01482 778 463
Client Focussed
No Win No Fee
Specialist Legal Teams

Tag Archive: NHS

Inquiry into rogue surgeon Ian Paterson must identify how to better protect patients and ensure they can be compensated

Ian Paterson

Having acted for a number of people who were patients of the rogue consultant breast surgeon Ian Paterson, we certainly welcome the national inquiry which has been announced by the Government this week.

Certainly, serious questions need to be asked, especially given that Paterson was not suspended from his position until eight years after concerns were first raised.

Paterson, who worked at the Heart of England NHS foundation trust (HEFT), also practised privately at Spire Parkway and Spire Little Aston.

He was found guilty of 17 counts of wounding patients with intent and jailed for 20 years in August, having carried out needless surgery on patients who were left traumatised and scarred.

The inquiry is set to look into the reasons for the delays in stopping the unacceptable practices of this surgeon, and crucially question if more could and should have been done to protect the hundreds of patients he saw.

As compensation lawyers who support victims of medical negligence every day, we see the need for such matters to be fully investigated. It is only by doing so that the public’s faith in the medical profession can be restored in some way.

Are inspection regimes strong enough to detect rogue and poor performing health professionals?

Paterson was the man committing the crimes and has rightly been sentenced, but how and why was he able to get away with it for so long without being detected and stopped?

The Government says the scope of the investigation will include the independent sector, and it is set to examine whether the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) inspection regime needs to be strengthened.

It has certainly been a costly situation. The NHS has now paid out almost £10m in compensation to more than 250 patients, and Spire healthcare agreed in September to settle a further 750 cases.

In my view, the investigation certainly needs to and look at whether surgeons are still today being allowed to work in isolation and whether enough is being done to spot health professionals who may be a danger to patients early enough.

The reasons for the delay in stopping unacceptable behaviour must be a major focus – and the findings should be publically revealed so that all who played a part in allowing this scandal to happen are held to account. This should hopefully ensure lessons are learned to prevent something like this happening again.

From our perspective, when things do go wrong we always look for the quickest route to right the wrongs for our clients, aiming to obtain full compensation to help them get back to the position they were before they were injured, as far as money is able to achieve that.

One of the key reasons for the delays in paying compensation to our clients in this case has been the initial indication from Paterson’s own Medical Defence Organisation, the MDU, that the indemnity cover they were providing did not actually cover all of his actions as a surgeon.

This resulted in years of delays as specialised lawyers tried to extend every legal principle in the book in a search for other organisations and bodies to hold to account for his actions.

We will therefore be following the inquiry with interest to see what sort of recommendations are made in relation to arrangements for medical indemnity cover for clinicians in the independent sector to cover all aspects of medical and cosmetic treatment.

It is simply not acceptable for patients to suffer so badly, and then find there is no individual or organisation willing to accept responsibility and provide them the compensation they fully deserve and need.

Protecting patients must be the priority.

Read More

11/12/2017 No Comments

Hospital Trust admits ‘memory lapse’ led to doctors being unaware woman who died when pregnant with twins had dangerous heart condition

The family of a woman who died of severe heart failure when pregnant with twins say it is ‘unforgiveable’ that a mistake led to the midwives and doctors treating her being unaware her family had a history of heart disease.

Kelly Forrest, 36, had lost her father when he was aged just 22 to cardiomyopathy – a hereditary disease of abnormal heart walls which is especially dangerous for pregnant women due to the added stress on the heart when having children.

Ms Forrest, who was already a mother of three children, had made midwives aware of her family history at her first antenatal appointment, where it was recorded in her medical notes, but due to a ‘memory lapse’ was not transferred onto Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trusts’ electronic systems.

Due to this error, Ms Forrest believed she was being cared for by midwives and doctors aware of her family background throughout her pregnancy, but that was not the case.

When 32 weeks pregnant, Ms Forrest’s family say she became increasingly unwell, suffering from breathlessness, sweating, feeling dizzy and vomiting.

