Trust Policy: Interpretation of HM Coroner conclusions

C Rock made this Freedom of Information request to Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

Dear Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust,

Context of question:

i. In 2011, an Inquest heard evidence of a young man and his carers’ appeals to BSMHFT, of messages left for family and for emergency services. Evidence from the fatal event in 2008 and of efforts made to gain Services’ investigation included complaints that had been ignored for nine months.

ii. With familiar indications of a suicide, HM Coroner gave a narrative conclusion questioning the Trust’s inability to clarify correct clinical approach—despite this being readily available in NHS and government guidelines, in Trust Policies, and within Trust knowledge, resource and training (all as confirmed). Coroner’s questions were directed to BSMHT and NICE. Conflicting information strongly signified that the Trust had indeed been negligent.

iii. In a protracted PHSO investigation, it was revealed that in 2015 the Trust had overtly lied to the PHSO (written 1st October 2015) stating that HM Coroner gave “narrative verdict concluding that [patient] died as a result of an accident” and, giving further unsubstantiated opinion “the Coroner did not think that [patient] had any intention to end his own life”. Further Trust unsubstantiated opinion was that parents’ “beliefs about how [patient] died appear to be inconsistent with the Coroner’s later verdict”.

In deference to the above I wish to see the Trust's justifications.

FOI Questions:

a. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to regard HM Coroners’ narrative conclusions synonymous with Accidental Death?

b. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to reinterpret Coroner’s conclusions with added opinions of what the Coroner was thinking?

c. Was it a Trust policy decision? Recorded where?

d. How was this instruction or policy disseminated, for unqualified staff to repudiate culpability?

e. Was the Chief Coroner, Attorney General or CPS consulted on this ‘local’ construal? Please provide record of this.

f. Was this questioned by legal staff at the PHSO (Health Services Ombudsman)? Please provide full record of this, and response.

g. Is it recorded Trust policy that those affected (i.e. subjects of an apparent falsehood) were to be shielded from this new opinion? When, and by whom?

If the FOI officer feels that excessive resource under FOI rules is demanded, please respond promptly to give questioner opportunity to break down content to incorporate in further requests.

Yours faithfully,

C Rock

C Rock left an annotation ()

For other researchers:

This appeared to the complainant to be an unsubtle effort by the NHS Trust to ‘make gain’ of previous unsubstantiated Trust claims (yet to be challenged—in disinclination of PHSO to do so), and now undersigned by the current Chief Executive (John Short).

Apparently it had the desired effect for PHSO to find closure against the complainant with the inexcusable ‘PHSO finding’ that the victim of claimed negligence “would probably have died anyway”, a statement also agreed between the current BSMHFT CEO, and PHSO.

Predictably—at least to any normal comprehension—this ‘news’ had devastating effect on the deceased’s family, in limbo without closure (now ten years) in a traumatic life event, even before involving the PHSO.

I can relate that there was no mention of ‘accident’ in any part of the narrative conclusion (as frequently used by coroners in suicide - q.v. research)

I can also relate that not the Trust, GPs, Coroner nor PHSO probed closely into the deceased's late actions, or care services' intimidation, leading up to the event. Investigators have now had ten years to resolve evidence relating in particular—but not solely—to messages left by the deceased (messages known to Police and Trust workers).

This inflammatory and, to me, appalling ‘evidence’, was never disclosed by PHSO during case assessment. This is against PHSO policy as affirmed by another questioner on this FOI platform.

Despite many attempts through 'PHSO Customer Services', the PHSO has refused to investigate my objection to this “finding”. Other lay assumptions contributed to a shambles of a Report.

It is still far too easy for complainants to reveal PHSO corruption of purpose, in my opinion, and the situation appears becoming worse, with zero recourse except to share experience.

FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

 

Dear C Rock,

 

Thank you for your request for information regarding Trust Policy:
Interpretation of HM Coroner conclusions. Your request was received on
19/11/2018 and I am dealing with it under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

You will receive the information requested within 20 working days unless
the Trust does not hold the information or there is a reason for it to be
withheld. I will write to you in any event.

 

Accessibility requirements: If you have any requirements regarding the
format any information should be supplied in, e.g. the language to be
used, audio, large print, verbal explanation and so on, then please let me
know.

 

If you have any queries or concerns then please do not hesitate to contact
me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

 

Further information about your rights is also available from the
Information Commissioner at: Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe
House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or
01625 54 57 45 or [1]www.ico.gov.uk

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Trust FOI Officer

Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust

50 Summer Hill Road

Birmingham

B1 3RB

Tel: 0121 301 1370

e-mail: [2][Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust request email]

website: [3]www.bsmhft.nhs.uk

 

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST),

It may help you if I provide a copy of your response to the PHSO which gave outright lie. In fact two lies, the first of which I question in this approach for FOI. Please state, and I can publish it.

