Cheltenham private ambulance service criticised by watchdog

“your right, I will reply to your comment. As told many times I am not involved in the company in the slightest, nor do I have any leads that connect me to anybody there. I'm merely an individual who has a positive outlook on such a negative reading, please forgive me. Not everyone on this planet can just sit there and let their fingers go wild with negativity, some of us do have a heart and a positive outlook on things that appear negative. I for one have no heard of these scandals you are talking about, but that's not to say i'm stupid of naïve, I do on the other hand will probably know a lot more about other things than you. obviously everybody has their opinion, mines positive, regardless of how the paper reads. i'm not a judgemental person, If for some reason there are negatives within the company, i'm pretty sure they are being sorted, if they are, wahey! so what's all the negative comments about, besides, there are ALOT and I mean ALOT more issues going on in the NHS than the private sector, your life is more at risk the minute you call 999.”

“'Mzpinkypants' must be connected to the company in some way. If not an employee, then I would suggest a friend or relative of somebody strongly involved with the company.
To say that the company could not have operated for so long whilst not complying with procedures is either childishly naive or deliberately misleading. I can only imagine that 'Mypinkpants' has not got a tv set and has never heard of Winterbourne View! There are many companies that have managed to operate whilst breaking regulations and who got away with it for years. The chemical company that operated from Sandhurst did so for many, many years and was only caught because it was flooded and caught fire. Had that not happened they would probably still be operating now and they are not a one off. How many times do we hear on the news of a companies breaking safety rules that were only exposed when somebody was tragically injured or killed?
This affair only came to light because of complaints from medical professionals. I am sure there are many occasions when such staff are not completely happy with the quality of outsourced service provided by private companies but that the majority of incidents do not result in a complaint to the CQC. it would be reasonable to conclude that for multiple complaints to be received it must have been very obviously bad.
No doubt, 'Myinkpants' will respond to defend the indefensible but as he/she is so obviously biased and willfully blind to the facts I doubt that those comments will have any credibility. He/she seems to think that this is one huge conspiracy but provides not a jot of evidence to support this and let's face it anyone with no connections to the company would not be trying to defend it so vigorously and for so long.”

“I'm not going to add any more here after this comment but I am intrigued by one thing that perhaps Mzpinkypants could answer.

The CQC said: " No equipment checklists were in place and no maintenance or service records were available for any piece of equipment." They give the evidence for this statement on their website.

Mzpinkypants said " but to say paperwork is non-existent is a tad ridiculous. do you really think a company would still be running after so long if paperwork isn't present?"

What evidence do you, Mzpinkypants, have for your statement? (especially as you claim no connection to the company). I specifically mean the absence of maintenance and service records for any piece of equipment.

Unless you have actual evidence beyond your own opinion that the CQC's report is mendacious I will not reply further.

I hope that the company learns from this and improves. I like the fact that we now have inspection regimes in place to catch problems before they result in harm rather than waiting until someone has a problem before an investigation.”

“Look all this is stupid now we are all saying how bad this is but could we do any better I believe until we know what the full story is we should stop moaning and saying how bad things r 2bf the comments by the cqc are all the bad ones which in turn make us automatically assume the worst (I don't see the cqc post comments about the state of the hospitals let's be fair they could do with some work) also it says enforcement action taken so doesn't that mean that the company have been told to improve this. Let's be honest its easy to judge based on the staitments we have seen ( regardless of if they r paper bases or not) also wouldn't it be a more appropriate of us to want this company to succeed rather than fail as private ambulances help NHS in jobs they don't wish to do so let's not jump to a bad point and let's think of the good these sort of company's do”

“I can read, you do not need to copy and paste a report from the CQC website... but thanks for clearing up that lil factor.
Do you honestly think the company would be and should be running after so long if there was a dangerous threat to all those who use it? obviously there is an exaggeration here and you all come to your own conclusions at how bad the company is or isn't.
I honestly believe this report has been put in place to better their standards than their own standards already in place.
Vehicles and people would not be sent out if there was any need to question the safety of whoever gets inside one of these ambulances.
Obviously there is a standard, which, could be missing detailed paperwork, but to say paperwork is non-existent is a tad ridiculous. do you really think a company would still be running after so long if paperwork isn't present?
I'm sure the safety of patients is of a very high standard and that their needs are put first, safety and good record keeping of vehicles, and the staff i'm sure are highly qualified to do the job at hand.

