After waiting for months and months to get the nursing records for my mother (regarding CC). my solicitor has had a report compiled from these records which has been submitted to the county council responsible for my late mother's care. We have received a reply stating that it has been given to 'Nurse Assessors' for consideration. Should we demand now that someone more senior make this assessment, or wait for the decision to arrive, bearing in mind that every letter costs more in solicitor's fees, also that the county council are dragging their feet in order to bump up interest rates.

Nurse assessors seem to be the gatekeepers of any CHC department. You could always ask the PCT for the level of their qualification and any specialisation eg RGN or Mental Health Nurse.

Frankly I have found many of them appallingly underskilled, and some both uncaring and illiterate - but Hey ho - let's not prejudge.

Hi and welcome traveljunkienan. I've read your post two or three times and It reads differently when I re read it.
'We have received a reply stating that it has been given to 'Nurse Assessors' for consideration'. to me either means its been given to these people ( nurse assessors whoever they might be) for consideration, or does it mean that who ever its been given to will be assessing the Nurses? It can read two ways cant it or is it me just being cynical?

Whether a patient is eligible to receive NHS funded care is a matter of law, not medical opinion and clinicians cannot arbitrate legal questions. TELL them that refusal of NHS care based on their opinion will put them at risk of an action for recovery of exemplary damages. Similarly legal questions cannot be arbitrated by MDA teams and review panels when members could be held collectively and individually liable. Their sole legitimate function is to determine what care the patient requires and by whom and where it can best be provided - NOT who should pay for it! Steve.

The report refers to the Coughlan case so the legal point has been made, but the recovery of damages is something I haven't considered. Are there instances of this having succeeded? Could you give me chapter and verse!
Many thanks everyone for your replies.

The Coughlan judgement simply applied existing law - the National Health Service Act - to Miss. Coughlan's situation and the Court confirmed that ALL her care including all so-called social care, was the sole responsibility of the NHS and that 'miss coughlan's needs were beyond the scope of local authority services'
The judgement remains intact as it could only have been varied on appeal to the Law Lords - which it wasn't - or through repeal of the Health Act - which hasn't happened - Yet!.
The current position is confirmed by the Law Society's evidence to the Commons Select Committee: 'Patients with an illness, disability or injury who are so ill that they require full time nursing care are entitled to receive ALL their care 'free at the point of need'. This includes ALL so-called social and personal care which arises as a consequence of an illness or disability AND the provision of accommodation suitable for delivery of that care.
Nowhere does the Health Act mention that 'criteria' can be applied to determine who should and should not be entitled to receive NHS funded care 'free at the point of need' and the Act confirms that this shall be provided 'regardless of the ability to pay' which has been upheld in a recent Administrative Court judgement: Case No: CO/9781/2010 The judgement handed down on 28/10/2010 (the Booker Case) applied Coughlan and the Health Act confirming that the right to continuing long term care is determined by clinical need NOT on an individuals ability to pay. (The 19 year old lady concerned was awarded £2.9 Million and left tetraplegic following a road accident) and Oldham PCTs lawyers had argued that, given Ms. Bookers pay-out, it was simply not necessary for the NHS to continue picking up the bill for her care when she had the money to fund it. However, Judge Mark Pelling ruled in favour of Ms Booker saying that "she is just as entitled to free NHS care as any independently wealthy patient". Stressing the principles underpinning the national health service, he said: "Access to NHS services is based on clinical need, not on an individuals ability to pay". Ruling the PCT's stance unlawful, he said "there is nothing within the NHS National framework that suggests that financial considerations are relevant to the provision of future (ie, long term) healthcare"
Therefore all claimants should remind NHS review panels that if they apply 'eligibility criteria' then it cannot circumvent the law and they must state whether or not Miss. Coughlan and Miss. Booker would qualify for NHS continuing care if their criteria were applied to them. Note that Miss. Coughlan has herself confirmed that she would fail to qualify under the 'National Framework'. Also remind them that clinicians and social workers cannot make a quasi-judicial decision which denies a patient NHS care because that is a statutory right enshrined in Law and not amenable to variation by clinicians, social workers, or anyone else. It is also a breach of the Human Rights Act to make a decision which imposes a substantial financial burden on or places at risk a persons entire assets. Under such circumstances every citizen has the right to be heard before a 'lawfully constituted fair and independent tribunal' - which review panels most certainly aren't!! Steve.

Thank you Steve for your informative and detailed response, which I have passed on to my solicitor

The real problem in all this is that most solicitors do not understand the relevant law - yet it's all there on the internet for those who can be bothered to look! Their own trade association - the Law Society - is also there to advise them! I will gladly advise your solicitor if asked, but in fact you don't need a solicitor to tell you what is already in the public domain! The law is perfectly clear - the problem lies in forcing the NHS and SS to comply with it! Steve.