She was sent home from Hull Royal Infirmary’s Maple Ward having been prescribed iron for anaemia, before being sent home again a day later from Priory Children’s Centre and advised to contact the antenatal day unit if her condition worsened.

However, just three days on June 5th, 2014, later Ms Forrest died after suffering severe heart failure and a massive loss of blood as doctors battled to save her when admitted to the emergency department in an ambulance.

Ms Forrest’s two baby boys survived having being delivered by a Caesarean Section, with one needing resuscitation.

Hospital staff only became aware she had she had died of dilated cardiomyopathy following a post mortem.

Investigation identified catalogue of errors pregnancy care

Now, following a legal case which consulted a number of independent medical specialists for expert opinion, Ms Forrest’s family have been told the catalogue of errors admitted by Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust cannot categorically be attributed to her death.

Experts said her illness in the two and three days before her death was ‘unexplained’ and that her final illness was ‘complex, multifactorial and essentially untreatable.”

For her mother, Anne Campbell, this has been a difficult conclusion to accept, and she says such ‘basic errors’ being made in maternity units are a cause for wider concern.

“How on earth can something so significant simply not be entered into vital medical records when it is known to be dangerous to pregnant women?” she said.

“Kelly made it known to the doctors as soon as possible that there was the family history of losing her dad when he was just 22. They say it was a ‘memory lapse’ that led to that being missed during her care, but they may as well have just completely ignored her.

“It has been very difficult to accept that, despite the Trust admitting a string of errors in Kelly’s care, this error at the start- impacting on her entire care when pregnant – did not contribute to her death.

“My granddaughter (Kelly’s daughter), who is 21, is now having to go for regular testing in Leeds and the boys will do also. It is a serious condition and they want to monitor her closely and have said she must speak to them before trying for a baby herself.

“I am certain Kelly would have been monitored much more closely had it been known, they even admitted it should have been an ‘escalated matter’ during her pregnancy.

“The worrying thing is how many basic errors like this are being made across maternity care? What else should midwives and doctors be aware of when treating patients but are not? These kinds of mistakes are completely unforgivable.”

Root cause of incident was ‘memory lapse’

A Serious Incident Investigation concluded that the root cause of the incident had been ‘an unintended skill based memory lapse as the patients’ family history was not escalated appropriately or acted upon at any point during her pregnancy’.

As a result, details of the error have since been circulated across the NHS nationally. Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust has also reminded all staff of the need to accurately transfer all hand-held records onto its electronic system, and that consultants and midwives must review handheld notes through the pregnancy.

Mrs Campbell added: “It is all very well saying lessons have been learned but how often do we hear that, and when such basic mistakes are being made, how can we believe it. You don’t need extra training to know the importance of making sure patient records have all vital details on.

“The only positive from this horrendous situation has been the two beautiful boys that were added to our family. They are three-years-old now and are starting to ask about their wonderful mummy.

“Kelly was a fantastic daughter and mother. She inspired her eldest daughter and cared for her middle son who has Aspergers Syndrome. She was very strong headed and wouldn’t hold back on her opinions and thoughts, so she’d expect us to speak out and highlight what happened.

“We tell the boys mummy is an angel and in heaven. She will certainly be looking down on them and she would have loved every minute of them.”

Nicola Evans, a medical negligence specialist at Hudgell Solicitors, has represented the family as they have demanded answers from the Trust.

She said: “This was a very sad incident and it is certainly fair to say there were many areas of concern with regards to the processes at Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust and how basic errors were made which impacted on the future care of their patient.

“Ensuring midwives and doctors have all the relevant information at hand when caring for any patient, particularly a pregnant woman, is imperative and can be so dangerous if not the case.

“This case has led to lessons being learned at the Trust, which we certainly welcome, but also acts as a warning to other patients and mothers to not be afraid to repeat their concerns and ask questions of their care at all times. It is clear that doctors don’t always have all the information they need at hand to make the right calls, and that is a worry.”

