The GSCC have had another bashing from the Care Standards Tribunal (CST) in this case: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1092/ND%20Final%20Approved%20draft%20_3_.pdf
This is very similar to an earlier case where, in Wilt’s opinion, the GSCC are using the suspension procedure used by the Preliminary Proceedings Committee (PPC) to cover for delays in their investigation teams. Although the CST have not expressed in that way it is fairly obvious what message they are sending to the GSCC – get your act together.
Community Care reported on the outcome of the GSCC final hearing of its Conduct Committee here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/08/12/115083/Cocaine-user-allowed-to-remain-on-social-care-register.htm although they appear not have linked it to the CST finding (link above). Community Care appear not to report on CST hearings, or at least not routinely – here at Regulator Watch (http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/) we do.
In essence the CST finding that issuing a suspension whilst investigations were made, in this case, was perverse is supported by the GSCC Conduct Committee who issued the Registrant with a two year admonishment – a low level disposal.
So what was the miraculous change that caused the GSCC at one time to suspend the social worker and then issue an admonishment? Might it be they fucked up again at the PPC?
This social worker was represented (at the CST) by the Celtic Knot law firm based in Birmingham http://www.celticknot.org.uk/ and Allan Norman has a blog here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=Allan%20Norman&blog_id=276
And tweets here: http://twitter.com/CelticKnotTweet
We still think he needs a ‘proper’ hair cut – only joking!
Allan Norman and a former student Registrant was not so lucky in this CST appeal: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1091/sass2%20decision.pdf
This is the first time it seems that a former Registrant has complained that the GSCC did not go through the conduct process and arrive at the process – the man must be on something!
This is a most mind boggling and stupid case to bring before the CST. The arguments for bringing it presented by Norman were very carefully constructed and eloquent but nonetheless, in Wilt’s opinion, utter fucking folly.
This is a must read case – I laughed so much I fell of my chair.
Wilt
Showing posts with label Care Standards Tribunal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Care Standards Tribunal. Show all posts
Friday, 13 August 2010
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
Jacinta..............
Wilt has had the following Email:
Dear Wilt,
Having been outside of the country for some time I thought I wanted to drop a line about one of my favourite case, Jacinta Hofstetter vs GSCC. I am not sure how close you are from the CST but it seems that you have a very positive view of their work. On my side I spent, for professional reasons, a fair amount of time looking at the Jacinta Hofstetter case. I must say that when I saw the CST judgment I could not believe they produced such poor piece of work, the lack of intellectual rigour is astonishing. The person claimed that she was bullied, harassed and victim of racial insult from a manger at Brent. She moreover accused this manager of having made significant mistakes putting children at risk. Despite evidence this was never investigated either by GSCC and the CST. Not only was it not investigated but the manager was used as a witnessed, produced a statement though did not turn up at the hearing! It was proved that two witnesses lied in their statement, again no mention of this made by GSCC or the CST, only that the witnesses were credible, to lie is credible? One witnessed who conducted the investigation against Jacinta Hofstetter recognised that she had not experience in conducting disciplinary hearing, was out of her depth and was asked to build a case against the defendant instead of investigating impartially. It is in the recording of the hearing but nowhere in the GSCC final statement of the CST. Nobody complained against Jacinta Hofstetter whilst working in Brent. It is only after her suspension that people were asked to complain about her. Evidence though presented were not considered as even not quoted or disproved. Start seeing a pattern? Who would honestly believe that someone with a 15 years of career, became, in the middle of it, for around 12 month, totally and utterly incompetent, and this by coincidence just after reporting her manager for...incompetence! Despite all the GSCC efforts it was still recognised that no children were harmed or put at risk. But who cares, the point is that Jacinta Hofstetter did not go on her knees in front of the GSCC or the CST and fought for what she thought was right. Good for her, I like this! GSCC spent ~£0.5m on to make up a case against her. She obviously did not have this kind of money to spend. I could spend the night going through the details of how wrong this case was and I have no doubt in my mind it was a miscarriage of justice. However I am sure you have better things to do and even if it is not always obvious we are in a democracy and everybody can have his/her point of view.
Best regards,
Justicewillbedone.
