

Forgot about the theft part. All of my mums friends who have been in hospital have had pretty much all their belongings stolen by the staff. You can't tell me that a bunch of old ladies are out to nick each others jewelry. Again old people wont make a fuss so it gets let slide. My mum raised a complaint just to see what would happen. 6 months later gets a call to say " we have concluded our investigation and nothing untoward has happened". Her friend in the meantime is dead. Watch, rings and expensive clothes all gone. .. Boils my piss.

[grumbledoak]

The Surveyor said:

We are all told by our insurance companies that if you have an accident, don't admit fault. The same advice is given to health professionals, don't admit liability,....

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

Are you seriously suggesting we accept no liability for negligence for an organisation that kills in the region of 25,000 people per year?

[Dixy]

The NHS may fail to save 250,000 people a year. No one goes to the NHS with no problem at all.
The NHS is stretched far beyond its original aims, it is beyond exceptional for patients to be harmed deliberately, clinicians are human not gods so do make mistakes or make decisions that with the aid of hindsight were wrong.
Whilst life may change dramatically because of these errors, the country has a safety net that stops anyone being destitute.
I think that part of the deal with being a patient should be that the state will provide care free at the point of need and will investigate and learn from mistakes when things go wrong. Patients cant sue when things go wrong.
If you don't want that pay and go private.

[Truffles]

It isn't just admission of liability which is a problem. A family member had an issue with a dentist, and he immediately admitted liability. Restoration work cost £6k. His insurer would only pay £1.5k, so he had to sue to get even his costs covered. In the end the solicitor's costs were higher than the settlement agreed. Such a waste of public money and he wishes he hadn't had to go down that route, but he had little option.

[Sheepshanks]

£4.3bn in legal fees against outstanding claims of £83bn is a much lower ratio than I would have thought.

[The Surveyor]

grumbledoak said:

The Surveyor said:

We are all told by our insurance companies that if you have an accident, don't admit fault. The same advice is given to health professionals, don't admit liability,....

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

Are you seriously suggesting we accept no liability for negligence for an organisation that kills in the region of 25,000 people per year?

No, I'm saying that we either accept that a huge portion of the NHS budget (paid for by you and I) goes out in legal fees to defend and deal with medical negligence claims, or we stop permitting medical negligence claims.

[The Surveyor]

Sheepshanks said:

£4.3bn in legal fees against outstanding claims of £83bn is a much lower ratio than I would have thought.

That's because the £83bn figure is so obscene.

[ralphrj]

The Surveyor said:

There are too many ambulance-chasing legal professionals to allow any Health Trust to simply say 'we're sorry' and close the case, medical negligence is too bid an industry and too many people are making large sums of money on the back of this for this ever to simply stop. The only potential way to stop this is for people to accept that if you put your health in the hands of the NHS, you accept that mistakes may happen and you accept they have no liability for such negligence, and we all know that will never happen.

The child of a relative of mine died shortly after being born. The hospital called the Police as they felt that the negligence was so awful that it constituted manslaughter. They still refused to admit liability for five years.


But sure, let's just accept that mistakes happen.

[grumbledoak]

The Surveyor said:

No, I'm saying that we either accept that a huge portion of the NHS budget (paid for by you and I) goes out in legal fees to defend and deal with medical negligence claims, or we stop permitting medical negligence claims.

Well, the latter is rank stupidity, so hopefully we accept that we are stuck with the former.

[The Surveyor]

ralphrj said:

The child of a relative of mine died shortly after being born. The hospital called the Police as they felt that the negligence was so awful that it constituted manslaughter. They still refused to admit liability for five years.


But sure, let's just accept that mistakes happen.

As I said before, they are told to never admit liability, just like you are when you have a car accident. If you were a surgeon and had been told by your Trusts Insurer that they would invalidate your insurance if you admitted liability without consulting with them, would you admit liability ?

I'm sorry to hear about the loss of the baby, but contrary to the usual witch-hunt, most of the NHS front line staff are caring and compassionate professionals working under huge pressure, they don't deliberately decide to harm their patients, they do sometimes make mistakes because they're human.

The real question we should be asking is would the quality of outcome in the NHS be any better if that £83b of negligence claims was spent at the coal face rather than being paid out in compensation?

[Dixy]

If the £4.3bn was spent on additional nurses and doctors they would be less stretched and therefore make less mistakes and fewer people would have their lives affected.

[anonymous-user]

Dixy said:

If the £4.3bn was spent on additional nurses and doctors they would be less stretched and therefore make less mistakes and fewer people would have their lives affected.

If spend/remuneration and medical negligance were related, then the US would have the lowest number of negligance cases per head, in the world.

The GP who prescribed morphine erroneously to my mother wasn't pushed for time or under resourced. They failed to follow a clinical guideline.If they follow the clinical pathways, they can do no harm that was their fault. It comes down to competance. Our Medical Schools are reasonably pricey places to attend, so I'm not sure medical training is being delivered on the cheap.

Arguably, more doctors and nurses will treat more patients, and create more opportunity for mistakes, increasing the negligance bill.

The way to reduce medical malpractice is to more closely monitor the performances of individial doctors (since, ultimately, its the doctor who has responsibility for their patients, not the nurses)..

Denmark banned malpractice lawsuits. Instead, they have a compensation scheme, where patients, at no cost, can lodgeclaims and appeals. Payouts are lower than elsewhere, but the number of claims per patient is much higher, because there is no deterrance from pusuing claims where the injury, though real, was relatively small. The result is a bigger database of claims against doctors, and a way to monitor their performance. Also you could look at patient readmission rates, which US insurers are looking at, to reduce the costs of treatment (and improve outcomes), which could also act as a proxy to identify doctors that need to stop practicing, or not harm their patients so much.

[The Surveyor]

MX5Biologist said:

…..
Denmark banned malpractice lawsuits. Instead, they have a compensation scheme, where patients, at no cost, can lodgeclaims and appeals. Payouts are lower than elsewhere, but the number of claims per patient is much higher, because there is no deterrance from pusuing claims where the injury, though real, was relatively small. The result is a bigger database of claims against doctors, and a way to monitor their performance. Also you could look at patient readmission rates, which US insurers are looking at, to reduce the costs of treatment (and improve outcomes), which could also act as a proxy to identify doctors that need to stop practicing, or not harm their patients so much.

That sounds a sensible approach and maybe something the CQC should be pursuing, although I'm not sure the GMCC would ever support it.

[CrutyRammers]

The Surveyor said:

As I said before, they are told to never admit liability, just like you are when you have a car accident. If you were a surgeon and had been told by your Trusts Insurer that they would invalidate your insurance if you admitted liability without consulting with them, would you admit liability ?

I'm sorry to hear about the loss of the baby, but contrary to the usual witch-hunt, most of the NHS front line staff are caring and compassionate professionals working under huge pressure, they don't deliberately decide to harm their patients, they do sometimes make mistakes because they're human.

"Most of" perhaps. But some are simply negligent and that can have life-changing (or ending) effects. There is a difference between making a mistake and being negligent, and there should be compensation for the latter.