A “crumbling” Surrey hospital trust says it is “cracking on” with plans for a new hospital and upgrades despite concerns the government could scrap a funding plan

Epsom General Hospital and St Helier Hospital had been marked for redevelopment under the previous Conservative governments’ £20bn New Hospital Programme. Regeneration of the health trust included a new emergency hospital in Sutton, South London, as well as much-needed facility upgrades. 

But Labour’s Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced last week she would review big hospital and road projects to fix a £22bn black hole in public finances. Although details are yet to be confirmed, the review will look into the previous government’s plan to build 40 new hospitals by 2030. 

Helen Maguire, Liberal Democrat MP for Epsom and Ewell, said her constituents “cannot wait any longer” for the investment.  Described as “crumbling”, “dilapidated” and “not fit for 21st century healthcare” in previous national reporting, the buildings at both the St Helier complex in Carshalton and the Epsom site are in dire need of repair. 

If the funding is not forthcoming, Mrs Maguire said she is concerned about the impact on the local staff and patients. “My constituents have been crying out for improvements at Epsom and St Helier and so it is vital that this project must go ahead,” she said.

The new Lib Dem MP said without the upgrade, staff and patients in Epsom, Ewell, Ashtead and Leatherhead would continue having to put up with substandard buildings.

Healthwatch Surrey, a non-profit advocating for locals to get the best of their NHS, claims wellbeing “does not solely lie in the hands of doctors and other frontline staff” but the built environment can also affect patient safety. According to NHS data from 2022/23, estate and infrastructure failures in England disrupted the care of more than 2,600 patients. 

Calling on the government to “protect funding for the new Emergency Care Hospital at Sutton”, Mrs Maguire said the new emergency hospital would relieve pressure on the current sites. She added she was “looking forward” to meeting the Health Secretary to relay the concerns of people in Epsom, Ewell, Ashtead and Leatherhead.

The news comes as another let down for locals after the £219m redevelopment of St Helier hospital promised by the 2010 Conservative-Lib Dem government also came off the rails. Budget cuts and a difficult ‘financial context’ were cited as the reasons at the time.

Most of the buildings at Epsom and St Helier are older than the NHS itself. Staff are reportedly working in areas with damp mould, leaking roofs, and floods. Trying to patch up failing infrastructure and out-of-date facilities is unsustainable for any hospital. 

“Our ageing buildings are not fit for purpose,” said a spokesperson for Epsom and St Helier Hospital NHS Trust. They said: “We’re cracking on with plans for a new hospital and upgrades to our existing sites while this review takes place.”

Plans include building a new Specialist Emergency Care Hospital in Sutton, where the sicker patients would have access to high quality care in state-of-the-art facilities. The Trust also plans to invest in Epsom and St Helier hospitals, where 85 per cent of patients will continue to receive care.

The spokesperson added: “We continue to make significant progress, from detailed pre-planning application discussions, to refining designs of the new hospital, bringing us closer to a state-of-the-art facility that our patients and staff deserve.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said the previous government’s commitment to build 40 new hospitals by 2030 is “undeliverable and unaffordable”. The funding allocated by the previous government runs out in March.

They said: “We must reset the New Hospital Programme to put it on a sustainable footing, following persistent delays and cost overruns.” The Department of Health and Social Care is launching a full review of the programme to provide a “thorough, costed and realistic timeline for delivery”.

The spokesperson added: “We can replace the crumbling hospital estate in England. This government is determined to be honest with people about what can be delivered, and not let them down again.”

A controversial plan to build 446 homes on Green Belt land near Horley, Surrey, has been approved on appeal, overturning the local council’s initial rejection.

The development, proposed by Rydon Homes, will include up to 446 homes – including 201 affordable homes (45 per cent), and four Traveller pitches on land west of Reigate Road in Hookwood. Mole Valley District Council (MVDC)  confirmed there is a significant unmet need for this type of specific housing within the local area.

Despite concerns about its impact on the Green Belt, the planning inspector ruled that the “very substantial public benefits” of the housing outweighed the harm to the protected area. This decision comes amid what the inspector called “an acute need for affordable housing” in the district.

MVDC rejected the outline planning application, claiming it could appear “cramped” and “incongruous” with the surrounding area. MVDC’s initial decision report from November 2023 said the development will have a “detrimental transport impact”.

However since then, the authority changed the site from being a ‘protected area’ in the Local Plan to a ‘potential development site’ – so they could not defence their original decision. The developer launched an appeal.