Dear Wilt,
Having been outside of the country for some time I thought I wanted to drop a line about one of my favourite case, Jacinta Hofstetter vs GSCC. I am not sure how close you are from the CST but it seems that you have a very positive view of their work. On my side I spent, for professional reasons, a fair amount of time looking at the Jacinta Hofstetter case. I must say that when I saw the CST judgment I could not believe they produced such poor piece of work, the lack of intellectual rigour is astonishing. The person claimed that she was bullied, harassed and victim of racial insult from a manger at Brent. She moreover accused this manager of having made significant mistakes putting children at risk. Despite evidence this was never investigated either by GSCC and the CST. Not only was it not investigated but the manager was used as a witnessed, produced a statement though did not turn up at the hearing! It was proved that two witnesses lied in their statement, again no mention of this made by GSCC or the CST, only that the witnesses were credible, to lie is credible? One witnessed who conducted the investigation against Jacinta Hofstetter recognised that she had not experience in conducting disciplinary hearing, was out of her depth and was asked to build a case against the defendant instead of investigating impartially. It is in the recording of the hearing but nowhere in the GSCC final statement of the CST. Nobody complained against Jacinta Hofstetter whilst working in Brent. It is only after her suspension that people were asked to complain about her. Evidence though presented were not considered as even not quoted or disproved. Start seeing a pattern? Who would honestly believe that someone with a 15 years of career, became, in the middle of it, for around 12 month, totally and utterly incompetent, and this by coincidence just after reporting her manager for...incompetence! Despite all the GSCC efforts it was still recognised that no children were harmed or put at risk. But who cares, the point is that Jacinta Hofstetter did not go on her knees in front of the GSCC or the CST and fought for what she thought was right. Good for her, I like this! GSCC spent ~£0.5m on to make up a case against her. She obviously did not have this kind of money to spend. I could spend the night going through the details of how wrong this case was and I have no doubt in my mind it was a miscarriage of justice. However I am sure you have better things to do and even if it is not always obvious we are in a democracy and everybody can have his/her point of view.
Best regards,
Justicewillbedone.
Friday, 9 April 2010
Files gathering dust...................
There are two new judgements published by the Care Standards Tribunal (CST) and three new cases listed by the GSCC for April.
Of the two CSCT http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/ cases it includes that of Jacinta Hofstetter who is something of a notable GSCC case as can be illustrated in the very complex, detailed and rather lengthy judgement published by the CST: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1074
It is worth reading and although both Wilt and others are highly critical of the GSCC it does make it clear that the regulator did on this occasion not only get it right but bend over backwards to do so – the CST are usually spot-on.
Supporters of Jacinta have posted previously their concerns about her treatment at the hands of Brent Council and in particular the GSCC.
Read, and make up your own minds.
In the second CST case it is Jayne Sedgewick v The Care Council For Wales (CCW). She is suspended primarily for her activities as a foster parent although it is her social work role that is pending a judgement by a full Conduct Hearing by the CCW.
Presently she is suspended from the social care register and Sedgewick has appealed against this. She has already had her registration removed as a foster parent and no longer employed. The criminal proceedings against her were however dropped.
Here is an extract from the judgement:
“Mrs Sedgewick is a registered social worker and also a foster carer working for an independent agency. In 2006 she and her husband fostered a 15 year old girl (A). Whilst in their care A entered into a relationship with an older man aged 19. It is alleged that Mrs Sedgewick knew about this and indeed allowed the boy to sleep with A at their house. She did not discuss this relationship with the childs social worker nor with her own support worker. As a result of this relationship A became pregnant. It is further alleged that on an occasion in March 2006 Mrs Sedgewick and A went on a shopping trip to Telford and stayed overnight in a Hotel. During the course of the evening it is alleged that Mrs Sedgewicke became drunk, allowed A to drink, became involved with a group of men, claimed A was her stepdaughter and aged 18 and allowed her to go to one of the men’s room where sexual activity took place. It is further alleged that when this matter came out she attempted to influence the man involved to lie about the evening.”
These of course are allegations at present time but if they prove to be correct then she must be listed as about the most dangerous of social workers (and former foster carer) in the UK. Dork would not be sufficiently expletive or descriptive – total fucking idiot comes close to it but I think I will settle on fucking twat.
Why is this woman still on the Register? Again the ever sensible CST give a clue:
“It appears to us given the gravity of the allegations and the matters we have outlined above that continued suspension is appropriate and we therefore dismiss the appeal. We have had cause previously to raise questions about the delay in bringing cases to hearing and the concomitant length of suspensions imposed by the Care Councils. In this case the effect of delay is extreme in that pending a final determination Mrs Sedgewick is actually free to work as a social worker from 31 March as the two year maximum period of suspension will have passed. This cannot be in the public interest. We note the particular difficulties of this case, firstly the criminal proceedings and the complications therein and latterly the hearings brought by her employer and the fostering agency. Nonetheless there is a tendency for the Care Council(s) to treat enquiries sequentially and allow other procedures to take place before they make their own enquiries. We would urge upon them a more proactive approach, particularly in cases like this when time limits are involved.”
