‘Buckets to flush the toilet’: Green Hammerton residents voice frustration over water crisisHarrogate residents ‘insulted’ by Yorkshire Water’s £100 compensation offerExclusive: Kex Gill contractor makes £23 million compensation claims against councilMore than 1,000 North Yorkshire Police officers injured on duty since 2022Harrogate hospital trust paid £4.9m in compensation claims since last year

Harrogate District Hospital has paid out £4.9 million in compensation claims in the last 12 months.

Figures obtained through a freedom of information request by law firm Legal Expert show Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust made the payments during the period July 2022 to July 2023.

The claims covered medical negligence complaints, which occur when a healthcare professional provides substandard care to a patient that falls below the standard expected of any healthcare professional.

However, the trust said some of the payouts were historical claims and were not necessarily claims resolved within the 12 month period.

In total, the trust paid £4,914,799.05 in compensation payouts. In the same time period, the hospital received 28 new letters of claims.

A spokesperson for the trust said: 

“In the event that the care we provide falls below our expectations or those of our patients, we have procedures in place to investigate what has happened, so that we can learn and continuously improve patient safety.

“We treat a large number of patients across the year and the vast majority are positive about the treatment we provide – the number of claims we receive reflects an extremely small percentage of the patients we care for.

“It is important to note that the compensation figure is not only for claims which were resolved over the 12 month period in question, but also includes payments for historic claims which have been ongoing for several years.”

Read more:

 

Harrogate council pays out almost £20,000 in compensation to tenants due to damp

Over the last three years Harrogate Borough Council paid out £18,690 in compensation to tenants living in damp or mouldy council homes.

People who live in the council’s properties can request repairs for issues that arise due to mould or damp through its website or over the phone.

If the tenant is not satisfied with the repairs they can then complain to the Housing Ombudsman, which will look at what action was taken and potentially suggest compensation is paid to the resident.

Figures obtained by the Local Democracy Reporting Service through a freedom of information request reveal Harrogate Borough Council paid out on seven compensation claims where damp or mould was a factor since the start of 2020.

The total amount for each year is below:

The issue has received national attention in recent months following the death of two-year-old Awaab Ishak who died from a respiratory condition caused by exposure to mould at his Rochdale home.

Read more:

Awaab Ishak’s father repeatedly raised the issue with Rochdale Boroughwide Housing (RBH) but no action was taken.

In November, housing secretary Michael Gove ordered councils and other social housing providers to step up action to tackle mould and damp in the wake of the death.

Polly Neate, chief executive of housing charity Shelter, said it was “wholly unacceptable” for any tenant to be “stuck in an unfit home with damp or mould”.

She added:

“Social housing is rented by lots of people who may be more vulnerable to poor housing conditions: older people, people with disabilities and long-term health problems and families with children. Reports of disrepair should be dealt with swiftly, so no-one’s health is harmed by their home.”

Harrogate Borough Council said it undertakes an annual maintenance programme in its properties and advises residents to report issues as soon as possible.

A Harrogate Borough Council spokesperson said:

“There are a number of reasons why damp and mould can occur in a property. These include everyday activities such as cooking, cleaning and bathing that, if satisfactory ventilation is not available or not used as intended, can add moisture to the inside of properties, resulting in the development of damp and mould in colder areas.

“Other potential reasons include rising damp, defects to a property or faulty plumbing, for example.

“To prevent our properties from experiencing these issues we have an annual maintenance programme, advise residents to report any issues as soon as possible and also share guidance on how damp can sometimes be prevented.

“Unfortunately, in some occasions, it can occur and where it has caused significant issues for our tenants then they have been eligible to claim compensation.”

Harrogate hospital pays six-figure sum to patient left severely disabled

Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust has paid a six-figure sum to a patient who suffered a stoke and cardiac arrest after an operation, leaving him severely disabled.

The trust and York and Scarborough Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust were found jointly responsible for the treatment of the 74-year-old patient, who suffered a minor stroke in January 2016.