Related News

Hull Daily Mail

The Sun


Read More

05/09/2017 No Comments

Care Chief Warns Funding Gap Risks ‘Catastrophic Failure’ within NHS

Care home resident jigsaw puzzle | Social care crisis in NHS funded care homes

UK care homes are “teetering on the edge” and are at risk of “catastrophic failure” according to Chai Patel, a businessman set to become the largest operator of private residential care homes in the country.

In the wake of savage spending cuts within the social care system, Mr Patel has warned that NHS services are now at breaking point, with funding gaps placing struggling centres under immense pressure to deliver the quality of care people expect when moving their elderly relatives into a care home.

In an interview with the Times, Mr Patel, chairman of HC-One, an independent provider of residential care homes, commented on the “chronic under-funding of social care services” within the health service, and admitted that the entire sector — including private care services — is on the brink of collapse.

Mr Patel’s comments come after it emerged that HC-One is set to acquire 120 homes from Bupa, a takeover deal which would make it the UK’s largest provider of private residential care accommodation. The businessman has predicted that six national chains, including HC-One, will emerge to dominate the social care landscape, easing financial pressure on the NHS and giving lower-income households greater choice and flexibility in the services available to them and their relatives.

Since the government cut funding to social care services, many small operators reliant on monetary support from local authorities have struggled to provide the quality care expected by care watchdogs, including the CQC. Others have been forced to close, with a reported 144 residential and nursing homes closing their doors in the past 12 months alone, at the loss of 2,000 vital bed spaces.

Earlier this month, it emerged that 70,000 new care home places will be needed in the next 10 years, with an ageing population requiring quality care and treatment for more complex medical conditions in later life. In the current climate, experts like Mr Patel believe that capacity issues and funding gaps mean that the government will fail to reach this target, and by a considerable margin — placing the most vulnerable people in society at risk from failing services and a lack of quality care spaces.

At present, the care home system is hugely fragmented. While there are around 22,000 care homes in the UK, only 1,000 of these are operated by the top five private companies. This means that around 220,000 elderly people rely on services which are funded by local authorities; services at risk from bankruptcy and the inability to provide reliable patient care.

Businessmen like Mr Patel believe that private care companies may provide the answer to the current care crisis, helping to ease the social care burden on the NHS while ensuring that every elderly person gets access to affordable and quality care.

He said: “Demographics are showing in the next ten years there is need for almost 70,000 beds and this is not happening. When local authorities are trying to work alongside social care providers you can see the challenge of trying to integrate these services. I think larger operators can bridge this gap.”

Are private firms the answer to the care home crisis?

Nursing home resident Experts warn of imminent catastrophic failures in NHS social care

As HC-One looks set to become the UK’s largest provider of independent care and residential home places, questions are being asked about the role private firms could play in solving the current funding crisis, which has plagued the social care sector for more than a decade.

Businessmen like Mr Patel believe that the social care sector needs investment from private companies if it’s to stay afloat under the mounting pressure of spending cuts and capacity shortages. Increased investment from the top five independent care providers will mean that services struggling to cope under local authority funding will be given a much-needed cash injection, while elderly people will also have a greater choice of services available to them.

Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, agrees, welcoming the potential deal between HC-One and Bupa. He said: “Private providers are painted to be only concerned with profiteering from older people when, in my personal experience, this could not be further from the truth. It is the private sector that is plugging the gaps for the state.

“The real scandal in social care is the abject failure of successive governments, across all political parties, to invest properly in social care over many decades.”

While HC-One’s Bupa takeover bid is yet to be finalised, it’s hoped that the acquisition could prove a positive step towards increased investment in the crippled care sector. With the NHS in turmoil and the government promising, but so far not delivering, on its pledge to plug the care spending gap, we’re interested to see the impact increased private investment could have in solving the ongoing care crisis.

For more of the latest news and updates on the care crisis, take a look at our dedicated care home abuse and negligence newsfeed. Or, to find out more about our work in helping to support the victims of care home abuse, click here or call our team today.