In other words Care Council for Wales (CCW), get off your fucking arse and sort it out – twats. What is wrong with these people?
The full judgement can be found here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1075
Meanwhile recently concluded GSCC case matters are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/recently_concluded_hearings/
Again some interesting reading, for those junkies like me.
The upcoming cases are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
There is an error on the page – the first case will not load-up after clicking on it and so the details are unknown.
In the two other cases http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6A16FCE1-0478-4903-9DDD-FE9D9D5C978B/0/InformationSMITHB.pdf it involves alleged theft of goods and services from a children’s home and in the second casehttp://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/43835DE4-21D7-4CAE-AE8C-8887883E6AC9/0/InformationSALISBURY.pdf falsification of case records (purporting to make visits to children/families).
These are of course allegations – the cases are yet to be proved.
Wilt
Of the two CSCT http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/ cases it includes that of Jacinta Hofstetter who is something of a notable GSCC case as can be illustrated in the very complex, detailed and rather lengthy judgement published by the CST: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1074
It is worth reading and although both Wilt and others are highly critical of the GSCC it does make it clear that the regulator did on this occasion not only get it right but bend over backwards to do so – the CST are usually spot-on.
Supporters of Jacinta have posted previously their concerns about her treatment at the hands of Brent Council and in particular the GSCC.
Read, and make up your own minds.
In the second CST case it is Jayne Sedgewick v The Care Council For Wales (CCW). She is suspended primarily for her activities as a foster parent although it is her social work role that is pending a judgement by a full Conduct Hearing by the CCW.
Presently she is suspended from the social care register and Sedgewick has appealed against this. She has already had her registration removed as a foster parent and no longer employed. The criminal proceedings against her were however dropped.
Here is an extract from the judgement:
“Mrs Sedgewick is a registered social worker and also a foster carer working for an independent agency. In 2006 she and her husband fostered a 15 year old girl (A). Whilst in their care A entered into a relationship with an older man aged 19. It is alleged that Mrs Sedgewick knew about this and indeed allowed the boy to sleep with A at their house. She did not discuss this relationship with the childs social worker nor with her own support worker. As a result of this relationship A became pregnant. It is further alleged that on an occasion in March 2006 Mrs Sedgewick and A went on a shopping trip to Telford and stayed overnight in a Hotel. During the course of the evening it is alleged that Mrs Sedgewicke became drunk, allowed A to drink, became involved with a group of men, claimed A was her stepdaughter and aged 18 and allowed her to go to one of the men’s room where sexual activity took place. It is further alleged that when this matter came out she attempted to influence the man involved to lie about the evening.”
These of course are allegations at present time but if they prove to be correct then she must be listed as about the most dangerous of social workers (and former foster carer) in the UK. Dork would not be sufficiently expletive or descriptive – total fucking idiot comes close to it but I think I will settle on fucking twat.
Why is this woman still on the Register? Again the ever sensible CST give a clue:
“It appears to us given the gravity of the allegations and the matters we have outlined above that continued suspension is appropriate and we therefore dismiss the appeal. We have had cause previously to raise questions about the delay in bringing cases to hearing and the concomitant length of suspensions imposed by the Care Councils. In this case the effect of delay is extreme in that pending a final determination Mrs Sedgewick is actually free to work as a social worker from 31 March as the two year maximum period of suspension will have passed. This cannot be in the public interest. We note the particular difficulties of this case, firstly the criminal proceedings and the complications therein and latterly the hearings brought by her employer and the fostering agency. Nonetheless there is a tendency for the Care Council(s) to treat enquiries sequentially and allow other procedures to take place before they make their own enquiries. We would urge upon them a more proactive approach, particularly in cases like this when time limits are involved.”
In other words Care Council for Wales (CCW), get off your fucking arse and sort it out – twats. What is wrong with these people?
The full judgement can be found here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1075
Meanwhile recently concluded GSCC case matters are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/recently_concluded_hearings/
Again some interesting reading, for those junkies like me.
The upcoming cases are listed here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
There is an error on the page – the first case will not load-up after clicking on it and so the details are unknown.
In the two other cases http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6A16FCE1-0478-4903-9DDD-FE9D9D5C978B/0/InformationSMITHB.pdf it involves alleged theft of goods and services from a children’s home and in the second casehttp://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/43835DE4-21D7-4CAE-AE8C-8887883E6AC9/0/InformationSALISBURY.pdf falsification of case records (purporting to make visits to children/families).
