ELDERHOLME NURSING HOME DISHONESTY

A) INTRODUCTION

1) My wife Doreen is in a state of low awareness following an emergency brain operation in 1999. I am
appointed as her Deputy by the Court of Protection. You can read Doreen’s Story at
www.scribd.com/doc/230217688/Doreen-s-Story The NHS decided on continuing health care at Elderholme
Nursing Home and Doreen moved there in October 2000. I have been fully involved in caring for her after training
by the NHS in hospital. My involvement in my wife’s care created no real problems until a new matron arrived in
2008. The new matron considered that her judgement over ruled the advice from the specialist services.
Elderholme’s new matron asked my wife’s GP to tell me to restrict that involvement. In order to obtain her aim she
held a meeting at which she made false statements. During this meeting the GP realised that he had been given
incorrect information and refused her request. He confirms that the matron became aggressive towards me.

B) My Complaint to Elderholme and the NMC

1) I made a formal complaint to the nursing home about the matron’s lack of integrity. I was given no meaningful
help to resolve matters. I asked my wife’s MP to advocate and she made a complaint to the Nursing and Midwifery
Council (NMC). The complaint was not about the standard of care but related to Elderholme’s lack of integrity. The
NMC asked Elderholme if they had any concerns about the matron and they, of course, said none at all and
categorically refuted everything. The NMC declined to take the matter forward. The matron made a complaint to
her employers that she felt victimised by my actions and Elderholme evicted my wife from her home of eleven
years just before Christmas 2011.

2) Afterwards I asked the NHS and Social Services to investigate the circumstances of the eviction and my wife’s
GP made a statement in evidence. The NHS and DASS concluded that neither party had followed their own
policies and guidelines to rectify the failure by Elderholme to meet expected standards of care. Both apologised and
I accepted their apologies and considered the matter closed.
Read the NHS Clinical Investigation Report at www.scribd.com/doc/226717371/NHS-Clinical-Report and the
Final Report at www.scribd.com/doc/226717601/NHS-CCG-Final-Report and the Social Services Report at
www.scribd.com/doc/226717785/DASS-Report-Elderholme-Evict-Doreen-Beddows

C) Elderholme’s Complaint to the NHS CCG and their Evidence

1) In 2015, over twelve months after the Final Report was completed and published, Elderholme disputed the
findings, and asked the NHS to withdraw the Reports claiming that they had not been involved prior to publication,
and I had published them on the internet. They now produced “new evidence”. This was the first time that they had
put anything in writing. They wrote: Elderholme seeks: withdrawl of the report and an acknowledgment that
damage has been done to the reputation of Elderholme and our matron manager and suitable recompense for that
damage.” They persuaded the NHS-CCG to withdraw the reports under threat of a demand for compensation.

2) I repeatedly asked the CCG to see this “new evidence” but was told that Elderholme would not agree to my
seeing it. I applied to the CCG under the Freedom of Information Act but they still declined. I applied to the
Commissioner of the FOI office. The CCG eventually complied with FOI and sent me Elderholme’s written
“evidence”.The Commissioner said that I was free to publish any of this documentation on the internet or anywhere
else as it concerned both me and my wife. This decision took nearly another year.

3) I asked the Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman to decide that the CCG could not retract an NHS
Independent Report well over a year after it was published. Based on Elderholme’s new evidence, which at the time
I had not seen, the Ombudsman had found in favour of the CCG. I asked for a review of their decision and after
another year they said that as new evidence had appeared the CCG could retract.

4) I do not accept the retraction of Independent Investigation Reports by the CCG. Elderholme wrote: Regrettably
the report published by the CCG is unbalanced, unchecked ,full of inaccuracies, errors of fact, and opinions on
procedure contrary to accepted medical practice and unsupported by guidelines. It would appear that Elderholme
management are completely unaware of NHS procedure and accepted guidelines. They wrote:The following
information will clearly demonstrate that the CCG report was inaccurate, misleading and by virtue of its
premature publication, significant damage has been inflicted improperly to Elderholme Nursing Home and to our
matron manager.The matron writes “I pride myself on my integrity and honesty and find it shameful that Dr has
suggested I lied to him” . People can make their own judgement from the following comparison of statements
as to who is telling the truth and whether “ the potential damage” to Elderholme’s reputation emanates from
the GP or the home itself. Inaccurate comments by Elderholme are shown in red.
1
5) Elderholme’s evidence was no more than statements from the matron and their ceo, that contradicts the NHS own
records. There was no clinical documentation provided to support their statements. In fact much of it provides
evidence of Elderholme’s lack of integrity. The alphabetical headings here relate to the same as in the full
explanation of all of the statements seen at www.scribd.com/doc/343771600/Statements-Comparisons-2017