Read More

23/08/2017 No Comments

One in Four Back Pain Sufferers ‘Left Damaged’ by Surgery

Back Pain Sufferers Left Damaged by Surgery | Hudgell Solicitors

A quarter of back pain sufferers are ‘left damaged’ by remedial surgery according to a study by spinal surgeons, with post-op issues ranging from severe pain to permanent paralysis.

The study, which was conducted by a team at Salford spinal surgery unit, found that 25% of 900 patients suffered complications following a spinal operation. This figure sits in stark contrast to the 4.6% complication rate reported by surgeons.

Medical negligence claims for substandard spinal procedures are now so common that the Medical Defence Union, which provides insurance to private doctors, has announced that it will no longer cover the cost of back surgery claims outside the NHS. Leading spinal surgeons are also demanding the development of a patient database, which would make it easier to identify patterns of failure and hold those liable to account for inadequate care and wrongdoing.

Leading surgeon Naveed Yasin of the Salford spinal unit led the study, and reported the team’s findings to the British Association of Spinal Surgeons (BASS). Speaking to the Times, Naveed voiced concerns that the lack of a single registry for spinal operations means there’s no benchmark against which the quality of spinal operations can be measured, and that the outcomes of many procedures aren’t being properly recorded.

He said: “Outcome measurements are controversial, but we need them. We compare outcomes with European averages. If you don’t do them, how do you know if you’re a good or bad surgeon?”

In our work representing those affected by substandard spinal surgery, we see patients living with life-changing injuries and complications, including severe pain, incontinence, paralysis, and difficulty walking. Worryingly, cases of botched spinal surgery are on the increase, with the same failings found to be repeated from patient to patient.

Spinal Surgery Errors Greatest Legal Drain on NHS

After damage during childbirth, spinal surgery complication claims represent the greatest legal drain on the NHS, with thousands paid in failed back surgery compensation each year. According to the Medical Protection Society, a government-backed organisation which supports healthcare professionals, the cost of settling medical negligence claims could reach £2.6bn a year by 2022 — with botched spinal surgery compensation accounting for a large proportion of this total figure.

Given the life-changing impact substandard back surgery poses, more must be done to improve standards and reduce the risk patients face when undergoing seemingly low-risk procedures. The General Medical Council is currently reviewing the results of the study, and is expected to outline its proposed improvement plans when BASS publishes its full report later in the year.

If you’ve suffered as a result of a substandard back operation, our medical negligence solicitors are here to help. For a free, no obligation consultation about your claim, click here or call our team today.

Read More

04/07/2017 No Comments

Scandal around ‘secret’ of lost patient records could cost lives and those responsible must be held to account

Filing records

It is nothing short of a scandal that thousands of patients may have suffered harm as a result of more than 700,000 documents – including details such as cancer test results and child protection issues – failed to reach GPs and were left in a warehouse over a five year period.

Even more shocking is the fact that the company responsible for delivering the documents – part owned by the Department of Health – allegedly became aware of the issue in January 2014, but took two years to come clean and inform the Government and NHS England.

It has been called a ‘colossal blunder’ by politicians and a ‘disastrous situation’ by the British Medical Association.

Quite simply, it appears an astonishing case of negligence, worsened by an apparent lack of care and consideration for those put at risk by not informing key people of concerns earlier.

By keeping matter ‘secret’ the significant risk to patients was ignored

In our work as medical negligence claims specialists, our team see day to day the need for speedy diagnosis of serious conditions such as cancer. Early detection is vital and impacts the level of treatment patients may have to undergo.

The National Audit Office (NAO), which has investigated this matter, says the company involved, NHS Shared Business Services (SBS), had become aware of a risk to patients in January 2014.

However, senior managers had not developed a plan to deal with it or tell the government or NHS England for another two years, and only told NHS England and the Department of Health of the issue in March 2016.

Even then, neither Parliament nor the public – the people put at risk by these potentially grave errors – were told. The issue only came publicly to light in February after the Guardian newspaper reported it.

