I put a Freedom Of Information request (FOI) into the ICB (Integrated Care Board) and LA (Local Authority) about a month ago, for the legal costs against Rohan from Nov 2023 when Beaumont went into liquidation. I received the FOIs over the last few days, and I think it is important to share these with you.
Beaumont’s sister company came in and agreed to move all complex care packages including Rohan’s over for the same cost as Beaumont, with the same team providing seamless transition and continuity of care. The LA/ICB flatly refused. We offered two other companies on 3rd Nov that were currently being used by our LA/ ICB, and they again refused.
The LA and ICB worked together to attempt to destabilise Rohan’s care, their first action being their attempting to put an agency in that cannot take sponsorships – does this sound familiar? When that failed, they then attempted to take us to Court of Protection on 8th Nov for the court to decide where Rohan lives. The LA/ICB favoured option was a nursing home costing £484k/yr; failing that, Addenbrookes, while an assessment was done to put him into the same nursing home. It was more expensive than his package at home and it was totally inappropriate for Rohan – it would have been life threatening for him. Thankfully, our solicitor got in first with Judicial Review (JR). We fought day and night, receiving threats, sham stories and long silences from the SC team and solicitors who should have been supporting us.
The LA/ICB were claiming to have never heard of one of the companies we had proposed. A friend provided a legal statement saying her child, the same age as Rohan and on the same SC team, was provided care by them. It was only when we evidenced this, proving they were discriminating against us, that they put his package on to framework again. The package received 14 tenders overnight. They chose the two cheapest to send to us, neither of which were suitable for continuity of care. We applied for emergency JR and the LA sent in a third company (our current provider) on 15th Nov and we accepted while on the steps of the court. This was all so unnecessary.
Over three weeks in November 2023 we spent £23.2k from long-term savings. I had to cancel workshops in Sweden with 5 days’ notice to my client – at cost to both of us. Rohan received £11.7k in legal aid once in the JR process. The LA/ICB spent £67k. None of these costs account for SWs, managers or our time and lost income. The stress, sleepless nights and heartache are impossible to put a value on. This was all spent because the LA/ICB were determined to take Rohan from his loving home.
Just think, if they had taken Beaumont’s sister company and agreed to move Rohan’s package over for the same cost as Beaumont, with the same team providing seamless transition and continuity of care, they would have saved us a collective £102k+ over a 3 week period on JUST ON LAWYERS FEES. The LA/ICB’s only defence was that this company was not on framework, however many other companies, including this one, were commissioned at greater cost off framework. My economy-savvy mind fails to understand this rationale!
Reading the legal paperwork after the event, the ICB/LA framed themselves as heroes for saving the day after Rohan’s mother was responsible for destabilising his care. The very scary fact is the courts believe what they say without question, so they continue to fabricate stories and evidence which go entirely unquestioned.
I am not sure how they justified their financial decision. Do they even have to justify what they spent? And if so, to whom? We are seeing the same pattern of events again, our costs and their costs are mounting again, and YOU as a taxpayer are paying to destabilise Rohan’s care again!
We need to stop this normalised behaviour.