These are of course allegations – the cases are yet to be proved.
Wilt
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Whistling in the dark.............
This press release from the GSCC is an utter disgrace. They first off presume they have a future (at all), second they believe they have something to contribute, third they assume any competence (they are under special measures) but fourth and worst of all they believe they have the moral foundation (“compass”) to judge others.
See the press release here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/Media_release_17-03-10.htm
We believe this is the equivalent of “whistling in the dark” (as in nervously walking down a dark alley feeling very nervous but trying to appear confident to ward off an attack). In reality the GSCC are fighting for their life and they are grasping at any opportunity which might deter any further attack on their status e.g. we are big girls and do not take us on.
The fact is “darlings” your future is already written, and it aint as you hope or aspire to – you’re dead meat girlies and no amount of whistling will improve your chances of winning confidence with anyone.
We see the Care Standards Tribunal continue to regard the GSCC as utter dorks, see here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1071
Wilt is aware that other findings will yet further prove the fuck ups of this most fucked up organisation.
Twats!
Wilt
See the press release here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/Media_release_17-03-10.htm
We believe this is the equivalent of “whistling in the dark” (as in nervously walking down a dark alley feeling very nervous but trying to appear confident to ward off an attack). In reality the GSCC are fighting for their life and they are grasping at any opportunity which might deter any further attack on their status e.g. we are big girls and do not take us on.
The fact is “darlings” your future is already written, and it aint as you hope or aspire to – you’re dead meat girlies and no amount of whistling will improve your chances of winning confidence with anyone.
We see the Care Standards Tribunal continue to regard the GSCC as utter dorks, see here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1071
Wilt is aware that other findings will yet further prove the fuck ups of this most fucked up organisation.
Twats!
Wilt
Friday, 12 March 2010
More fireworks..............
Wilt wondered what was going to happen with this case – Rosalind Shaw. It is listed here for a Care Standards Tribunal appeal date to be fixed.
http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1072
Rosalind Shaw’s case was reported in Community Care, here:
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/10/06/112793/hospital-social-worker-struck-off-for-repeated-failings.htm
The GSCC press notice is here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/Rosalind+Shaw+conduct+hearing.htm
Wilt commented at the time:
“Well, let us take Rosalind Shaw a 65 year old Hospital Social Worker. There is no suggestion that she was a serial failing social worker over many years. She never robbed anyone or shagged her clients. At the end of a career most of us are ready to be shelved and our performance and energy is less than it should be – in fact it must be rare to find social workers still active at 65 years.” – see: http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/2009/10/dorks-with-bells-on/
There was nothing proportionate in removing the woman from the Register and it seems Ms Shaw agrees.
What is ironic is that the GSCC attempted to have the appeal “struck out” but the Care Standards Tribunal have refused. The GSCC had asked for more time to submit evidence for the “strike out” (which has not been forthcoming for months) and yet when Shaw (who had not attended the GSCC hearing) had previously asked the GSCC for a postponement, they refused.
What goes around comes around!
These case matters are always difficult to predict, but I remain amazed the woman was removed from the register – I think the Tribunal might find it a bit excessive. Again the issue is competence (and probably difficult working conditions) and not conduct. If there was ever a misuse and abuse of the term “conduct” the GSCC hold the gold medal as they are equally guilty of abusing process and power.
Good luck Rosalind.
http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/View.aspx?ID=1072
Rosalind Shaw’s case was reported in Community Care, here:
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/10/06/112793/hospital-social-worker-struck-off-for-repeated-failings.htm
The GSCC press notice is here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/Rosalind+Shaw+conduct+hearing.htm
Wilt commented at the time:
“Well, let us take Rosalind Shaw a 65 year old Hospital Social Worker. There is no suggestion that she was a serial failing social worker over many years. She never robbed anyone or shagged her clients. At the end of a career most of us are ready to be shelved and our performance and energy is less than it should be – in fact it must be rare to find social workers still active at 65 years.” – see: http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/2009/10/dorks-with-bells-on/
There was nothing proportionate in removing the woman from the Register and it seems Ms Shaw agrees.
What is ironic is that the GSCC attempted to have the appeal “struck out” but the Care Standards Tribunal have refused. The GSCC had asked for more time to submit evidence for the “strike out” (which has not been forthcoming for months) and yet when Shaw (who had not attended the GSCC hearing) had previously asked the GSCC for a postponement, they refused.
What goes around comes around!
These case matters are always difficult to predict, but I remain amazed the woman was removed from the register – I think the Tribunal might find it a bit excessive. Again the issue is competence (and probably difficult working conditions) and not conduct. If there was ever a misuse and abuse of the term “conduct” the GSCC hold the gold medal as they are equally guilty of abusing process and power.