It has been suggested there was a ‘conflict of interest’ between the health secretary’s responsibility for the health service as a whole and his department’s position as a shareholder in NHS SBS.

However, a Department of Health spokeswoman said it was committed to being transparent over the handling of the issue, saying it was given advice not to raise the alarm publicly until it had a better understanding of the problem.

It claimed concerns about patient safety ‘would always outweigh its role as a shareholder in the company’, and that as yet there had still been no proof of harm to patients.

However, given doctors have already raised concerns in 1,788 cases, which are now being individually investigated and overseen by NHS England, that approach already looks a serious error of judgment.

NHS England also said the company had been “obstructive and unhelpful” when it had tried to investigate the issue.

It is a shocking, inexcusable, and unforgiveable situation.

How many have suffered as a result of lost medical records?

The question now is how many people have suffered due to this error?

There are still over 200,000 records which went missing to be reviewed by GPs, and therefore it is highly likely that many more cases in which there is genuine concern will be uncovered.

NHS SBS was employed in the East Midlands, South West and north-west London to redirect mail for the health service between 2011 and 2016.

It was meant to pass on documents that had either been incorrectly addressed or needed re-routing because the patient had moved to a new GP surgery.

People diagnosed with conditions in recent years could now discover it should have been treated much earlier. Even worse, some may never have known their health was a concern at all.

The report by the NAO found the cost of dealing with this incident was likely to be in the region of at least £6.6m.

The human cost, sadly, could prove to be much more, and for that, those found responsible must be held to account.

Read More

27/06/2017 No Comments

NHS Trusts Must Do More to Prevent Stillbirths and Neonatal Death

Adult holds baby's feet | NHS Hospitals with high rate of stillbirth

Stillbirths and neonatal deaths have a lasting impact, and nothing can prepare parents for the pain of losing their baby. Tragically, 15 babies die before, during or shortly after birth in the UK every day — raising questions about what can be done to prevent and reduce perinatal mortality.

Just last week, a report emerged suggesting that almost two dozen NHS trusts in Britain have higher than expected rates of stillbirths and neonatal death. Some twenty-one hospital trusts are currently labelled “red”, meaning they have an infant mortality rate 10% higher than the European average for that type of organisation.

In 2015, experts began examining the UK’s perinatal death rate. They introduced a traffic light system to highlight trusts where action is needed to improve birth outcomes. Over 12 per cent of the 165 NHS trusts assessed in the study were labelled “red”, while around a third (32.7%) were given an “amber” rating. Troublingly, just 7% were ranked “green”, meaning their perinatal mortality rate is 10% lower than average.

The authors of the study, MBRRACE-UK (Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the UK), have called on individual NHS trusts to investigate the possible causes of the higher rates, and review the quality of care they provide. Working with the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, plans are in place to develop a standardised perinatal mortality review tool that will allow hospitals to monitor and review stillbirths and neonatal deaths— with a goal to reduce instances of infant mortality in the future.

The 21 NHS trusts with high rates of stillbirths and neonatal deaths

NHS hospital with high rate of stillbirths and neonatal deaths

Below, we list the 21 NHS trusts deemed “red” by the MBRRACE-UK report.

  • Belfast Health & Social Care Trust
  • Birmingham Women’s NHS Foundation Trust
  • Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust
  • Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust
  • Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • University Hospitals Bristol Foundation Trust
  • East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust
  • Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust
  • Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
  • Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust
  • Southern Health & Social Care Trust
  • The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust
  • The Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust
  • Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
  • Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • Kettering General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust
  • Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust
  • Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Despite these worrying statistics, the report does show that the UK’s stillbirth rate fell by 8% between 2013 and 2015 (when the study was carried out), and that the number of cases is generally falling year-on-year. The Government’s long-term ambition is to halve the total number of stillbirths and neonatal deaths by 2030, and these statistics do suggest that things are moving in the right direction.

