Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Looking at NHS Choices, based on reviews The Hambleden Clinic at Denmark Hill and 306 Medical Centre in Lordship Lane are the closest with decent reviews. The Gardens by Peckham Rye Common has shrunk it's catchment area to the surrounding streets.


306 has an online address checker which shows all of SE22 is covered and part of SE5, while Hambleden doesn't have an online check to see if you're covered.

Due to poor turn out the meeting that was schedule to take place yesterday evening did not happen. Yes it was late notice for people but you can't blame those at the surgery for trying.


Comments like littleones referring to not accessing information about the meeting until late due to being a work and such is not helpful. Most of us work and can't just drop things last minute. There's no point complaining you were not involved. You could help yourselves - call the surgery, express your interest in wanting to help in whatever way you can. MAKE yourselves heard instead of expecting others to run around doing the work for you.

I had only found out about the meeting shortly before posting on here that is was taking place - directly from the surgery. I also was unable to attend and I'm only passing on information as it is being shared.


BicBasher attached is a list of surgeries being advised to join. I have concerns that although there is "choice" I'm not convinced it will be easy to simply switch. It was already identified there wasn't a suitable surgery that could take all Dr Sarma's patients in bulk so the other surgeries are expected to absorb these patients - what if a large number wanted to register at a particular surgery over others. They wouldn't be able to cope resulting in patients being refused and having to go elsewhere which could then be a similar occurrence across the board. Patients being pushed from pillar to post. Not particularly fair.

Hi

I am sorry to hear meeting did not happen

I also like littleone didnt find out till gone 7pm when I got home

when I got access to the internet.

and Kalamity I admire your attitude call the surgery etc

but over 1600 people have read this thread so far, what if we all phoned

how would the sick get through ?

The staff knew sometime ago, so did the doctor, we could have been warned- advised

to go elsewhere before the stampede.

I am personally worried about this,I am not impressed by any of the surgeries local

[ I read the forums opinions ] I need due to medication to re-locate fast.

But how do the old oldies who are immobile fare

to quote littleone

too little too late

There is a petition running at the surgery.

We need to sign this.Staff told me no meeting last night I quote [" what meeting!"]

staff unenthusiastic, no sign or anything either in or outside surgery

this lot is going down without a fight

I'm not really sure what is going any more. A meeting was definitely attempted to be arranged last night.


Could be a case of certain members of staff are trying to drum up support whilst others are not. I really don't know.

I'm just feeding info to here as and when I hear.

lameduck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is a petition running at the surgery.

> We need to sign this.Staff told me no meeting last

> night I quote [" what meeting!"]

> staff unenthusiastic, no sign or anything either

> in or outside surgery

> this lot is going down without a fight


Went there today and the receptionists seemed very up for a fight and keen to get the petition signed. They said they had not accepted it was a done deal, and were hopeful something could be done. My local pharmacist told me she had also been down to sign the petition (so should anyone who can get down there) and was spreading the word, so even though it's late there's still a fight.

I have been looking through NHS England's site, and came across the attached Summary Document entitled "Putting Patients First", It makes interesting reading especially the end section "What we stand for", particularly in view of the fact that we were neither consulted on nor informed about any impending closure until now when they claim it's a done deal.

Can I suggest that as well as signing the petition, we, the patients, also bombard NHS England with emails voicing our dissatisfaction with the way this closure has been handled and our worries about registering with other surgeries in the area given the poor reviews that have been written about them on this forum?

Some will notice the South London Press featured part cover of this matter on the front page of today's issue. It's not a particularly great piece of writing and doesn't cover any of the issue concerned and gives the impression the PPG had prior knowledge to no of the closing of the surgery which is certainly not the case.


The surgery and other supporters are keen to have accurate and more coverage from other publications and news avenues. If you would be interested in sharing your views and even be involved in a group picture (apparently we're more likely to get a bigger section with a picture) please drop me a PM so we can organise a suitable time for all. Obviously time is tight for all those involved but support is greatly appreciated.

Sabrina Harley Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hey everyone

>

> Found out today that when Dr Sarma retires on 31st

> of July the NHS instead of getting a new doctor to

> replace him are going to close the surgery!