The scheme was allowed after the developer Rydon Homes attended the inquiry with a team of 16 headed by a KC. At the start of the hearing MVDC & Charlwood Parish Council withdrew their objections to the planning application.

The inspector noted the opportunities for transport, employment and other facilities due to its proximity to Hookwood, Horley and Gatwick Airport. He also found transport options were satisfactory and in agreement with Surrey County Council.

Concerns were raised by locals that the increase of around a thousand new residents would put pressure on GPs and schools. Rough plans put forward by the developer suggests it will create new community facilities like early education, but details are not yet apparent.

Although the inspectorate agreed there was a degree of harm to the character and appearance of the neighbourhood, he concluded there was “very special circumstances” to build on the Green Belt.

Image: View of development land west from Hookwood, Horley. (Credit: Google Street View)

An ex-serving Surrey Police officer has been banned from the profession for gross misconduct after viewing body-worn camera footage of a “significant local and national case” without a legitimate reason.

The Local Democracy Reporting Service understands that the footage was of the moment the headteacher of Epsom College was found dead. Surrey Police have not confirmed which specific footage was viewed, however the date of the footage aligns with the date that officers were called to Epsom College.

Emma Pattison, 45, was found dead alongside her seven-year-old Lettie, in the grounds of the Surrey school, on 5 February 2023. Mrs Pattison’s husband, George Pattison, is believed to have shot them at their home before killing himself.

The former Surrey Police cop, Mr Baseer Ahmed, admitted he watched the body-worn video (BWV) footage of the serious incident on 5 February, but denies he did so without a policing purpose.

The police misconduct hearing panel, held July 1, found Mr Ahmed breached professional standards as he unnecessarily watched footage of the police attending the scene, where the victims were found.

Professional standards state that there must be an express policing purpose to access body-worn camera footage, to ensure it is not accessed unnecessarily.

Mr Ahmed watched some- not all- of the footage on February 7, days after the major incident was reported, and picked up by newspapers. He was not given specific instructions to look at the footage nor carry out any enquiries, according to the misconduct report.

A Staff Officer for Chief Superintendent Budd since 2022, Mr Ahmed’s role included accessing additional information for his Chief Superintendent. Working in West Surrey, the panel noted it was not in this instance appropriate for Mr Ahmed to find out information from other divisions.

The panel found Mr Ahmed did not appear to be watching the video as part of a genuine work activity. For example, he made no notes, did not attempt to discover the location of the incident or tell any senior colleagues about it.

Although admitting he watched part of the video footage, Mr Ahmed has continually denied not having a justifiable policing purpose for accessing the footage. He also denies a breach of the standards and that his conduct amounts to gross misconduct.

The panel was not satisfied and Mr Ahmed was found to have breached standards of professional behaviour, confidentiality, orders and instructions. The report reads: “It is important to remember the high standards that members of the public rightly expect Police Officers to adhere to, the extremely difficult circumstances being faced by family members in this particular case and the likely effect that unnecessary viewing of the footage would have on them.”

The panel agreed this amounted to gross misconduct and it would harm the public’s view of the police service for watching footage of a major incident without legitimate purpose. This was aggravated by Mr Ahmed acting contrary to national guidance, without any specific instructions and continuing asserting he had valid policing reasons to access the footage.

Mr Ahmed resigned from Surrey Police on December 15, 2023 – 10 months from the incident- with his last day being January 15 this year. If he was still a serving officer, the panel said he would have been dismissed to maintain public confidence in and to uphold high standards in policing

Whilst Mr Ahmed attended the two Pre-hearings, he did not attend the misconduct hearing due to ‘personal reasons’ he cited in an email.

Head of Professional Standards, Superintendent Andy Rundle said: “The public rightly expect that police officers behave at all times with integrity and respect.

“Ex-officer Ahmed breached this trust when he looked at body worn footage of a crime scene, despite having no policing purpose. This behaviour is not acceptable, and a thorough professional standards investigation was launched.”

A full inquest into the deaths of George, Emma and Lettie Pattison is due to take place later this month on July 30.

Surrey police said they are not officially confirming what body worn footage Mr Ahmed viewed due to “other ongoing judicial processes” that have not yet been concluded. The full inquests into the deaths are expected to take place on July 30.  Surrey Police confirmed it is the Epsom College incident “off the record”.

_{Image – Epsom College: Naveed Barakzai/Maxal Photography. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license}

Plans for new speed limits in Surrey could go ahead despite lack of confidence it would improve road safety.

Locals said they considered road conditions and potholes to have a greater impact on safe driving and cycling.