I ask with great concern since the PHSO refused to say why he had bent to BSMHFT CEO's demand to change the outcome of their investigation, it stands as paramount evidence of corruption in PHSO 'behind closed doors' operations, in a serious claim of medical negligence extended into the current leadership.

Yours sincerely,

C Rock

FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

1 Attachment

Dear C Rock,

 

Thank you for your request for information received on the 19/11/18.

 

We have considered your request and can provide the following information
in the document attached.

 

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
request and wish to request a review of our decision, you should write to
the Freedom of Information Officer, BSMHFT, 50 Summer Hill Road,
Birmingham, B1 3RB, or e-mail [1][Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust request email]

 

If you are not content with the outcome of your review, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the
ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints
procedure provided by our trust. The Information Commissioner can be
contacted at:

 

Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45 or
[2]www.ico.gov.uk

 

We are always interested in improving our services. To give us feedback
regarding your experience with the Freedom of information office, please
visit:
[3]http://www.bsmhft.nhs.uk/about-us/inform...

 

Yours sincerely

 

Trust FOI Officer

e-mail: [4][Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust request email]

Direct Dial: 0121 301 1370

 

show quoted sections

RE BSMHFT INTERPRETATION OF HM CORONER CONCLUSIONS

Dear FOI Officer (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST),

You said you have a copy of communications between [the Trust] and the PHSO to which I refer.

I Quote a particularly offensive and revealing part of those communications which stated:

"...Mr Rock... was wrong about .. his son's [death]..."

This shows utter contempt and intention to to divert proper investigation, by a Professional in your employ.

You confirmed that in the absence of Policy to do so, statements given by BSMHFT to the PHSO in this instance were not Trust consensus and it appears now that they were deliberate acts of persons operating as individuals to divert the course of investigation away from Prime involvement or as Accessory - i.e. to freely reinterpret facts as they wished in their own lay opinion of Coroner's thoughts and written outcome.

I will be looking for BSMHFT to withdraw all false 'evidence' found including other potential lies I may yet bring to light. I will expect that BSMHFT will apply its Disciplinary Policy to those concerned in the submission and agreement of false information in a case of negligent care with resultant avoidable death. I will enquire about this directly, copied to WM Police.

Withdrawal will need reasons and apologies, and, of course, re-examination in the light of other deceptions in related Trust departments with all concerned. That is my reasonable expectation of a Public Service.

The PHSO Outcome of Jan 2016 has already been rejected, and yourselves and the PHSO R Behrens have been made aware of this. You have, together, kept this complaint open, harmfully and unresolved for ten years. That is NOT my opinion.

Yours sincerely,

C Rock

C Rock left an annotation ()

On 1st October 2015, an Associate Specialist in Psychiatry, Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Trust wrote to the PHSO:

"Mr. Rock’s beliefs about how Nicholas died appear to be inconsistent with the coroner’s later verdict."

This outrageous expression of half remembered opinion was supported by more succinct lies on the subject.

In an attempt to confuse the PHSO in course of a 3rd attempt investigation regarding why improper care and intimidation was used on my son, who afterwards died by his own means and without proper care in NHS policy and admitted by other Trust workers kept out of the investigation.

I discovered this too late for R Behrens dismissal of my case again (despite a promise to PACAC to hang fire with any outcomes which required clinical advice since the Court outcome in criticism of PHSO methods).

I have no idea what 'later verdict' the Trust was referring to because the only verdict was Narrative of the event, and not Accidental Death as the Trust now give their own opinion on, seven years after my sons self-harm, evidenced by the tragic messages he left for parents and Police.

Against stated PHSO policy, this series of lies given as so-called 'evidence' by the NHS Trust was not revealed to me. Any intelligent comparison with the Coroner's verdict would have proved the Trust was lying again. Previous evidence of lying had been conveniently 'forgotten' or ruled out of scope (i.e. out of scope of PHSO intelligence to query).

This is very relevant given the uncertain status of the writer of this deceit. I am currently waiting for a reply from the Trust's Chairman Sue Davis, to discuss this and other potential crimes committed during her Chairmanship.

Dear FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST),

Questions
FOI Questions:

a. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to regard HM Coroners’ narrative conclusions synonymous with Accidental Death?

There is no such policy

b. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to reinterpret Coroner’s conclusions with added opinions of what the Coroner was thinking?

There is no such policy

I therefore claim that the persons/s making inappropriate claims made these outside HM Coroners decision and direction, illegally and unfettered by BSMHFT policy. I believe comments were made with careless and prejudicial intent, and personal harm was caused. Appropriate action may need to be taken to address this misdemeanour and misconduct.

Review is hereby requested.