However, while the UK’s stillbirth and neonatal death rate is falling, it remains higher than other European countries. In 2015, the rate was 3.87 per 1,000 total births — higher than European countries with a similar population and GDP. There is also considerable variation between NHS trusts across the country, highlighting the need for individual hospitals to review the care and treatment they provide, and do more to prevent infant mortalities.

Could Hospital Negligence be Responsible for Hundreds of Baby Deaths and Brain Injuries?

Pregnant woman in grey jumper | Stillbirths and neonatal deaths

In a similar study released last week, the RPOG (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) concluded that more than 550 babies who died or suffered brain injury shortly after birth may have had different outcomes had hospital care been better and more comprehensive.

In the wake of the report, the RPOG are calling for a raft of actions to be taken to improve care in hospitals with a high infant mortality rate. The organisation has launched an ‘Each Baby Counts’ campaign, calling on the government to take a tougher line on NHS trusts which currently fall below the expected standard in neonatal care.

Raising Awareness of Neonatal Death for Sands Awareness Month

June is Sands Awareness Month, an annual campaign raising awareness of stillbirths and neonatal death. As part of the 2017 campaign, Sands is highlighting the tragic fact that 15 babies die every day in Britain, and has launched a #15babiesaday initiative to get people involved in the event.

Sands was founded in 1978 by a small group of parents left devastated by losing their babies. Ever since, the charity has campaigned tirelessly to raise awareness of the impact of stillbirths and neonatal death. The charity provides help and support to families who have suffered the death of an infant, and also works with the government to advise on how hospitals and healthcare trusts can do more to prevent and reduce neonatal mortality.

For more information on Sands and ideas on how you can get involved in the #15babiesaday campaign, click here.

Hudgell Solicitors is experienced in holding healthcare providers to account for substandard antenatal and neonatal care. To find out more, visit our dedicated birth negligence page or call our team today.

Read More

27/06/2017 No Comments

Holding medical profession to account over negligent care can lead to improved services for all

Nurse helping lady

By Lauren Dale, Clinical Negligence Solicitor at Hudgell Solicitors

In our work as medical negligence specialist solicitors, we strive to achieve two clear goals in each and every case we handle.

Firstly, we seek justice and compensation for those we represent.

Our clients turn to us at difficult times, and hope Hudgell Solicitors can help them find the answers to their questions and concerns – answers they would most likely never get without our legal expertise and support.

Read More

03/09/2015 No Comments

Proposals to cap medical negligence costs for NHS will only prevent patients from receiving support and compensation they deserve

Medical negligenceHudgell Solicitors will be strongly opposing Department of Health (DoH) proposals to place a cap on legal costs involved in clinical negligence claims against NHS organisations.

Importantly, we will do so to not to protect our own earnings in such cases, but crucially to ensure patients across the UK continue to have the option of seeking compensation when they have been victims of sub-standard medical care.

As specialists in handling such claims, we see the devastating, life-changing impact medical negligence can have. When people suffer from sub-standard treatment, they need someone on their side to ask serious questions of those who have let them down.

Read More

07/08/2015 No Comments

Musgrove Park report highlights concerns over private care in NHS

medical reports

WORRYING questions have been raised over NHS Trusts using private healthcare providers to clear waiting lists following a leaked report which has claimed dozens of eye surgery operations were rushed and of a poor standard at a UK hospital.

The Guardian newspaper has revealed that a private company agreed to perform 20 cataract operations on patients a day to clear a backlog at Musgrove Park hospital in Somerset, in a bid to meet Government waiting list rules.

However, that was at least six times more operations a day than the hospital’s own surgeons would usually carry out – with a combination of staff, equipment and facilities which had never been tried before.

The report, seen by the Guardian and apparently marked “strictly confidential: not to be disclosed to any other party”, says that despite it being clear that patients were suffering complications, procedures continued.

By the time operations at the Taunton hospital were stopped, 62 patients had undergone surgery, and of them, only 25 had a “normal recovery”. The report says the complications reported were ten times the number that might have been expected from the surgery.