E) GPs Statement
When we arrived at Elderholme the matron asked if I would change my wife’s GP from Bebington Practice to
Willaston Practice as it was nearer and they had many patients at the Home. I agreed. He was not my own GP and I
seldom met him because he made morning visits before I arrived. The matron told him various unsubstantiated
complaints about me. She then called me to a meeting at which the GP was speaking on behalf of Elderholme when
he repeated the matron’s accusations. He repeated to me what the matron had told him. He was Elderholme’s
“witness” at the meeting, not mine. A doctor whom Elderholme recommended and hardly knows me, is not going to
write a statement that is “inaccurate and misleading”. The matron claims to have witness statements from other
staff who will verify her accusations. She forgets that the other nurses had left the room BEFORE I was called in.
When I stated my explanations to these complaints, Elderholme wrote that I was “accusing” the matron and she
categorically repudiated them all. For the first time since 2009 Elderholme have put in writing their explanations.
Although they persuaded the NHS that everyone else was lying except themselves, the following comparison of
statements proves that the complaint made to the NMC should have been upheld and the reasons given by
Elderholme for the eviction were bogus and not based on fact.

F) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 1st example of dishonesty – The Falsified Eviction Letter

A possible reason for Elderholme not wanting me to see the “evidence” was that it contained a doctored document
which showed duplicity on the part of Elderholme. In 2011 they had written a letter of eviction in which my
complaints were described by Elderholme as “accusations against their matron” which she “categorically refuted.”
At the bottom of the letter they had listed that carbon copies had been sent to the MP, Wirral Social Services,
Safeguarding, CQC, the GP, DASS Complaints, the NMC, the NHS-CHC. and Merseyside Police. The copy now
produced in their evidence shows that Elderholme did not send these people true carbon copies – instead they had
added additional paragraphs which were not in the letter sent to me. This subterfuge could only have been because
they did not want me to know what they written. Both letters can be seen at
www.scribd.com/doc/222292287/Elderholme-Eviction-Letter

G) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 2nd Example of dishonesty - Falsified “ threats of violence”

They wrote in the false copy that one of the reasons for evicting my wife was “His threat of violence to his wife
witnessed by our visiting physiotherapist”. The minutes of the Safeguard Meeting with Social Services shows that
the matron told them that I “ had made a comment about a shotgun saying that he would kill himself and his
wife” .It would be very difficult to shoot yourself with a shotgun! There is no doubt that this false statement
influenced Safeguarding into agreeing the eviction without full investigation. I have never threatened my wife
with violence. Doreen had an eye infection which caused her to have her eyes closed for ten days.Two weeks after
she had fully recovered, Heather Ward made a referral to Safeguarding that “Deteriorating health has triggered
anxiety/distress for this lady’s husband. Mr Beddows has expressed suicidal thoughts to a care worker that he
would harm himself and thoughts of ending his wife’s life. Relationships between Mr Beddows and staff are
strained due to his demanding nature. They felt that this would be further exacerbated were he to know of this
referral. Category of abuse: Physical potential if Mr Beddows becomes increasingly distressed about his wife’s
condition”. I had never threatened my wife. There was no “strained relationship” with staff . My wife had fully
recovered from the eye problem TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE REFERRAL WAS MADE. I was never told about
this referral and Safeguarding did nothing about it until they used it as a reason for agreeing to the eviction nearly
one year later.

I) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 4th Example of dishonesty - Vexatious Complainant

Elderholme claimed that I was a vexatious complainant over many years. They stated that they had “addressed
each of the above matters with the matron and she had categorically refuted them all.” When the NHS asked
Elderholme for their investigation files, all that Elderholme could produce was what they called a “timeline” of my
“complaints”. It lists fifteen copies of my correspondence after the matron arrived, only one of them received a
reply. In the Social Services Inspection Report of February 2011 the matron claimed that they had only five
complaints from all sources between August 2008 and February 2011.They list the dates and log numbers 1 to 5.
None of those dates correspond to any of the complaints now detailed in their “timeline”. Either the timeline is
incorrect or Elderholme gave the Social Care inspectors incorrect information. The CQC Inspection Report of
October 2011 page 18 states: “The manager showed us records of six written complaints that she has dealt with
since taking up post. None of them were major incidents and all were fully recorded.” Was the manager telling the
2
truth when she told the CQC Inspector she had only six complaints from everyone at the Home or was she telling
the truth when she told the NHS that I alone had made fifteen written complaints? You can see the full details of
these “complaints” at: www.scribd.com/document/343138119/Elderholme-s-TIMELINE-of-Complaints

J) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 5th Example of Dishonesty - Mr Beddows’ Unreasonable Demands

In their statements Elderholme’s chief executive officer claims that From the outset Mr Beddows was a demanding
relative whose requirements were beyond what a reasonable person would consider fair and normal. Elderholme
list these “unreasonable demands” as being He insists carers and registered nurses are present. (It is in the NHS
Review of the care plan)We have no record that Mrs Beddows was identified as requiring hourly monitoring. (It is
in the NHS Review of the care plan)There is no mention in nursing discharge needs that a qualified nurse is
required to supervise transfers or bathing (It is in the NHS Review of the care plan). The care plan required by
Mr Beddows was not approved by a consultant or external professional. (It was approved and reviewed annually by
the NHS Physical and Sensory Disability Review Officer) The only care I wanted was that set out in the new care
plan written by Elderholme themselves and agreed with the NHS in their annual clinical reviews which can be
seen at www.scribd.com/document/390650323/Hourly-Checks-Evidence
And www.scribd.com/document/390650412/NHS-Annual-Reviews0002

K) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 6th Example of Dishonesty - Mr Beddows interference in care judgements

The false copy letter also gave a reason for the eviction as “his continuing interference in care judgements made by
qualified nurses to the detriment and safety of the resident and the consequential reflection on the professional
integrity of Elderholme. The following two examples illustrate that it was Elderholme themselves who interfered in
the clinical judgements of NHS specialist services:

1) The NHS Continence Service: In October 2008 Doreen’s Urological Consultant, Mr Kutarski, confirmed the
supra pubic as the best option for Doreen. Elderholme disagreed and, disregarding his advice, asked the Continence
Service to remove the catheter. The specialist nurse would not do so, as she considered it to be in my wife’s best
interests.
GP: The Continence Nurse wrote a report to me following her visit which confirms that her treatment plan was
based on Mrs Beddows best interests
Matron: GP point is inaccurate and misleading. In our opinion she did not need to be catheterised. We would
appreciate sight of the report which GP says he has from the continence nurse stating that this catheterisation was
in Mrs Beddows best interest. It was Mr. Beddows who wanted her to remain catheterised.
LB: In the NHS letter of 11 th July 2011, the Head of the Continence Service has confirmed that Elderholme asked
them to remove the catheter because they were having difficulty changing it. (Doc 1)
NHS Continence Nurse Report 26th March 2009: I discussed with Mrs (sic) Beddows performing the re-
catheterisation-myself and he was in agreement that this would be in Doreen' s best interests (Doc 4) (for
documents see www.scribd.com/document/251161043/Documentary-Evidence

2 )The NHS Dietetic and Nutrition Service: GP: HW, matron of Elderholme, informed me that the dietician had
made complaints that Mr Beddows was interfering in the care of his wife. From the NHS letter dated 11 th July 2011
it is confirmed that Elderholme informed the Dietetics department that Mrs Beddows was passing too much urine.
Matron: DR.M. statement is inaccurate and misleading. . I can state that we never had or raised a concern that
Mrs Beddows was passing too much urine.
NHS Head of Nutrition & Dietetic Service, in their letter dated 11 th July 2011:“The records show that
Elderhome’s RGN contacted the Service on 3rd March 2009 concerned about Mrs Beddows’ fluid intake…. the
RGN felt this was too much as there was a high urine output… This letter can be seen at Doc 1
LB: The matron’s statement that Elderholme never had or raised a concern that my wife was passing too much urine
is therefore untrue.

M) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 8 th Example of dishonesty – not open and honest about Reason for
Elderholme Meeting with my wife’s GP 12 th May 2009: GP : I can confirm HW arranged a meeting with me and
Len Beddows to discuss Doreen Beddows’ care and it was only during the meeting that I realised that Len Beddows
had been given no prior warning of the meeting but that it had simply been arranged with me at a time when Len
was likely to be visiting his wife.
Matron: GP is inaccurate and misleading. GP was asked to attend a meeting at Elderholme by myself to discuss
the care of Doreen Mr Beddows was asked to the nurses’ office and of course was not previously aware of the
nature of the conversation that followed.
LB: The GP had not asked to see me about my wife’s diet. Why was the matron not open and honest with me as
required under the NMC code of conduct?

