This is an historical complaint, it relates to nurse: Erica Bulpin – Swansea, South Wales
Sent: 07 June 2017 12:38
To: NMC = (name redacted)
Subject: TRIM: (redacted)
I have already contacted CHRE who suggested I contact yourselves and request you escalate my complaint under your “Rule 9”.
Please, escalate this complaint under rule 9.
The initial complaint to yourselves was quite simple and can be summarised within one sentence. “Discrepancies exist between the oral recording of the assessment and the written medical report,both of which conducted by the registered nurse”.
Despite your letter claiming you have made a “full review”, despite your letter claiming that you have “considered all the facts”, I today find out that your letter is incorrect and you have not completed a full review and you have not considered all the facts.
In essence, you have done nothing.
The only thing you have done is to send me a letter that is showing maladministration.
The fact of the matter is quite simple, I shall reiterate again.
There is discrepancies between the assessment oral recording and the written medical report. I request that you treat this as a complaint and investigate this.
Despite your claims that this does not raise any public protection concerns, the allegations do not engage the public interest, and is not capable of amounting to professional conduct that would lead to impairment, – your claims I totally refute.
I fail to see why I should have to wait another 20 days for your response in this matter because this matter should have already been dealt with by now.
To aid yourselves, I shall be putting www.maladministration.co.uk website onliune within the next few days and this will include a copy of the recorded assessment compared with the medical report. This will also include copies of our communication plus me pointing out your maladministrative failings in your response in relation to my complaint.
In order for yourselves to mitigate the future embarassment of having your derisory reposnes made public on a website showing your maladministration, I request that you treat this complaint with merit and investigate the complaint as a priority, as I have already had to wait practically a month for you to decide that you would not investigate, despite claiming that you have already made a full review, all the facts etc.
I hope that you are in a position to appease me in relation to my complaint – and do so within the next few days. Faliure to do this will result in me losing all faith in DWP and yourselves and will result in me blogging about your maladministrative processes.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:59 AM, (redacted) <@nmc-uk.org> wrote:
Thank you for your email.
I am one of the line managers in the Fitness to Practise Directorate. I am Maria’s current line manager.
I confirm that we are treating the contents of your email as a formal complaint both in terms of how we have handled this referral and in terms of the decision we reached. In line with our corporate complaints procedure we will look into the points you have raised and come back to you with a full response within 20 working days of today’s date. Further information on our corporate complaints process can be found on our website at this link: https://www.nmc.org.uk/contact-us/complaints-about-us/
I am happy to forward your email below to the relevant team who handle Freedom of Information requests.
I understand from Maria that you would like to contact the NMC’s governing body. The NMC is regulated by the Professional Standards Authority.
Acting Case Investigation Manager
Fitness to Practise
020 7681 5472
Sent: 07 June 2017 11:17
Thank you for your letter dated 6th June 2017. In response to this I contacted yourselves today by phone in order for various things to be established.
- I require a Subject Access Request in relation to this complaint.
- I require a Freedom Of Information request in relation to how many complaints you receive concerning Work Capability Assessments, how many are investigated by yourselves and how many are not investigated. Additionaly, I would like details on how many professionals you have taken action against in relation to DWP assessment complaints.
- During the phone call today, I was told by yourselves that the reason this complaint had not been progressed for investigation is that the nurse is not related to a practice, rather a company, namely CHDA.
Upon firstly enquiring with yourselves whether you’d be able to accept a complaint and investigate Work Capability Assessments, I was told yes.
- Your letter states “A full review of the allegations contained within your referral was undertaken by the Screening Legal Team” – however, upon myself questionning whether yourselves had listened to the recording and compared it against the medical written notes, I was told that the recording had not been listened to.
As this is the crux of my complaint, then I do not consider you have completed a full review.
- I was told several times during my 2 phone calls today that I need to put my complaint again in writing. I was told to request that you listen to the oral recording of the assessment and compare this with the written report of the assessment. In relation to this, I responded that I have already requested this.
- In the telephone call today, I was told a few times that I would need to put this additional complaint in writing. I responded that under the Equality Act ideally you would have been able to escalate this complaint from my phone call. After mentioning the Equality Act, you then decided that you would escalate my complaint from the phone call and did not require me to write.
Your letter states:
“I Understand you may be disappointed by this outcome, However, the NMC can only investigate allegations made against nurses and midwives in cases where their conduct is likely to amount to their current fitness to practise being impaired.
A registered nurse conducting assessments is in my opinion not fit to practise as a medical professional when such practise includes numerous discrepancies between that of the recorded assessment and the written assessment.
