Private company ‘removes free access’ to hospital bedside TVs as pandemic surges – SKWAWKBOX


All this equipment was installed some years ago on a National direction and hospitals had no choice but to accept it.

The concept was a great idea, but the relating costs to the patients who wishes to use it were exceedingly costly.

Now most patients will have a mobile phone so, should not need this equipment to obtain and make calls, but reception for phone signals in hospitals is spasmodic, meaning at times calls can’t be made or received. However, the hospital staff are very accommodating and will generally allow patients to use the ward phone on occasions, but with COVID-19 staff may be, now too busy to provide this.

So, the free use was very welcome, but for Hospedia to withdraw this facility, while they are entitled to do so, is not very customer friendly. Or was this Hospedia intention to allow usage and give patients a flavour, with the hope that these patients would then pay when the facility was withdrawn, especially without notice.

If this was so, then Hospedia are only interested in making a profit and have no concerns or thoughts for the patients.

I believe that the original contracts, which each hospital had to enter, are now due for renewal and hospitals have a choice whether to renew or not. If it was my choice then I would not renew the contract. During 2020 I was in hospital on 3 occasions and could not obtain a phone signal, but I could use the hospital free WiFi which I did as I took my laptop and others could use their mobiles or tablets through the free WiFi.

The Hospedia technology has now been superseded by personal media and therefore the need, if there ever was one, is now not required.

Going to hospital as an inpatient should not be a cause to obtain debt, which paying to use Hospedia technology could cause.

 
Private company ‘removes free access’ to hospital bedside TVs as pandemic surges – SKWAWKBOX

How Trump’s company charged the Secret Service more than $900,000 – The Washington Post


The president has taken other actions that have shattered his early promise to “completely isolate” himself from his business.

Source: How Trump’s company charged the Secret Service more than $900,000 – The Washington Post

SICK JOKE: Boots charges NHS £1,579 for tube of £2 cream – AND THERE’S WORSE : Express


A list of payment records shows that chemist Boots sent the frighteningly high bill to the NHS in 2016 for a patient in Barnet, north London.

As much as £650 was also paid for tubs of coconut oil that can be priced at a mere £1.

Claire Parker, the chief officer for quality at Sandwell and West Birmingham CCG, claimed that even if the oil had been charged at £30, the NHS would have still found itself “exploited”.

She explained: “Even if these mixtures cost £30 that would be overcharging.

 

Source: SICK JOKE: Boots charges NHS £1,579 for tube of £2 cream – AND THERE’S WORSE : Express

Social care companies ‘profiteering’ on the backs of the most vulnerable, says Burnham : Welfare Weekly.


I agree that social care and related health should be administered by one just one authority, but should it be health or social services or should a completely new authority be formed.

As to whether independent social care providers are profiteering from the system I am not too sure for to have quality care does cost.

If Andy Burnham is stating that these social care providers should be run by either social services or health rather than independently, this I would seriously contest. The reason being than generally the most expensive providers are run by these authorities as the lowest paid would generally be paid no less than the Living Wage as opposed to the National Living Wage, their pensions would generally be better as these may still be based on final salaries as to contribution as is the newly created work portable pensions which are being rolled out to all employees who are currently not in a pensionable employment.

The management structures will generally be more expensive to run than in a private provider, but this would depend on the extent of the profit being extracted by the owners from their care company. But with the current state of social services and health finances due to Government austerity cuts the scope for excessive profits are being restrictive.

With regards to zero hours contracts and I agree that they should not used in practice, Local Authorities do use these for some of their workforce, but I am not sure about health.

What should be occurring is zero contracts should be outlawed, everyone should be paid at least the Living wage, which would make the National Living wage redundant. In addition retain the independent providers, but insist on a effective quality control system, which should be independently monitored outwith the care provider, be they independent, Local Authority or health.

There are currently local independent HealthWatch organisation in all localities who do, at present, monitor Care home, GP surgeries, Pharmacies, Dentists and Opticians. Their remit should be extended to day services and all other care providers and their powers should be strengthened, for at present they can not insist to look at records kept by the respective organisations, unless the organisations offer them to the Enter and View representatives. Also they can only state recommendations, but these should be extended to be more than voluntary for the care providers to follow them.

Then the HealthWatch visits would be more on a par to the CQC (Care Quality Commission) inspections.

If the NHS is so desperate for money, why is it happy to spend £850 on a £23 roller blind? NHS managers are accused of failing to crack down on ‘profiteering suppliers’ : Daily Mail.


The NHS premium is always there and the NHS needs to be forever vigilant to ensure they are being offered a competitive price.

For many years many manufacturers have seen the NHS as a way to engineer a large profit, whereas the NHS should be treated equally with any other purchasers. While no one wishes for these manufacturers to make a loss, they themselves need to take into account that for any penny that they take over and above for a reasonable profit is reducing the money available for the NHS to use in treating its patients, no funding is infinite.

This relates to all suppliers be they be Pharmaceutical, medical equipment or any others.