3
O) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 10th Example of dishonesty – Permission to contact GP
GP Statement: HW informed me that Mr Beddows had instructed her that his permission was required before they
could contact me and that Mr Beddows insisted on being present on my visits
Matron: GP is inaccurate and misleading. I never made the statement to GP that Mr Beddows’ permission was
required before staff could contact the GP.
LB: I have never given any such instructions. The matron writes that “I never made that statement”. The matron
made this comment to the GP in front of me at a meeting on 12 th May 2009. (doc 2) It was the reason the GP agreed
to the meeting.

P) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 11th Example of Dishonesty - Clinicians’ Complaints Q) 12th Example of

dishonesty – Clinicians’ Visits
Matron: The many specialist nurses that visited Mrs Beddows often made verbal complaints to Elderholme staff
about Mr Beddows’ behaviour/demands etc. I can confirm that long before I started at Elderholme Mr Beddows
instructed staff that he wished to be present when any visiting health professional was treating his wife, including
his GP.
LB: I have never requested to be present for all interventions and visiting professionals. Between May 2006 and
December 2011 there were 115 visits by external clinicians and I was present on only 29 of those. Those twenty
nine visits at which I was present were made by only eleven different clinicians. As so few clinicians are involved,
and I have their names and the Elderholme staff present, and the dates, if there had been complaints about me, it
would be an easy matter for Elderholme’s “three or more RGNs” to be specific about who complained and what
about. The NHS Head of the Dietetic Service and the Head of the Continence Service, the GP and the NHS
CHC Manager have since confirmed in writing that none of their staff had made any complaints about me.
See NHS letter 11th July 2011. doc 1 can be seen at www.scribd.com/document/251161043/Documentary-Evidence

R) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: Care Plan failing – Always providing three staff for transfers
GP: HW informed me that Mr Beddows had been insisting on three staff to transfer his wife.
Matron: GP is inaccurate and misleading. Mrs.Beddows has since admission to Elderholme in 2000 has had 3
staff to transfer her as instructed by Wirral Neuro Rehabilitation Centre. At no point did I “complain” to Dr. about
this.
The matron made this comment to the GP in front of me at a meeting on 12 th May 2009. (doc 2) .Dates when only
there are only two signatures on the care sheet, so it is plainly evident that Elderholme did NOT always provide
three staff when I was not there. 2008 January 2nd 6pm, 13th 2pm and 6pm, 21st 2pm and 6pm, 24th 6pm, 27th 9am
and 6pm, 28th 2pm, 30th 2pm,3 1st 2pm 2009 February 4th 2pm and 6pm, 14th 6pm, 15th 2pm, 17th 9am, 21st 2pm, 24th
9am: 2010 February 3rd,10th,18th24th,26th27th and March 2 and 15 occasions in June and up to 5th July 2010

S ) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: Care Plan Failing - Checks to be made hourly

GP: HW complained to me that Mr Beddows was insisting on his wife being checked every hour. Mr Beddows said
that it was in the care plan but was not always done
Matron: GP is incomplete, inaccurate and therefore misleading. I spoke to GP about Mr Beddows’ insistence that
hourly checks be carried out.no one could give me a valid reason why these documented checks had to recommence
and why they were required in the first place.If at any point during her stay GP, Dr.P. (consultant) or the CHC team
had given a valid reason why hourly documented checks were needed, we would have of course completed them.
LB: The NHS Annual Review Reports for 2008/9 and 2010 taken from the care plan detail the valid reasons:
“ Check hourly to assess for pain, bypassing and correct head positioning, check skin integrity ”.During their
annual review CHC copied the care plan and agreed it with Elderholme, in 2008, 2009 and 2010. The matron only
had to read the care plan for an explanation as to why the checks were required. The matron is therefore
incorrect when she states that no one could give her a valid reason for checks.

T) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 13th Example of dishonesty – Checking four times per 24 hours
GP: I have seen the letter from Elderholme written sometime after the meeting in which they suggest that checking
Mrs Beddows when giving her medication four times per 24 hrs. is considered regular enough. In my opinion a
patient in Mrs. Beddows’ condition in a bed with detachable side rails is at risk and checking four times per 24
hrs. is insufficient. In March 2011 I saw severe bruising to Mrs. Beddows’ foot which was unexplained by staff but
was consistent with having been trapped in the side rails of the bed.
Matron: GP states that he has seen a letter from Elderholme which suggests we considered 4 checks in a 24 hour
period is sufficient. Never has this suggestion been made and is refuted by all qualified staff. We find what GP has
written baffling and totally untrue. May we see the letter that we have purportedly written.