Your letter states:
“When deciding whether an allegation is capable of impairing a registrant’s current fitness to practise, we take a number of factors into consideration. These include when the events took place, the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the likelihood of repitition, any subsequent action taken by the employer or the person in question…”
The nature and seriousness of the allegation is that there are several discrepanicies (or lies, for want of a better word) between the oral recording and the written assessment. I have already informed you of this but you have not investigated it despite the fact you say you have made a full review.
The likelihood of repetition in this instance is immense, this can clearly be seen from other people and media reports surrounding work capability assessments.
Your letter states:
“In the first instance this matter should be investigated by the DWP who are more suited to assess the efficacy of the assessment.
I am awaiting a reply from DWP Chief Executives Office, however, it is only approx 2 months past their timeline to respond. Their lateness of 2 months to respond is not a long time in comparison to my previous complaint where I have waited 2 years for a response, and pales into insignificance when I am still awaiting several years for a response, despite the fact that DWP say no records exist into my complaint several years ago, but then decide to send me Subject Access Request detailing the complaints that they say do not exist.
A little like CHDA who 2 years ago said a complaint did not exist, yet asked me if i wanted it processed when I said it does exist and here is the proof of existance.
DWP are clearly not suited in this intstance.
Your letter states:
After considering all the facts in this case we concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support a regulatory concern.
Total maladministration on your part. You have not considered all the facts, despite yourselves saying you completed a full review of the allegations. In the phonecall made to yourselves today, it was stated that you did not listen to the oral recording of the assessment. Therefore you have clearly not conducted a full review as your claim, neither have you considered all the facts as you claim.
Your letter states:
“…there is no evidence supporting the allegations to justify a full investigation”
The evidence is per my first contact with yourselves, ie – the oral recording of the assessment in comparison to the written report which were both conducted by the registered nurse.
Your letter states:
“It is unlikely for there to be any credible admissible evidence to support your concerns and further investigation is not deemed necessary”
If you had bothered to not treat my complaint in a derisory manner, you would have conducted the complaint investigation and realised that the credible admissible evidence is the oral recording of the assessment.
Your letter states:
“The allegations do not raise issues which would further engage the professional regulator and there is no evidence to highlight any patient harm, although we have noted the distress this incident has caused you. Neither does this case raise any public protection concerns; the allegations do not engage the public interest and is not capable of amounting to professional conduct that would lead to impairment.
I totally refute everything you have stated here. Public protection concerns come from members of the public who are having to endure work capability assessments from nurses who skew the results. Impairment is when there is discrepancies between an oral recording and written report.
To reiterate my complaint:
Various discrepancies exist between the oral recoring of my work capability assessment and that of the written report – both conducted by a registered nurse. This raises public protection concerns and public interest – despite your claims that it does not.
Any result of this complaint will be published on a website I own: http://nursingandmidwiferycouncil.uk/
The site is not yet published, however it is my intention to put all details of what I believe to be maladministration onto that site.
Revalidation for nurses and midwives is here. Find out more at www.nmc.org.uk/revalidation
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential. Please do not act upon or disclose the contents if you have received it in error. Instead, please inform the sender at the email address above, or notify the Nursing and Midwifery Council at [email protected]. If you have an enquiry regarding registration please email [email protected].
You should ensure this email and any attachments are virus free. Email is not a 100% virus-free or secure medium. It is your responsibility to ensure that viruses do not adversely affect your system and that your messages to us meet your own security requirements. No employee or agent is authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of NMC with another party by email without express written confirmation of the Director of Corporate Services. The Nursing and Midwifery Council may monitor email.
The Nursing and Midwifery Council has its registered office at 23 Portland Place, London W1B 1PZ, and is a registered charity in England and Wales (charity number 1091434) and in Scotland (charity number SC038362).
Thank you for your reply, hopefully you will respond in full before another 20 days.
The facts of the matter are quire simple. I am under the belief that a registered nurse has made several lies and ommitted key information.
If you had conducted a full review after considering all the facts, you would have already listened to a copy of the recording of the assessment and compared it against the medical report (both of which have been conducted by a registered nurse).
I see from FOI requests that your action shown toward myself is indicative of the action you show to others, for example:
I have requested that you listen to a recorded oral copy of the assessment and compare that with the written medical report, both of which conducted by the RN.
If possible, please conduct the investigation into this and respond accordingly, as soon as possible. Afterall, it has taken yourselves about a month to decide you can not do this, despite the fact that I was originally told you could do this.
In relation to my further complaints as to what is in my opoinion several instances of maladministration surrounding the way in which you have so far investigated the complaint as well as your letter of response to me, as this is a new complaint then I am quite happy to wait 20 days in order for you to respond. However, to reiterate, it would be prudent of yourselves to investigate the discrepancies in between the oral recording and the written report as soon as possible.
DWP / CHDA have been given permission to share my data with you previously in order for you to investigate.
As per my previous email to you, it can be seen that I totally refute your explanations as to why regulatory action is not necessary at this time.