> Not only that but all the remaining staff are

> being made redundant instead of being transferred

> to another surgery.

>

> There is a petition to sign on the reception desk

> and there will be a peaceful demonstration to

> appeal the closure.

>

> Please if you are a patient there, or even if

> you're not but don't agree with the closure, take

> 5 mins to pop in and sign the petition

>

> Thanks for reading

> Sabrina



Just to keep the info rolling in the right place...

Hi All

still waiting for reply to email from Tessa Jowell and Harriet Harman RE this closure, also emailed

local mayor and health authority.

seems no one is interested, and have heard nothing from James Barber.

According to S.L.Press there are 2400 on his books

Thats a lot of missplaced patients

Maybe if we all bombard these MP's who are supposed to looking after our interests

with emails. they may answer them.

the duck

Note that on the list of alternative GP practices, up first (by virtue of proximity) is the disaster that is MGMP- I'm sure Concordia/MGMP would love to plump up their numbers since, or so it would seem, patients have been leaving in their droves over the years. Hmmm.

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Note that on the list of alternative GP practices,

> up first (by virtue of proximity) is the disaster

> that is MGMP- I'm sure Concordia/MGMP would love

> to plump up their numbers since, or so it would

> seem, patients have been leaving in their droves

> over the years. Hmmm.


Just to reiterate - I left MG to go to Dr Sarma and would rather have a monkey with a stick try to cure my ailments than go back there. When and if the axe falls that is the LAST place anyone who cares about their health should think of.

Hi All

recieved one answer

still waiting for Tessa Harriet and James


Dear Duck


Thank you for your email which was forwarded to me today.


Unfortunately, the Local Authority does not have control over GP's surgeries in Southwark.


Healthwatch Southwark is currently doing some work on this issue, and they may be able to offer further assistance?


http://www.healthwatchsouthwark.co.uk/


Yours sincerely



Jennifer Chambers

Investigator - Social Services

Floor 2, Hub 2

Office: 0207 525 5917

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.southwark.gov.uk

Postal Address

Southwark Council

PO Box 64529

LONDON

SE1P 5LX

The NHS has been slowly disassembled and put back together in such a confusing way that even those within the system are not quite sure who is in charge of what; so where do the powers of local GP's/CCG's stop and those of NHS England begin? Who does decide what is in the interests of local patients? I thought that the whole idea of the new system was to put more power into the hands of patients not for major decisions, like the closure of a surgery (against patient wishes) to be made by some centralised body.


Reminds me of the 'free' schools where most decisions seem to go through one person in the Govt.



First mate, I thought that it was obvious that Orwell type newspeak applies here. To use the slogan first featured in that rather boring song by John Lennon, "power to the people" means "much less power to the people".


And to continue the Lennon analogy, "imagine no possessions" means "imagine lots more possessions for the chaps who have given our party plenty of dosh".

I have been sending emails to NHS England and have today received the response below:


Thank you for your enquiry dated 12th June 2014.

In response, I would advise that you contact your local NHS England Area Team via the details below:

NHS South London Area Team

Southside

105 Victoria Street

London

SE1E 6QT

0207 932 3700

I hope this information is helpful.

Kind regards,

George Fuller

Customer Contact Centre Support Assistant

NHS England

Tel: 0300 3 11 22 33

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.england.nhs.uk

Address: NHS England, PO Box 16738, REDDITCH, B97 9PT



I have already passed this information on to James Barber via email and fully intend to start ringing NHS South London Area Team tomorrow and to keep pestering them till I get some sort of response.

In response to emails I sent to healthwatch Southwark and NHS England I've had the following in reply (from the latter via the former)


In reply to my asking why the practice was closing rather than being taken up by another GP:


Dr Sarma holds a PMS contract this is the (provision of a set of services which are specified in the actual GP contract ), which is commissioned under a local arrangement. GPs that hold a PMS contact may ask NHS England, upon retirement, to take on a partner as part of their retirement plan. This allows a single handed GP practice to be maintained in the longer term. Dr Sarma did not request to take on a partner at the East Dulwich Medical Centre, and handed back his contract to NHS England.



And in reply to why patients were being palmed off onto other practices with no say in the matter despite local information seeming to stress these other practices were over-subscribed and waiting times for appointments and/or getting phone calls answered were already excessive:


NHS England looked at three options for the contract and patient list:


whether there is sufficient capacity and interest in the local area for patients to register with neighbouring GP practices

to procure the existing patient list

to place the list under temporary arrangements


In this case, a review found that there were eleven alternate GP practices that were within 1.2 miles of East Dulwich Medical Centre. All of these practices had capacity for additional patients and wished to accept Dr Sarma?s patients.


So it would appear that the eagerness of the other practices to 'accept' a large influx of new patients was the deciding factor. Makes you wonder how 'capacity' is decided and how many patients these practices have to have before they consider themselves full.

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In response to emails I sent to healthwatch

> Southwark and NHS England I've had the following

> in reply (from the latter via the former)

>

> In reply to my asking why the practice was closing

> rather than being taken up by another GP:

>

> Dr Sarma holds a PMS contract this is the

> (provision of a set of services which are

> specified in the actual GP contract ), which is

> commissioned under a local arrangement. GPs that

> hold a PMS contact may ask NHS England, upon

> retirement, to take on a partner as part of their

> retirement plan. This allows a single handed GP

> practice to be maintained in the longer term. Dr

> Sarma did not request to take on a partner at the

> East Dulwich Medical Centre, and handed back his

> contract to NHS England.

>

>

> And in reply to why patients were being palmed off

> onto other practices with no say in the matter

> despite local information seeming to stress these

> other practices were over-subscribed and waiting

> times for appointments and/or getting phone calls

> answered were already excessive:

>

> NHS England looked at three options for the

> contract and patient list:

>

> whether there is sufficient capacity and

> interest in the local area for patients to

> register with neighbouring GP practices

> to procure the existing patient list

> to place the list under temporary arrangements

>

>

> In this case, a review found that there were

> eleven alternate GP practices that were within 1.2

> miles of East Dulwich Medical Centre. All of

> these practices had capacity for additional

> patients and wished to accept Dr Sarma?s

> patients.

>



It's a shame the reps (Sharon Fernandez and another) from NHS England that informed the PPG and presented the letter were not briefed on any of this. They were asked several times why the practice couldn't continue under a different doctor - the answer was totally evaded and certainly not offered as is here.

This is most alarming.



Is there any way to challenge/override this decision, one which seems to have been decided by stealth on technicalities and small print? Can our local politicians help in anyway? Healthcare is just as important as education but there seems less political will and drive to secure local needs for the former.

It appears that Dr Sarma operated under a specific contract which allowed him (and required him) to appoint a partner to take over his practice if he chose to retire - which is, if I understand earlier posts, the method by which he himself took up this practice.


He appears not to have done this - and since GPs are private contractors into the NHS (they are not directly employed by the NHS) there is little the NHS could have done - they don't themselves 'own' the practice, nor do they have staff they could appoint into it if Dr Sarma did not chose to continue the practice via an 'inheriting' partner.


This is not like being a doctor employed by a hospital, where when one leaves, another can be appointed.


GPs have always been private individuals contracting with the service to provide health cover - either individually (i.e. Dr Sarma) or in partnerships.


The NHS has been told by the other private contractors in the area that they have capacity and desire to absorb Dr Sarma's list. What else could they (the NHS) have done?

P68,

Fair points. I just wonder how this works. Do processes automatically swing in once the contract is finished without any prior contact/communication between the relevant parties? Is it possible that Dr Sarma was simply not across the detail of the contract? It seems odd that if there are other GP's willing and able to continue running the practice that the contractual arrangement is immutable. I guess one would have to be convinced that Dr Sarma has stated something along the lines of 'I cannot be bothered/ I don't want anyone to take over'.


Still, I am no expert on contractual law so it may well be a set in stone affair where nothing can be done...shame though.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
    • Another recommendation for Silvano. I echo everything the above post states. I passed first time this week with 3 minors despite not starting to learn until my mid-30s. Given the costs for lessons I have heard, he's also excellent value.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...