Yours sincerely,

C Rock

EMES, Nicola (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

Dear C Rock,

 

Thank you for your request for us to review our attached response received
15/1/2019. I am dealing with this request under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

 

We aim to notify you of the outcome of the review within 20 working days.
At this point we will again highlight your rights if you are not content
with the outcome or are unhappy with the service you have received.

 

Further information about your rights is also available from the
Information Commissioner at: Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe
House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or
01625 54 57 45 or [1]www.ico.org.uk 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Trust FOI Officer

Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust

50 Summer Hill Road

Birmingham

B1 3RB

Tel: 0121 301 1370

e-mail: [2][email address

website: [3]www.bsmhft.nhs.uk

 

show quoted sections

EMES, Nicola (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

EMES, Nicola (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST) would like to recall the message, "Appeal FOI800".

show quoted sections

FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

Dear C Rock,

 

Thank you for your request for us to review our attached response received
15/1/2019. I am dealing with this request under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

 

We aim to notify you of the outcome of the review within 20 working days.
At this point we will again highlight your rights if you are not content
with the outcome or are unhappy with the service you have received.

 

Further information about your rights is also available from the
Information Commissioner at: Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe
House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or
01625 54 57 45 or [1]www.ico.org.uk 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Trust FOI Officer

Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust

50 Summer Hill Road

Birmingham

B1 3RB

Tel: 0121 301 1370

e-mail: [2][email address

website: [3]www.bsmhft.nhs.uk

 

show quoted sections

Here is the link to the request:

https://www
.whatdotheyknow.com/request/trust_policy_interpretation_of_h#outgoing-837620

FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST), Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

Dear Mr Rock,

I am writing with regard to your email which was received on 15 January 2019 relating to your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FoI Act).

Our response has been independently reviewed by John Travers, who is currently acting as senior communications and marketing manager, who has confirmed that, as our original response indicated, the policies to which you refer do not exist.

We would advise that while a requestor has the right to request an internal review into a decision not to provide information, reviews under the FOI Act cannot address the questions of ‘misdemeanour and misconduct’ that you mention in your email, unless such matters relate to actions governed by the FOI Act. These include:

• a disagreement regarding our interpretation of your request;
• a concern that we hold more information than we have disclosed; or
• a concern regarding the handling of your request and any resulting delay.

If you do retain concerns about the conduct of the Trust or its employees then I would encourage you to raise those directly with our Customer Relations and Complaints Department.

Details for how to do so can be found on our website at https://www.bsmhft.nhs.uk/service-user-a...

If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to request a review of our decision, you should write to the Freedom of Information Officer, BSMHFT, 50 Summer Hill Road, Birmingham, B1 3RB, or e-mail [Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust request email].

If you are not content with the outcome of your review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by our trust.

The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner's Office Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45 or www.ico.gov.uk

We are always interested in improving our services. To give us feedback regarding your experience with the Freedom of information office, please visit:

http://www.bsmhft.nhs.uk/about-us/inform...

Yours sincerely,

Trust FOI Officer
Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust
50 Summer Hill Road
Birmingham
B1 3RB
Tel: 0121 301 1370
e-mail: [Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust request email]
website: www.bsmhft.nhs.uk

show quoted sections

Dear FOIOffice (BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL MENTAL HEALTH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST),

Thank you for your review on this critical matter. Your review has had opportunity to consider, in this respect:

a. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to regard HM Coroners’ narrative conclusions synonymous with Accidental Death?

"There is no such policy"

b. Will the Trust please indicate when it became policy to reinterpret Coroner’s conclusions with added opinions of what the Coroner was thinking?

"There is no such policy"

I therefore claim that the persons/s in Trust service at your Lyndon Centre Clinic was making claims outside HM Coroners decision and direction, illegally and under no such BSMHFT policy.

It now appears that comments were made with careless but deliberate intent, and personal harm was caused in that intent.

Appropriate action may need to be taken to address this misdemeanour and misconduct. You may communicate what action is to be taken if you wish. I am seeking legal advice on claims made since Trusts previous admissions and legal settlement and despite this went on to show and actively use the same prejudice in a PHSO investigation which eventually could not be resolved for those exact reasons.

I noted that the PHSO report was a collaborative closure with the Trust only. I will show evidence of this. The case remains unresolved.

This new evidence shows that BSMHFT CEO bartered and then agreed with the colluded PHSO report. I did not and I have made that clear since issue date Jan 2016. The matter has caused unquestioned physical sickness and harm.

Not BSMHFT, Bernays and Whitehouse Medical Partnership, nor PHSO has shown corporate interest or care in harm caused and maintained for 10 years.

I sincerely hope that Government, CQC, NHSE and Patients Association, etc. are taking note of this insidious state of affairs.

Thank you for providing more negative evidence.

Yours C N Rock