One only has to look through various media reports to see that the work capability assessment carried out by RN is detrimental to members of the public.
Now turning to other matters.
- I require a Subject Access Request in relation to all information you have on myself and what has been done so far in order to investigate my complaint. Additionally, in the future I would like Subject Access Request to see exactly the paper trail as to how you have investigated this complaint.
- I require a freedom of information request into how many referrals have been made to yourselves in relation to complaints against RN who have conducted the work capability assessments. I would also appreciate you send me details of how many of these referrals you actually investigated and how many RN received action, whether that be struck off / advisory etc.
Due to the DWP repeatedly failing in their legal obligations to issue me with Subject Access Requests, it will be my intention to proceed to Court and request a judge make an order that you comply with Data Protection Act if you fail to discharge your legal obligations in respect of Subject Access Request.
In conclusion, to reiterate again – I totally refute your reasoning as to why you can not investigate this complaint and request you treat this complaint with merit, govern yourselves accordingly and provide a substantive response.
The matter is quite simple and within the public interest, it also raises public protection concerns and is quite obviously misconduct due to the fact that lies were told and relevant key information omitted by the RN. (despite your letter claiming otherwise)
As stated above, I will wait for the complaints process to take 20 days in relation to the complaints of maladministration surrounding your reply letter to me in addition to the complaints of maladministration surrounding the way in which you have so far conducted this complaint. However, the crux of the complaint, ie, the difference between the oral recording and written report should ideally now be listened to by yourselves and appropriate action taken.
|Jun 14, 2017, 4:33 PM|
Dear Mr Powell
Further to my email dated 7 June, I apologise that a response has not as yet been sent to you. It has been drafted but needs to be reviewed by a senior manager before I can send it to you. I am hoping the review will be finalised tomorrow and I will be in touch again.
Acting Case Investigation Manager
Fitness to Practise
020 7681 5472
|Jun 16, 2017, 2:11 PM|
Further to our 2 earlier conversations, firstly I would like to apologise if you consider myself to be angry toward yourself during the phone conversations, please be assured it is nothing personal.
You stated during the phone call that it is recorded, therefore I expect this recording to be part of my Subject Access Request.
The facts of the matter are quite simple. These facts are various indiscrepancies exist between the recorded assessment and the written medical report. I have requested that you govern yourselves accordingly and treat this complaint with merit and investigate the maladministration surrounding the 2 sets of data.
You have refused to investigate this – again, I consider your refusal to be further maladministration. I appreciate that you said you would be sending me email later today explaining the reasons as to why you will not investigate, however, you have previously sent me reasons as to why you will not investigate – I have refuted all your reasons.
Please will you escalate this to your final stage of complaints process.
Please will you provide me with a final response in order for me to place your derisory course of maladministration on a website I own which is conveniently named: http://nursingandmidwiferycouncil.uk (this is not live website yet)
The fact that I have previously informed you that 3 medical professionals (2 doctors and 1 nurse) have pointed out various indescrepancies, plus the fact that I have told you it is my intention to pay for an independent medical professional to review the data – yet your response is that you will still not investigate, I consider this to be further maladministration.
I look forward to your dismal derisory excuse of a response to me as to why you will not investigate. I appreciate that you said you would send me this response today.
The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society. It replaced previous anti-discrimination laws with a single Act, making the law easier to understand and strengthening protection in some situations.
I consider your actions of not investigating my complaint to be discrimination, however, not only discrimination shown to myself but also discrimination shown to practically everyone else who has made a complaint to yourselves surrounding the indescrepancies in assessments of DWP.
Your actions of not investigating such complaints is in my opinion discriminatory and maladministration.
I have repeatedly given you good reasons as to why you should investigate, however you have chosen to ignore my reasons and request for you to govern yourselves accordingly and perform your perceived role.
This is not the first time your organisation has in my opinion broke the equality act. The previous time was when I contacted yourselves by phone and your colleague told me repeatedly that I would have to escalate my complaint in writing. After you ignored several of my requests to take the complaint by phone and escalate it, I was simply told it needed to be in writing. The same colleague then miraculously decided that my complaint could be escalated and no need for me to put in writing as soon as I mentioned equality act.
Upon complaint to yourselves in relation to the above, I was told that staff had training surrounding the equality act. However, despite such training you had failed several times until I had to inform yourselves of the appropriate legislation.
Now, turning back to my original complaint about your faliure to investigate – I consider your faliure to investigate a further breach of the equality act 2010.
I fail to see why a disabled person suffering with mental health problems needs to jump through hoops in order to get a complaint or referral dealt with by your organisation.
I also fail to see why a disabled person suffering with mental health problems needs to remind your organisation about its duties under law.
As discussed earlier, please escalate this to the final stage of your derisory complaints process.