4
LB: Elderholme’s letter is dated 23 rd December 2010, so the matron’s statement is incorrect. See letter at
www.scribd.com/document/251161043/Documentary-Evidence doc 5

U) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: 14th Example of Dishonesty – Destroying original care plan record
The NHS approved Care Plan Seven called for safety checks to be made and recorded hourly. On 11 th June
Elderholme handed me a letter dated 10th June signed by the Director Mr Woods which stated that they did not get
paid for “additional care” . When I received their letter I told the General Manager that I only wanted the care
described in the care plan. The same afternoon on 11 th June 2010, within two days of the CHC team leader’s
confirmation of the need for hourly checks, Elderholme unilaterally removed the page which called for hourly
recorded checks and destroyed it without making any comments in the plan as to their reasons for doing so and
without consultation of everyone else concerned. The matron writes: We are quite within our rights to change the
care plan to reflect the care she required. Even if this were true, when making a change Elderholme are required to
follow National Minimum Standards, incorporated in the NHS’ own Record Keeping policies: Standard C30 states
“All entries in patients’ health records by health care professionals are dated, timed and signed, with the signature
accompanied by the name and designation of the signatory. Any alterations or additions are dated, timed and signed,
and made in such a way that the original entry can still be read. Outcome: Patients are assured of appropriately
completed health records which are created, maintained and stored to standards which meet legal and regulatory
compliance and professional practice recommendations”. Furthermore under the NMC code of conduct 44 a nurse
must not tamper with original records in any way. By removing the original page and destroying it Elderholme
altered the care plan without following the correct procedures.

V) Elderholme’s “Evidence”: Matron’s Aggression

GP : I was unhappy with the meeting as Heather addressed Len in a very aggressive manner stopped him from
completing his sentences on a number of occasions and generally spoke down to him.
Matron:Obviously the meeting did not go well as Mr Beddows was extremely angry and kept interrupting GP and
myself and would not listen. “I was not aggressive, only assertive in my manner”The above recollection of events
can be confirmed by other qualified nurses as to an accurate description of the meeting.
LB: There were NOT three other nurses present at the meeting. They had all left before I was asked in. Why did she
need to be “assertive” if she was telling the truth.

Matron: I personally have felt harassed and threatened by Mr Beddows in his attitude towards me personally.
LB: In the last twelve months my wife was at Elderholme I spoke with the matron on only three occasions, two of
which were when she came into the room of her own accord. Once she asked when Mrs Liversage’s funeral was to
take place and the other was to tell me that a dnar had been signed and was nothing to do with me. Why these
conversations would have been threatening to her is difficult to believe.

W) 15th Example of dishonesty - Issue of a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation order

GP: On 5th September 2011 I was visiting Elderholme when HW asked me to countersign a “Do Not Attempt
Resuscitation” form for Mrs.Beddows. I asked her if she had discussed the implications with Mr Beddows and when
she confirmed that she had I signed the form. Later Mr Beddows telephoned me to say that the issuing of the form
had NOT been discussed with him and I telephoned the Home and instructed them to destroy the form as I now
considered it invalid and then confirmed that discussion in writing.
Matron: GP is inaccurate and misleading. The conversation actually went as follows: I said “Dr do you think it
appropriate to resuscitate Doreen Beddows?” Dr replied at once “No”.I replied “Does a DNAR Form need
completing?”His reply at once was “Yes”. Because of Mr Beddows antagonism towards me I would not have raised
this matter with him.
LB: The matron had raised the matter with me. On 24 th August 2011,in the dining room about 3pm, the matron told
me that she was getting DNARs signed for all residents following a disagreement she had with the ambulance
service. I reminded her that I did not want such an authority signing for Doreen.
Why on earth would the matron ask the GP about DNAR for my wife when she was aware that I had objected to
one being issued.

SUMMARY
Overall Elderholme sent false letters to numerous agencies purporting to be copies of their correspondence to me.
They were not true copies. They altered the care plan without following the proper procedures and failed to provide
the care in the NHS approved care plan. They gave incorrect information to the Dietician, failed to monitor urine
when asked and made false statements to my wife’s GP that would be detrimental to her care, telling him that they
had received complaints from NHS departments when this was not true. Elderholme disregarded the advice from
these services, asked the GP to issue a DNAR knowing it was against my wishes and was aggressive towards me.