Reviewing speed limits is part of Surrey County Council’s (SCC) road safety strategy called ‘Vision Zero’ in partnership with Surrey Police (including the Police and Crime Commissioner), Surrey Fire and Rescue and National Highway colleagues. It aims to halve the number of collisions where someone is killed or seriously injured on the roads by 2035, with the ambition to get to ‘zero’ by 2050.

In the early 2000s Surrey had 60-70 deaths on the road every year and in the last few years it has reduced 30 or under, a Surrey County Council committee heard July 18. Cllr Matt Furniss (Conservative Cabinet Member for Transport and Infrastructure) said the number of collisions has “plateaued” around the 30 mark.

Highlights of the strategy include: introducing more 20mph limits around schools, town centres and residential areas, investing in sophisticated speed cameras to tackle the worst speeding and casualty routes; review 60 mph rural speed limits and replace them with lower limits.

Over 3,600 people responded to the consultation between January and March this year, both Surrey drivers and local residents.

Concerns were raised that 70 per cent of respondents were not confident or neutral that the strategy would improve road safety in Surrey, causing councillors to question whether it should rethink the proposal.

Respondents said they felt road maintenance had a greater impact on road safety and therefore the money would be better spent on fixing potholes and improving roads. “I would much prefer to see the roads we already have maintained better rather than new interventions,” one respondent said.

Officers admitted road maintenance is “crucial”, but said it was not the purpose of the multi-partner strategy. They added that “significant work” was already taking place to address the road defects.

Despite not having data to hand to show if improved road maintenance would lead to less road collisions, officers said police reports would let SCC know if this was the case.

The committee heard that potholes and road defects were occasionally mentioned in police reports but the speed limits and road maintenance “goes hand in hand” and “needs to work together” to improve safety.

Half of the responses (1,832) disagreed with the proposal for new 20mph speed limits, with 10 per cent (around 366) feeling neutral. The report stated the public had a “mixed view” on the subject.

Sceptical of this, Cllr Mark Sugden (Conservative) said: “Is the issue a lack of understanding and communication, or is there a fundamental disagreement to the proposed strategy?”

Officers claimed not everyone understood the policy. They highlighted 135 (4 per cent) of the respondents who had disagreed with implementing 20mph speed limits, had in fact aligned with the proposals. These included comments that did not support a blanket approach but only supported 20 mph limits in town centres, residential areas or near schools but not on main roads.

Negative comments by the public said 20mph limits do not improve safety (170 responses) and increase congestion and air pollution (132 responses). Officers accepted some people may be against the proposals but argued their reasoning went against national research shown in their report.

Officers repeatedly stressed that enforcing 20mph speed limits would not be a “blanket approach” and would, if approved by the cabinet, be subject to local consultation. They added the council needed to communicate its road safety message more effectively with residents.

With only 46 per cent of respondents being happy or very happy with the approach, officers said they had “hoped for more support” for the proposals. A further 20 per cent were neutral to the safe roads approach.

The committee resolved that SCC needed to address the public’s perception that fixing potholes would improve road safety and the concern whether the strategy will succeed.

_{Image: Neighbouring London Borough of Kingston’s Bridge Road approach to Epsom and Ewell 20 mph zone.}

Pothole damage has given rise to 5,619 claims for compensation from Surrey residents to the county council since May 2021.

Since the last local election three years ago, only 581 claims were successful (just over 10 per cent) resulting in £190,000 spent on repayment.

in 2024 so far, up to May, only 12 out of 1,204 claims have been repaid by Surrey County Council (SCC), with £4,435.15 being paid.

As the local highways authority, SCC is only liable to pay for damage to vehicles if it can be proved it has been negligent in the inspection and maintenance of its roads.

“Rather than 90 per cent of the claims being fraudulent, it is more likely that only 10 per cent of people are determined enough to see through a difficult process to the end,” said Cllr George Potter (Lib Dem/Guildford East) at a county council AGM meeting on May 21.

Cllr Potter said the process is “very difficult and time consuming and bureaucratic” which will “discourage many people from going all the way through with their claims.”

Residents can apply for compensation if they suffer personal injury or property damage due to council-owned roads.

For their claim to be successful, they must provide a long list of information such as the details of damage plus two independent estimates for repair, exact location, proof of ownership and current MOT and insurance, travel direction as well as time, date and weather conditions.

Rebutting the accusation, cabinet member for finance and resources, Cllr David Lewis (Conservative/Cobham) said he did not believe the claims were “fraudulent” in any way but that the criteria was not met.