If for whatever reason this company does have action against them, i am pretty confident they are getting all the help they can to achieve a pass on the CQC reports, so these negative and out of control comments can be withdrawn.
As previously said, i am not involved in this company or have leads, but honestly think alot of you are pushing a tad too far with your negativity, not knowing the full story, just picking up little bits that stick out at you. I think it's disgusting so many of you are very quick to judge a company based on two words "dirty" "safety" if these things were such a big deal, they wouldn't have been running this long and the report from a company only a year old would have been reported many years ago!”

“Mzpinkypants, I don't know which report you have been reading to conclude that the Echo's report is sick and twisted.

The actual CQC report is on their website along with the press release and the Echo's summary seems quite fair. The CQC's press release (easily found on their website) is entitled "CQC warns Rowan Medical Services that it is failing to protect the safety and welfare of people".

In the body of the report (again easily found on the website) it says " People were not protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment. The provider was not meeting this standard. We judged that this had a major impact on people using the service. We have taken enforcement action against the provider for this essential standard to protect the health, safety and welfare of people using this service."

As for not having the appropriate paperwork - " No equipment checklists were in place and no maintenance or service records were available for any piece of equipment. We asked how often the equipment was serviced and were informed that it only went to a local medical engineer department when the equipment went wrong. We asked the provider how the necessary equipment was calibrated. The provider was unable to provide us with an explanation or calibration records."

In addition the CQC found that " No checklists were present to confirm each ambulance had the required equipment before being dispatched to an event. The provider told us that these checklists were in his head. There was no documentary evidence that each ambulance and its equipment where checked prior to each event or by each new paramedic crew working on that ambulance. This meant that people were not protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment."

If I have to choose whether to believe the CQC or you, I'm afraid that the CQC are more credible. If you have evidence that the CQC are not telling the truth then send it to Rowan Medical Services so that they can take the appropriate legal action. However well-meaning the proprietor is, it is clear that the CQC has found that he needs to take serious action to ensure patient safety. I, for one, am glad that the issues have been found before anyone came to harm and give the company a chance to improve to the standards expected before any problems do occur. I hope that the company takes the needed action and becomes all the better for it.”

“I think Aletheia, you have powerful comments, but at the end of the day, you are wrong. you seem to be a very judgemental person based on newspaper readings, NOT FACTS. You seem to think you have read the report and come to the conclusion there are no positive things to say, when in actual fact, there are. clearly you haven't read the full report, else your comments made here would be different. If you had also read the full CQC report, you'd understand that the echo report is sick and twisted to ruin somebody's career and life. I feel you are a very judgemental person, who presumes those of us who are positive about the company are to do with it, how does it feel being in the same league as the echo? a Liar ?? not right to presume hey, it hurts peoples feelings right...? Well might i add, you wanna think about the owners feelings and how distraught he is right now, knowing people have made disgusting accusations about him and his company. i'm sure from running a valid non profitable company for over 30yrs he has appropriate paperwork set in place, i'm sure he's not THAT stupid. If his vehicles are of a disgusting state, why would they be clear of MOT's? I really do think alot of negative comments on here should be more thought about than just jumping into the band wagon and critising somebody's lively hood - Lets turn the tables shall we and all judge your lives and how you go about it? perhaps even write a report about you!”

“I would be extremely surprised if 'starwars' is totally unconnected to this company. How could he possibly read the facts of the report and conclude that this company did not have a regard for patient safety? Did he/she actually read the article. There is not one positive comment from the CQC and the investigation came about by complaints (multiple) from NHS staff.
How can 'starwars' possibly conclude that being in a position whereby the CQC orders Rowan Medical Services to take immediate action to improve its cleanliness and infection control, medicine storage, equipment safety, record keeping, and logging of the service history of its vehicles is somehow demonstrating a responsible approach to patient safety is beyond me. It is not me that is making allegations, I am merely commenting on what the CQC report states. Are you suggesting that the CQC have fabricated evidence with false allegation and false reports in some sort of conspiracy theory?
I say again, as someone who has spent over 30 years working in the emergency services, that it appears that the company has a total disregard for patient safety.
To conclude otherwise is absolutely ludicrous!”

“Wholesale disregard for safety procedures? I think Aletheia you need to read the report properly before you make presumptions and accusations. At no time according to the report was 'disregard for safety' brought into question.
I agree with Mzpinkypants. Don't believe everything you read to be true and make outrageous comments when you are not in receipt of the full facts. I am sure the CQC are working with Rowan to help better their company.”

“It is quite apparent from the facts provided that this company is making little or no effort to provide a safe environment for patients. Had there just been one or two failures of record keeping as regards the equipment one might see it as a careless oversight but a wholesale disregard for safety procedures and the record keeping that is required to protect the public is outrageous.
The big question is are they still being used at present and if so why because if somebody dies or is infected or injured as a result both Rowan and the commissioning agent will be responsible.”