Among those complications were burns caused by the machine used to break up cataract and loss of iris pigment, some patients being left with microscopic metallic fragments in their eye and others left needing further surgery because cataract fragments were left in their eyes.

This report certainly paints a frightening picture of the arrangements made between NHS hospitals and private healthcare providers – and in this case one where the standard of patient care doesn’t appear to have been any kind of priority.

Indeed, the report states that Musgrove Park drew up a contract with the global health giant Vanguard Healthcare Solutions, which in turn sub-contracted the provision of surgeons and equipment to another private company, which in turn sub-contracted the provision of some equipment to a third company. It is hardly surprising that there were major problems during surgery as a result.

NHS Hospitals have of course been encouraged by the Government to treat some patients privately for some time now as a way of generating extra cash and cutting waiting lists, but carrying out surgery on a conveyor belt system will only ever lead to a fall in standards of care.

As experts in dealing with cases involving medical negligence, we at Neil Hudgell Solicitors welcomed the government’s commitment to becoming more open about mistakes made in the NHS following the Mid Staffs hospital scandal.

Greater transparency across the board, and a willingness to accept and fully address issues of poor medical care is the first step towards implementing new procedures and polices across the UK to bring about improvements in NHS care.

The decision not to publish this report – marking it strictly confidential and not to be disclosed to any other party – sadly suggests there is still some way to go before that is achieved.

It begs the question, how many more hospitals are using desperate measures to cut waiting lists and meet targets, at the expense of patient care?

Read More

16/10/2014 No Comments

Looking to see if you're eligible?

Get in touch for free legal advice

0808 159 7699

Call today to speak to an expert

Start your claim

What Our Clients Think

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Case still ongoing

"Case still ongoing, excellent communication between myself and solicitor.. 🤞🏻 for good outcome"


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Excellent and fast

"Excellent and fast. I won’t go anywhere else from now on"


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Very helpful

"Listened too, great advice and feel rejuvenated by their response. Really helpful feedback and will… "

Mr Procter

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Great Service

"Hudgell Solicitors dealt with my case very quickly and effectively. The contact and communication was… "


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Fantastic service

"Fantastic service, on the ball with everything and good outcome"

Hayley coleman

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Very professional

"Very professional, took all the stress off my hands and very pleasant to deal with.… "


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Hudgsell’s were our insurers with…traffic accident in France - successful claim.

"Hudgsell’s were our insurers with regard to road traffic accidents occurring abroad, (France) we were… "

P. Nevitt

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Always honest with there appraisal and…

"Always honest with there appraisal and willing to listen"

Tim Edge/

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Made the whole holiday illness claim…

"Made the whole holiday illness claim stress free. Updates given regularly- overall a pleasure to… "


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

I was fortunate to find Hudgell…

"I was fortunate to find Hudgell Solicitors after having an official complaint upheld. After I… "

James Henderson

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Great service

"Great service. Kept informed at all times. Good results"


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Very professional and pleasant…

"Very professional and pleasant solicitors .. kept me up to date and was very prompt… "


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star


"Friendly, Helpful, and fair. Would recommend Hudgells to anyone I know."


trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Friendly professional service.

"Excellent service all way through."

Sakina begum

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star


"After not knowing what to do, hudgell have helped me thoroughly through the process and… "

Adam Shutt

Rated 9 out of 10 based on 481 reviews

Powered by Trustpilot

Our offices


55 Fleet Street
DX 437 Chancery Lane
SRA No. 607141



No 2 @ The Dock
46 Humber Street
DX 11923 Hull
SRA no. 521372



10 Park Place
DX 744770 Leeds 19
SRA No. 544561



1 St Peter’s Square
Third Floor
M2 3AE
SRA No. 655049


© 2019 Hudgell Solicitors®. All Rights Reserved.

Hudgell Solicitors is a trading name of Neil Hudgell Limited | Director Dr. Neil Hudgell MA LLB (Hons) LLD | Registered in England No. 7078429 | Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority | SRA No. 521372 | VAT Registration No. 254 7802 90