Having developed some slurring of speech and a headache, he was taken to Harrogate District Hospital by ambulance, where he was admitted to the stroke unit and underwent a CT scan of the head.

As part of the legal case against the two trusts, solicitors acting on behalf of the man made several allegations of negligence. It was alleged imaging was wrongly reported and surgery was unnecessarily performed.

During the surgery the patient suffered a stroke and later a cardiac arrest from which he was successfully resuscitated.  He was left severely disabled and brain damaged.

Solicitor Elizabeth Maliakal, a specialist in medical negligence claims at Hudgell Solicitors, led the legal case on behalf of the patient, whose daughter was appointed his deputy by the Court of Protection to manage her father’s affairs.

Ms Maliakal alleged the operation had been carried out without the patient or his family being fully informed of the risks involved, and without being informed that the benefits of surgery were small. She said the case centred on two key aspects of care and treatment:

“Firstly, there was no need for surgical intervention and, had my client not undergone surgery, he would have avoided the stroke which occurred during surgery and the later cardiac arrest.

“Secondly, he was inadequately consented over the decision to operate and, given doubts about his mental capacity to consent, his family were not consulted over the decision either.

“Had an appropriate discussion taken place regarding the relative risks and benefits, neither my client nor his family would have consented.

Read more:

elizabeth maliakal hudgell-solicitors

Ms Maliakal (pictured above) added:

“Whilst our medical experts felt that he may well have gone on to suffer further strokes in the near future, had he not undergone the surgery, they were of the opinion that he would not have been left as profoundly disabled as he is now.

“He has been left with a catastrophic injury.  He is paralysed, has little vision in his right eye and reduced vision in his left eye. He is unable to talk, he is doubly incontinent, needs to be fed through a tube and requires hoists to be moved.  He now lives permanently in a nursing home.”

‘Denied liability’

Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust and York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust agreed a six-figure sum for damages. The precise amount has not been revealed.

The compensation agreed covers the cost of future care, nursing home fees, private medical treatment, medication expenses and aids and equipment.

Mrs Maliakal added:

“This was a hard fought case. Initially both trusts denied liability and it was only after court proceedings were commenced that settlement discussions took place. The negligent treatment left my client severely disabled, and in need of round the clock care, which could and should have been avoided.

“As part of our investigations into the case we instructed independent medical experts, including a vascular surgeon, a stroke physician and neuroradiologist. The Trusts agreed to compensate

A joint statement for Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust and York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, said:

“The trusts sincerely regret the difficulties experienced by the claimant and are pleased to have been able to reach an amicable compromise of his claim.  The trusts wish the claimant and his family well for the future.”

45 former CNG staff in £210,000 tribunal win against Harrogate firm

Forty-six former members of staff at Harrogate firm CNG have won an employment tribunal against the failed company worth about £210,000.

The ex-colleagues claimed CNG didn’t follow the correct redundancy procedures when the firm went into administration last year.

A tribunal in Leeds agreed with their claim, brought by solicitor Nuala Toner, and awarded them 90 days’ pay as compensation.

However, each claimant’s award was capped at eight weeks and a maximum of £571 a week. It means the total sum awarded to the group as a whole is about £210,000.

Any remaining sum owed can be claimed in the insolvency process, although whether any funds will be left when all creditors are paid remains to be seen.

The compensation will be paid by the government’s Redundancy Payment Service because CNG is in administration.

Read more:

The claim, heard last month, was not contested by the administrators of CNG.

CNG ceased trading last year due to spiralling wholesale gas and electricity prices.

Solicitor Nuala Toner

Nuala Toner

Ms Toner told the Stray Ferret:

“As early as August 2021, draft management accounts showed CNG had significant financial difficulties and by October 2021 it was accepted CNG was no longer sustainable. Despite this no steps were taken to commence consultation until November 2021, by which point any consultation was pointless.

“When mass redundancies are made, consultation must be meaningful and must be undertaken with a view to reducing the number of redundancies or mitigating the effects of the dismissals. By failing to undertake proper consultation in good time, the employees were denied the opportunity to mitigate the effects of the dismissals.”