Well, it is now July the month timetabled by Nep to complete the removal of Clacton's Peter Bruff Unit to Colchester. As I write to the best of my knowledge the move is yet to take place. Nep are holding a public meeting! Unlike ours of June 14th, this one is in the evening so I do hope those of you who were unable to attend in June will be able to attend this one along with those from before able to do both. It is on Wednesday 20th of July 6:30pm - 9:00pm at St. James Church, Tower Road, Clacton, CO15 1LE. Please RSVP, details linked below. You may remember Nep's insistance that they were not under any statutory obligation to consult about moving the ward to Colchester? I'm afraid that we missed a golden opportunity to at least have the Public Consultation that we rightly deserved because once again, as so often, Nep have hidden behind an increasingly thin veil of authoratitive credibility, that despite previous clear intent to deceive, certainly speaking for myself, I was far too willing to take on face value. Here are some excerpts of very relevant legal advice: "The law requires NHS bodies to engage with members of the public before making decisions on changes to health services. Currently, separate sections of the NHS Act apply to CCGs and to other organisations." "In summary, any significant commissioning decision or reconfiguration will be caught by these statutory requirements. You will note that the statute does not insist on "consultation", but seeks to make sure that service users are "involved". In practice, for any significant proposed change to services, some form of consultation exercise will be required to comply with this duty." "What about changes that implement Government policy? Public involvement, ie, some form of consultation, is still required. The courts have ruled that even where a commissioner was simply implementing Department of Health policy, the provision of services was still the commissioner’s responsibility and therefore it had an obligation to consult. The rule is this: if a commissioner or provider will be making significant changes to how services are provided, even if it is doing so because it is obliged to do so by external pressures, it is the commissioners’ obligation to carry out a consultation." "A throwaway remark that suggests a decision to close a service has already been taken but that a consultation has to be done "so the legalities are complied with" could undermine the whole process and result in a court order to redo the whole exercise and take a fresh decision." Where shall I start!!!! Well, Nep will no doubt insist that moving a ward 17 miles away from an area with one of the highest incidents of mental ill health, an area it has served for over a quarter of a century, that those who suffer enduring and recurrant issues rely on, is not a major service reconfigurement!??? I cannot see any judge accepting that!! CQC / single sex rules (Government Policy) still required to consult! AND involvement / consultation must take place BEFORE a decision is made and therefore "Post Decision" engagement is unlawful! The challenge to this failure to follow procedure is by "Judicial Revue." There is quite a strict time limit of 3 months to bring a case and "Ignorance Of The Law" (my excuse) is not normally accepted as a valid reason for late action. The legal advice I have received is therefore: " Whilst you can sometimes start court proceedings outside of limitation, it will be almost impossible to prevent the move at this stage as it appears implementation is already part way through. The court would likely say it would prejudice the Defendant too much to halt the move now, as they have already invested money and effort in moving patients and staff. Unfortunately, it is therefore our view that the prospects of success are insufficient to take on the case." If I build a house without planning permission the council will insist I knock it down regardless of the money I have invested, they will probably make me pay any legal costs too, so I don't think this is fair, though have to accept it is the law and as Nep seem to not care for humanitarian appeals, but only power, we may have to accept that for now at least, the force in them is great. It beggars belief that people such as these are actually running an organisation that purports to care for peoples mental health! Thank goodness for those excellent staff among those on the ground delivering the best service they can day to day, despite the management they have to work with. I'm sorry about the legal position. If only I had known earlier. I will share this advice with other NHS campaigns in the hope that no one else gets caught out. As I write there are two last "Irons In The Fire." I emailed NHS England about our situation. They have assigned a case number and I am waiting to hear. Essex County Council's "Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee have requested the presence of both Nep and the ccg at their meeting on Wednesday 27th of July. I believe they have the power to refer to the Secretary Of State for health, Jeremy Hunt (or successor?) or they might just rap them over the knuckles, we shall see. I will let you know anything significant, oh, and you remember that they(nep & ccg) were going to get in touch regarding issues that were raised at our June meeting...NOTHING!