Good luck Rosalind.
Fireworks................
This is going to be an interesting case. It had many a headline during the prolonged GSCC hearing and Hofstetter had a bit of a disagreement with Community Care on their reporting of the case.
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/12/114043/Children39s-social-worker-to-appeal-against-being-struck.htm
A supporter of Hofstetter was once a regular correspondent on these pages and there is certainly another side to the story. Regrettably Wilt will be away for the appeal to the Care Standards Tribunal, otherwise he would have observed.
Keep calm Jacinter - however justified you might be how the GSCC deal with things.
Wilt
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/12/114043/Children39s-social-worker-to-appeal-against-being-struck.htm
A supporter of Hofstetter was once a regular correspondent on these pages and there is certainly another side to the story. Regrettably Wilt will be away for the appeal to the Care Standards Tribunal, otherwise he would have observed.
Keep calm Jacinter - however justified you might be how the GSCC deal with things.
Wilt
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Proportionality...........
It seems the GSCC are becoming a little more thoughtful and considered in their judgements as is evidenced in this case, http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/03/09/114008/lancashire-family-support-agency-worker-admonished.htm which is further encouraging of their newly found proportional response. It is in contrast of course to more historical cases, not least in relation to Arthurworrey as one example, where clearly they were out to earn their spurs and prove to the Government that they were worthy of their existence – a history littered with despicable and outrageous attitudes.
Whilst there are signs of improvement we have not yet removed them from the Dork List and of course we must not let them become complacent. They are of course fighting for their existence at the moment and are effectively still under special measures.
We are still watching.
Wilt
Whilst there are signs of improvement we have not yet removed them from the Dork List and of course we must not let them become complacent. They are of course fighting for their existence at the moment and are effectively still under special measures.
We are still watching.
Wilt
Labels:
Care Council for Wales,
Care Standards Tribunal,
Community Care Magazine,
Court News,
CSCI,
dorks,
General Social Care Council,
let there be light,
Ofsted,
politics,
Public Sector Social Care,
Scottish Social Services Council,
social care,
some mothers do ave em,
Voluntary Sector Social Care
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Hearings........
Here is the latest list of GSCC hearings: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
And here are the latest Care Standards Tribunal list of hearings: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
The GSCC are to revise their website and you can comment here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/ - beware however they log who has commented! We wonder why?
Wilt
And here are the latest Care Standards Tribunal list of hearings: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
The GSCC are to revise their website and you can comment here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/ - beware however they log who has commented! We wonder why?
Wilt
Monday, 22 February 2010
Dream Team.................
The GSCC http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/has announced a new dream team to heads up its directorate – we at Regulator Watch think it is a to be short lived (Royal) team.
The official press release is here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/news_release_22-02-10.htm
The Community Care article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/22/113866/gscc-appoints-three-to-senior-positions.htm
We wish them well...............
They have a major task on their hands and the greater scrutiny to the value for money/competence (combined with very severe public spending cuts) we admire these people for taking on such a disgraced organisation still under special measures.
Part of the dream team is Sherry Malik who is presently employed by Cafcass where she is corporate director of strategy and performance. That inspires confidence, given Cafcass is virtually under special measures themselves on issues of strategy and especially performance!
Gawd help us!
Meanwhile there is no news on March GSCC hearings, but the February list is here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
The details of concluded hearings are here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/recently_concluded_hearings/
Nor have the Care Standards Tribunal http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/ yet updated their recent findings, see here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/search.aspx
You can find up-coming hearings here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/hearings.htm
Wilt (on the case)
The official press release is here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/News+and+events/Media+releases/news_release_22-02-10.htm
The Community Care article here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/22/113866/gscc-appoints-three-to-senior-positions.htm
We wish them well...............
They have a major task on their hands and the greater scrutiny to the value for money/competence (combined with very severe public spending cuts) we admire these people for taking on such a disgraced organisation still under special measures.
Part of the dream team is Sherry Malik who is presently employed by Cafcass where she is corporate director of strategy and performance. That inspires confidence, given Cafcass is virtually under special measures themselves on issues of strategy and especially performance!
Gawd help us!
Meanwhile there is no news on March GSCC hearings, but the February list is here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/
The details of concluded hearings are here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/recently_concluded_hearings/
Nor have the Care Standards Tribunal http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/ yet updated their recent findings, see here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Public/search.aspx
You can find up-coming hearings here: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/hearings.htm
Wilt (on the case)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)