“We have a duty to protect our finances and money raised from residents,” Cllr Lewis said. “[SCC] simply can’t have a process where every claim put in is paid out. The system we currently have is fair.” He added there are no plans to review the criteria or the process of compensating pothole claims.

Fixing approximately 50,000 potholes a year on average, Surrey County Council has budgeted to spend £5m of its annual budget on repairing potholes and other road safety defects.

SCC inspects its major roads (A roads), roads connecting traffic between A roads and smaller roads (B roads) and some smaller roads (often linking a housing estate or a village to the rest of the network) once a month. Rural roads connecting to smaller communities are inspected once every three months, according to guidance on SCC’s website.

As a general rule, the county says, the diameter of the pothole at the surface level should be less than 150mm on carriageways for cars to require it to be repaired within five working days. If it is not possible to permanently correct or repair the defect within the time period, a permanent repair should be carried out within 20 working days.

Related reports:

Pothole payouts and repairs penalise Councillor projects?

On the Hunt for pothole repairs

Don’t blame us for potholes say Surrey’s highway authority.

Going potty about pot-holes?

Parents say “children and families lives are at stake” after the repeated “failings” by Surrey County Council (SCC) over special needs provision for children. Local authorities are legally obliged to carry out Education, Health and Care (EHC) assessments for children with special needs, and have a statutory duty to deliver special educational provision.

“It needs to be like the Post Office scandal,” said Erika on a rainy morning outside SCC Headquarters Woodhatch Place. Five women gathered outside Woodhatch Place in Reigate to protest against SCC “failing” children with special needs. She said SCC is “flouting the law” and “criminal” for failing to provide EHC plans for many children with special needs.

One parent, Sharren Bridges held a placard of her daughter Jen who committed suicide in 2021, aged just 17. It read: “a multi-agency, systemic failure”, referring to the coroner’s conclusion that SCC, amongst other organisations, failed to ensure Jen’s needs were met which contributed to her tragic death.

Diagnosed with Autism and ADHD at age 10, Jen did not have an EHCP plan which reflected her mental health needs. The coroner also found that opportunities were missed to make an EHCP application at an earlier stage, to ensure she was in better educational setting.

Cllr Clare Curran, (Conservative Fetcham West) Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, said in a press statement: “We take the findings from the Coroner extremely seriously and sincerely apologise for any part our services played in Jen Chalkley’s tragic death and the distress of all those who love her. Following the hearing, we are working hard to ensure we learn from the findings and to ensure necessary changes are made as quickly as possible.

“We are resolute in our ambition to improve services and outcomes for children and young people with additional needs and disabilities so that they are happy, healthy, safe and confident about their future.”

Susanne Stonewood, a single mum, has paid more than £12,000 in legal fees fighting for her son’s EHCP. Her son waited 64 weeks (the legal requirement for the process is to be completed within 20 weeks) for an allegedly ‘inappropriate’ EHCP.

She told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) outside the SCC meeting that she was informed “in no uncertain terms” by a SEN professional that her son is “too academically and socially vulnerable to ever set foot in a mainstream secondary school”. Going into Year 6, Ms Stonewood is “fighting” to get the EHCP to meet her son’s needs ready for secondary school.

“SCC are blocking the process at every single stage for [educational] provision for their children.”

Parents protesting outside the council offices were also calling for the council’s Director for Children, Families and Lifelong Learning, Rachael Wardell, to hand back her OBE.

Mrs Rachael Wardell, who is also vice president of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services for 2024/25, was awarded an OBE in the King’s Birthday Honours List. She was granted the honour due to her services to children’s social care both inside and out of Surrey.

But parents claim it is under her watch that SCC has dismissed its legal duty to support children with SEND. They argue it would send a devastating message to families and belittle their struggles and legal battles to try and secure the education children are entitled to.

Ms Stonewood said. “We feel it’s inappropriate that Rachael Wardell has been handed an OBE and she should give it back.”

More than 1,900 people signed a petition asking for her OBE award to be blocked. Many parents have commented they feel this has echoes of the Post Office scandal in which Paula Vennells was handed an OBE despite presiding over the Horizon scandal.

Cllr Curran added: “We acknowledge as a council that we have not always got things right for all families and that the service received by some children and young people with additional needs and disabilities has not always been as good as we would like it to have been. We apologise to impacted families for that.

“We are committed to continuing to improve our services and a recent Local Area SEND Inspection found that, although there is more to do, the right actions are being taken and we are starting to see progress.

