You are here

CQC decision to suspend London GP’s registration upheld by Tribunal

Published:
30 March 2015
Categories:
  • Media

Tribunal says CQC action protected people from risk of harm The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has suspended a London-based GP’s registration following serious concerns about patient safety at the practice.

Dr Mujib ul Haq Khan failed to overturn the suspension at a tribunal on 25 March 2015 and will not be able to run his Southfields-based practice Granville Road Surgery until May 2015 as a result. The Tribunal unanimously dismissed Dr Khan’s appeal and confirmed the CQC’s decision to suspend for four months his registration as a service provider.

The Tribunal’s findings included the following:

‘It is beyond doubt that there was not what there should have been, namely easy, well-known and established access to the appropriate medication in case of emergency. That, in the Tribunal’s view was indicative of Dr Khan’s careless, passive and reactive approach to the management of his practice. Other examples were provided by the lack of any adequate induction procedure for new locum doctors, the absence of any Disclosure or Barring Service check, hepatitis status check or references, the lack of child protection or adult safeguarding polices and of adequate staff fire training’.

‘…The conclusion that, in Dr Khan’s practice, persons, patients and staff and doctors, were exposed to the risk of harm was inescapable. That risk would have continued without action on the part of the CQC’

The single-handed practitioner had approximately 800 patients and they have been temporarily relocated to nearby practices by NHS England, the commissioner of the service. This is the first time the regulator has used this enforcement power in relation to a GP.

CQC has had concerns about the performance at the Granville Road Surgery since its first inspection in December 2013. Further inspections in 2014 identified serious concerns about risks to patient safety until an urgent notice to suspend the registration of the practice was issued in January 2015.

The CQC’s Deputy Chief Inspector of General Practice, Ruth Rankine, said:

We were confident we had taken the right decision to protect people and I am delighted that the tribunal agreed we did the right thing.

‘This case saw repeated breaches of the law and patients were being put at risk. We do not take enforcement action lightly, but are satisfied that the tribunal has agreed with our assessment that patients were at risk at this practice.’

‘When necessary, we will use our powers and do what it takes to make sure patients and the public are protected.’

Inspectors found a number of failings that led the regulator to take enforcement action:

Emergency medicines were not available. In the event of a patient suffering an allergic reaction, the arrangements to provide emergency treatment were inadequate. The locum working at the practice did not know where the emergency medicines were. When the emergency medicines were located, they were in a locked bag that could not be opened without the use of screwdriver.

The practice employed four locums. The appropriate employment checks had not been carried out and so the provider could not be assured that the doctors working at the practice were safe to do so.

The arrangements to ensure that the practice functions effectively were inadequate. The provider, who was not able to work at the practice following a suspension by NHS England, had not put in place plans for the day-to-day management of the practice.

There were no arrangements in place to record and report incidents and no system was in place to disseminate updates in best practice guidance and national safety alerts. The practice manager and locum were not clear about how essential decisions would be made.

The locum at the practice was not sure whether he had been trained to the appropriate level in safeguarding children and did not know who to whom he should report child safeguarding concerns.

There were also inadequate arrangements in relation to fire safety. All of these issues, along with the provider’s track record, led us to the conclusion that patients were not safe and that action needed to be taken to protect them.

CQC has now published its most recent inspection report rated the practice as inadequate. The report can be found here: www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-496002434.

We are now reviewing whether we need to take any further action in relation to this provider.

Ends

For media enquiries, contact John Scott, Regional Engagement Manager, on 077898 75809 or contact CQC’s press office on 020 7448 9401, during office hours, or, out of hours, on 0778 987 6508.

For general enquiries, call 03000 61 61 61.

Last updated:
29 May 2017

Notes to editors

 

About the Care Quality Commission

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and social care in England.


We make sure health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care and we encourage care services to improve.


We monitor, inspect and regulate services to make sure they meet fundamental standards of quality and safety and we publish what we find to help people choose care.