My mum was in an EMI 'care' home for about 12 months until 28th November 2005. On the evening of that day my sister received a telephone call from a member of staff at the home to say that my mum had had a fall and could not weight bear on one of her legs. The 'care' assistant asked my sister if she could go to the home and take my mum either to a local walk in centre or to hospital. My sister asked how she would manage to get my mum in the car if she could not walk and they said they had a wheelchair that could be used to transfer her to the car!
My sister phoned me and asked me to go to the home with her. We went there immediately and when we arrived found my mum sitting on a chair in the hall in a great deal of pain. I asked why an ambulance had not been called and was told this was because they were short staffed and would not have been able to spare a member of staff to accompany my mum to the hospital. I asked what difference this made and was told that paramedics would not take unaccompanied patients. I told them to call an ambulance and they did this. When the ambulance arrived I accompanied my mother to hospital and my sister followed in her car. The paramedics told me very quickly that they suspected a broken hip and this was later confirmed in the hospital. I asked the paramedics if they would have taken my mother if she was unaccompanied and they replied that of course they would - they frequently had to pick up unaccompanied patients in the street, some of whom were unconscious and had no id on them!
My mum had a hip replacement operation the following day. A week later someone from the home phoned my sister to say that they had been asked to assess my mum to see if it was possible for her to be discharged back to the home. Later that day my sister received another telephone call to say that it had been decided that the home could no longer meet my mother's needs so could her belongings be collected as soon as possible! We did not do this as we were unhappy with the speed of the decision and they way it had been communicated to us. We felt it was too soon to say that my mum would not be mobile enough to go back to the home. Later that week they phoned again and my sister told them she would not be collecting the belongings as we were unhappy with the decision. Later that night the owner of the home phoned to say that she had reconsidered the decision and my mum was still officially a resident.
Several weeks later my mum was again assessed to see if she could go back to the home and again they said they could not take her as they thought she needed nursing care. We did not fight the decision this time, we had decided we didn't want her to go back there anyway.
I later made a complaint to the CSCI about the fact that an ambulance had not been called when my mother first fell, about the fact that she was moved from the position in which she fell and about the way in which the home tried to 'evict' her without going through the correct procedures as outlined in our contract. The CSCI initially passed the complaint to the home to deal with directly. The owner of the home sent her reply to my sister, who had not made the complaint! The reply was very flimsy, evasive and either lied about things or did not answer them at all. I wrote to the CSCI to say I was unhappy with this and asking them to investigate it further. They did this and I got their final report on Friday.
The only wrong doing the home has admitted to is sending the response to my sister instead of myself. They stand by their reasons for not calling an ambulance before phoning my sister, even though the accident report states 'ambulance called, family informed', obviously attempting to insinuate that the ambulance was called first. Even though it has now come to light that the ambulance was not called until after we got there the CSCI don't make any criticism of this fact! Also, there were 3 members of staff on duty at the time, one of whom no longer works there. There were approximately 20 residents at the time. The telephone is at the end of a corridor near the back door into the garden. One member of staff is saying that she heard all of her colleague's side of the conversation and is backing up her story that my sister was never asked to drive my mum to the walk in centre or the hospital, that it was always the intention to phone an ambulance as soon as we got there. If there were only 3 members of staff at the time and there was one injured resident then why would 2 members of staff stand at the phone together to make the call!
I feel so angry and disappointed. My mum was let down firstly by the home and now by the CSCI in their accepting this web of lies from the home. Once the CSCI have completed their so called investigation then there seems to be nowhere else to go, short of legal action. If the CSCI will not look out for our most vulnerable people then what hope is there?
My sister phoned me and asked me to go to the home with her. We went there immediately and when we arrived found my mum sitting on a chair in the hall in a great deal of pain. I asked why an ambulance had not been called and was told this was because they were short staffed and would not have been able to spare a member of staff to accompany my mum to the hospital. I asked what difference this made and was told that paramedics would not take unaccompanied patients. I told them to call an ambulance and they did this. When the ambulance arrived I accompanied my mother to hospital and my sister followed in her car. The paramedics told me very quickly that they suspected a broken hip and this was later confirmed in the hospital. I asked the paramedics if they would have taken my mother if she was unaccompanied and they replied that of course they would - they frequently had to pick up unaccompanied patients in the street, some of whom were unconscious and had no id on them!
My mum had a hip replacement operation the following day. A week later someone from the home phoned my sister to say that they had been asked to assess my mum to see if it was possible for her to be discharged back to the home. Later that day my sister received another telephone call to say that it had been decided that the home could no longer meet my mother's needs so could her belongings be collected as soon as possible! We did not do this as we were unhappy with the speed of the decision and they way it had been communicated to us. We felt it was too soon to say that my mum would not be mobile enough to go back to the home. Later that week they phoned again and my sister told them she would not be collecting the belongings as we were unhappy with the decision. Later that night the owner of the home phoned to say that she had reconsidered the decision and my mum was still officially a resident.
Several weeks later my mum was again assessed to see if she could go back to the home and again they said they could not take her as they thought she needed nursing care. We did not fight the decision this time, we had decided we didn't want her to go back there anyway.
I later made a complaint to the CSCI about the fact that an ambulance had not been called when my mother first fell, about the fact that she was moved from the position in which she fell and about the way in which the home tried to 'evict' her without going through the correct procedures as outlined in our contract. The CSCI initially passed the complaint to the home to deal with directly. The owner of the home sent her reply to my sister, who had not made the complaint! The reply was very flimsy, evasive and either lied about things or did not answer them at all. I wrote to the CSCI to say I was unhappy with this and asking them to investigate it further. They did this and I got their final report on Friday.
The only wrong doing the home has admitted to is sending the response to my sister instead of myself. They stand by their reasons for not calling an ambulance before phoning my sister, even though the accident report states 'ambulance called, family informed', obviously attempting to insinuate that the ambulance was called first. Even though it has now come to light that the ambulance was not called until after we got there the CSCI don't make any criticism of this fact! Also, there were 3 members of staff on duty at the time, one of whom no longer works there. There were approximately 20 residents at the time. The telephone is at the end of a corridor near the back door into the garden. One member of staff is saying that she heard all of her colleague's side of the conversation and is backing up her story that my sister was never asked to drive my mum to the walk in centre or the hospital, that it was always the intention to phone an ambulance as soon as we got there. If there were only 3 members of staff at the time and there was one injured resident then why would 2 members of staff stand at the phone together to make the call!
I feel so angry and disappointed. My mum was let down firstly by the home and now by the CSCI in their accepting this web of lies from the home. Once the CSCI have completed their so called investigation then there seems to be nowhere else to go, short of legal action. If the CSCI will not look out for our most vulnerable people then what hope is there?
Last edited:
