‘My daughter was diagnosed with leukaemia aged 11 – and the NHS tried to charge us £17k for her treatment'
A Latvian mother who was sent a £17,000 bill for her daughter's NHS cancer treatment is taking legal action against the government.
The mother, listed as M in the legal challenge, said the bill 'was overwhelming and came completely out of the blue' and is taking legal action to argue that European nationals who apply late for settled status should be able to maintain their right to free healthcare in the UK.
She and her daughter now have settled status in the UK under the European Union Settlement Scheme (EUSS) and despite seeing some of the fees waived after challenging it with their NHS trust, are still facing costs of around £2,000.
The mother came to the UK in 2014 and was joined by her young daughter in 2017. She successfully applied for status under EUSS in 2019 and then made an in-time application for her daughter, which was rejected in December 2021.
At the time of her daughter's rejection, the mother had been locked out of her email account and therefore didn't realise the application had been refused. This only became apparent in early 2023 and she then made a second application, which was granted in June 2023.
During that period her daughter was diagnosed with leukaemia in February 2021, and underwent treatment at the North West Anglia NHS Trust. The now 15-year-old daughter went into remission in July 2023, but nearly a year later, in May 2024, the family were sent an unexpected bill for £16,635.81.
The charge was for the treatment received between the deadline to appeal her daughter's initial residency refusal, and the date the mother reapplied.
Due to delays in updating the new digital status system for EU citizens, the daughter did not appear to have a refused application when she went to the NHS for treatment.
During this period, when the system hadn't updated, some 141,000 settlement applications were refused.
The mother explained her shock on finding out that her daughter wasn't entitled to healthcare, saying: 'Finding out about this debt has been very stressful for my daughter. She thinks it is her fault. She knows I cannot afford to repay this amount of money.
'I tried to ensure that my daughter had applied on time and did not realise she did not have status under the EUSS. She now has settled status because the Home Office allowed me to make a late application for her.
'It does not seem fair that the NHS trust is not taking into account these circumstances and is now asking me to pay for so much of her treatment.
'Realising that other families might be in the same position made me determined to take legal action, so that they don't have to go through this stress and suffering.'
Niamh Grahame, lawyer at the Public Law Project, explained their claim, saying: 'People who make a successful late application to the EUSS are still charged for their treatment before the date on which they make the late application.
'We are arguing that this policy breaches the Withdrawal Agreement and unfairly treats people differently for making a late application where the government has accepted that they had a reasonable excuse for doing so.
'The intention behind the Withdrawal Agreement was that the rights of EU nationals and their family members who moved to the UK before Brexit should be continuously protected. If you meet the criteria for a successful application, it should not matter when you apply.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Cambridge professor ‘deliberately failed IQ test to aid £1m brain injury claim'
A University of Cambridge professor has been accused of deliberately failing IQ and memory tests to boost a £1 million brain damage claim. Dr Mohamed Atef Hakmi, 64, is suing the NHS for more than £1 million, claiming a failure to promptly diagnose a stroke left him with permanent brain damage and physical disabilities. Seeking damages the High Court, he claimed a failure to promptly diagnose him meant he missed the chance of vital treatment. But Dr Hakmi has been forced to deny deliberately throwing a pre-trial IQ test after scoring only a 'very bad' 84, putting him well below the UK average even though he still lectures at one of the world's most prestigious universities. Dr Hakmi had to give up orthopaedic surgery after suffering two strokes stroke at home in 2016. After the first, he was given clot-busting thrombolysis treatment and made a very good recovery, returning to the operating theatre within weeks, the court heard. He suffered a second stroke in November that year, while he worked late at night on paperwork, Robert Kellar KC, his barrister, told Judge David Pittaway KC. Spotting the symptoms, Dr Hakmi went to Lister Hospital in Stevenage, calling ahead and telling staff that he was having a stroke, said the barrister. However, the Royal College of Surgeons fellow says he was told he would not be offered thrombolysis because he was 'not having a stroke', with a remote doctor suggesting it could be simply a migraine or epilepsy. It was not until hours later that his stroke was diagnosed, at which point it was too late to treat him with the same drugs. Dr Hakmi accuses the NHS of 'cumulative and inter-related' failings, including a 'cursory and sub-standard examination' in A&E and the fact that he was only able to speak to the remote stroke specialist on the phone because of the NHS's Telemedicine system malfunctioning. He was left with reduced sensation in his fingers and toes, fatigue in his right arm, and a brain injury causing short-term memory impairment, impaired concentration, reduced processing speed and 'executive deficits'. He no longer has any private practice and has returned to the NHS on restricted duties, the barrister added, saying: 'He no longer does any surgery. But for the breach of duty, the claimant is likely to have made a good recovery. 'He would have been able to return to all types of surgery that did not require a high degree of manual dexterity.' 'Very surprising' results But John de Bono KC, representing the NHS, denied Dr Hakmi was due any damages payout at all and accused him of hamming-up his symptoms while being assessed before trial. He said Dr Hakmi scored only 84 on an IQ test, putting him below 86 per cent of the general population, adding: 'That's very bad – it suggests it would be hard to function as a surgeon or as an educator at that level.' Dr Hakmi was assessed by two neuropsychologists, who also performed memory tests, with 'very surprising' and sometimes 'astonishing' results, which Mr De Bono said raised 'serious concern about whether he was putting forward his best effort'. 'You scored astonishingly badly for someone operating at the level you are describing this morning,' Mr De Bono said, referring to the fact Dr Hakmi had spoken with pride in the witness box of his work with the university. 'Is it possible when you went to be tested that you performed worse than you should have done because you were trying to demonstrate to them just how big the impact had been?' Dr Hakmi denied performing worse than he should have, telling the court he found the tests 'exhausting'. He said: 'I definitely have a memory problem, slow effort. I know definitely I'm not as before I had the stroke.' The damages claim is against the East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, which runs the Lister Hospital, and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, where the doctor who spoke to Dr Hakmi by phone was based. The trusts deny blame, saying Dr Hakmi was 'at all times treated with reasonable care and skill by highly competent clinicians'. The Trust said he was assessed as being unsuitable for thrombolysis treatment because his symptoms were not serious enough and it was too long after their onset. Such treatment can also be risky, carrying a significant risk of brain haemorrhage and death, said the NHS barrister, and even if Dr Hakmi had been given it, the outcome would probably have been the same.
The Courier
44 minutes ago
- The Courier
How a Kinross woman's beloved pet dog is inspiring bid to change law
A campaigning mum from Kinross hopes the memory of her much-loved dog will help change the law for people who need 'emotional support animals'. Elizabeth Crammond took up the challenge to change UK equalities law after sadly losing Daisy in March. The Yorkshire terrier, who joined the family in 2009, was a constant companion and helped Elizabeth cope with stressful situations. She has fybromialgia and other debilitating conditions, and was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. The presence of her canine companion was a constant source of comfort after her own mother died from cancer in 2011. Daisy, classed as an emotional support animal with a doctor's note to prove it, would still be turned away from places including restaurants and public venues. 'After my mum passed away, Daisy was my emotional support,' Elizabeth told The Courier. 'She was the tiniest thing, she went everywhere with me to the point I lived my life around her. 'I was having a lot of anxiety and panic attacks, and that's where my fybromialgia would come in.' The condition flared up under stress, she says, causing even more anxiety about leaving the house and living a normal life. 'Daisy knew when an attack was coming and she would bring me back into the zone,' Elizabeth said. Daisy would even help support her own little daughter, now four, as she was growing up. Elizabeth, 42, who works in education, realised she would have to change the Equality Act 2010 to put support animals on the same footing as guide dogs. She's doing that by enlisting help from her local MP Pete Wishart and lodging a petition at Westminster to show UK-wide support. Elizabeth says the change of the law will also help people with unseen conditions, avoiding embarrassing situations in public places. Her petition – called Daisy Companion Law – is live on the Commons website.
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
New ‘poo pills' could flush out killer bugs that kill one million Brits each year
SUPERBUGS, or drug-resistant infections, are projected to cause more than 39 million deaths between now and 2050. This means that, on average, over three people are expected to die from antibiotic -resistant infections every minute. But now UK doctor are attempting to clear the number of dangerous superbug infections by using pills containing freeze-dried faeces. The "poo pills" contain stool samples from health donors, packed with good bacteria. And the idea comes from previous data that suggests superbugs can be flushed out of the bowel and replaced with a mix of healthy gut bacteria. Dr Blair Merrick, who has been testing the pills at St Guys and Thomas' hospitals, said the focus is on the bowels which are "the biggest reservoir of antibiotic resistance in humans". The bowel is considered a significant reservoir for these resistant bacteria, and from there they can cause trouble in places such as the urinary tract or bloodstream. Dr Merrick added: "So there's a lot in 'can you get rid of them from the gut?" Currently, people with recurrent illness caused by hard-to-treat bacterium Clostridium difficile can be offered faecal transplants. Scientists noticed they also had the potential to get rid of superbugs. In a new study, published in the Journal of Infection, researchers focused on 41 patients who had an infection caused by drug-resistant bacteria in the past six months. They were given pills made from faeces which people had donated to a stool bank. What is Klebsiella pneumonia? Each stool sample was tested to ensure it didn't contain and harmful bugs. Undigested food was removed, and then it was freeze dried into a powder. The powder, contained inside a pill, can then pass through the stomach unharmed and reach the intestines, where it then dissolves. Twenty of the participants were given three sets of capsules on three consecutive days, while the rest received placebo pills. For those who took the capsules , the donor bacteria was detectable in their gut flora a month later. Dr Merrick told the BBC: "It's very exciting. There's a real shift from 20 years ago, where all bacteria and viruses were assumed to do you harm; to now where we realise they are completely necessary to our overall health." To help avoid getting superbugs, the NHS recommends practising good hygiene - wash your hands frequently with soap and water, especially before eating, after using the toilet, and after coughing or sneezing. Use antibiotics responsibly - avoid taking antibiotics for viral infections like colds or the flu, as they won't work. Even if you feel better, finish all of your prescribed medication to ensure the infection is fully treated. And don't share antibiotics - sharing can be harmful and can lead to resistance. Also, take preventative measures when travelling - choose food from reliable sources, and ensure food is properly cooked and handled, avoid drinking water that may be contaminated, and make sure you are up-to-date on all recommended vaccinations before travelling.