Councillors Fiona White (Lib Dem/Guildford West) and Cllr Robert Evans OBE (Labour/Stanwell and Stanwell Moor) praised Mrs Wardell and Leader Tim Oliver in Surrey’s full council meeting on July 9.

Meanwhile, Cllr Joanne Sexton (Residents’ Association/Ashford) said parents and carers in her borough were “appalled that Surrey received an honour in the King’s birthday honours list.” She said that residents in her borough have shared their struggles with her, particularly with the fight for children’s education despite clear legislation meant to support them.

Cllr Sexton spoke of parents’ and carers’ “fight against the council which continues to fail to meet its legal and moral obligations”. She added that parents win 97% of legal cases, “highlighting the council’s systemic failure to comply within the law”. Ending her statement at the council, Cllr Sexton was greeted with a round of applause from other members.

SCC has seen a 64% increase in EHCP needs assessment requests across Surrey since 2020, at a time of a national shortage of educational psychologists, and this has naturally had an impact.

Cllr Curran said they have been prioritising the timeliness of statutory assessments through additional investment and focussed work with families. The service has reduced the number of delayed EHCP requests from 1,658 in October 2023 to 56 by the end of June 2024. SCC said it has also issued over 1,500 new EHCPs this year up to the end of June.

She added: “53% of EHCPs issued in May were done so within the statutory 20 week timescale, returning Surrey rates to above the 2023 national average of 50%. We are striving to improve this further over the next few months and are aiming to reach 70% timeliness during the autumn term.”

SCC was invited to comment on campaigners calling for Rachael Wardell to give back her recently-awarded OBE.

Related reports:

King’s Gongs for Surrey leaders

Council pays £3,900 to mother of SEND child

Surrey County failed SEND boy

_{Image: Parents protesting Surrey County Council\’s special needs provision. (Credit: Emily Dalton/LDRS)}

Guildford Borough Council (GBC) has failed to meet new rules on social housing a judgement has rules.

The report published by the Regulator for Social Housing (RSH) said the social landlord for around 5,200 homes is “failing”on a number of legal health and safety requirements.

Around 1,700 homes have been left without an up-to-date electrical condition report and another 1,000 with unsatisfactory certificates, according to the RSH’s report. GBC told the RSH it does not have evidence of a current electrical condition report for more than 100 communal blocks, and it could not provide evidence it had completed around 1,300 fire safety actions.

Introduced on April 1 this year, the new consumer standards intended to drive landlords to deliver long term improvements for tenants. In the first bunch of regulatory judgements RSH gave Guildford a ‘C3’ grading, which means there are serious failings and it needs to make significant improvements.

Reports by the RSH, published July 9, said: “The information provided by Guildford BC to us during our engagement with it demonstrates that Guildford BC is failing to ensure that it meets a number of legal requirements in relation to health and safety”.

Findings from the report also showed GBC had not collected Tenant Satisfaction Measures from tenants, which all social landlords are required to do. RSH judgement report said: “Guildford BC has been unable to explain the reasons for its failure to collect this data, and as a result, tenants are not supported to effectively scrutinise Guildford BC’s performance in delivering landlord services.”

In December 2023, GBC said it identified some areas of concern within its landlord housing function included potentially unnecessary repairs being carried out to tenants’ homes. Referring itself to the government’s Regulator of Social Housing (RSH), GBC has since identified other concerns relating to its legal landlord health and safety compliance.

Commenting on the Regulator’s report, Leader of the Council and Lead Councillor for Housing, Cllr Julia McShane responded: “Everyone living in a council property deserves to have a safe and secure home. Since December 2023, we’ve taken urgent action to improve our service. We can evidence progress across all areas of compliance and building safety which includes a real time compliance dashboard, recruitment of expert officers and procurement of building safety contracts.

The leader of the Liberal Democrat-run council said it has reviewed all electrical information data to confirm an accurate position of where it is. GBC has also procured two short term contractors to complete the certification work by July 2025.

McShane said a fire risk validation exercise has confirmed there are no outstanding high-risk actions. She added that a new contractor is now revisiting the low to medium risk properties to validate them, arrange any works required and update the council’s position.

“Our engagement with the Regulator will be ongoing and plays an integral and intensive part of our improvement plan as we work to resolve all of the issues identified and achieve full compliance for our residents,” McShane added.

 Image: © Copyright Colin Smith and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.

Plans for an Aldi store have been rejected again over fears the increased traffic would have a severe impact on road safety.

[The site is a few hundred yards away from another German owned supermarket Lidl in Upper High Street.]

A proposal to create the budget supermarket on the vacant former Dairy Crest site in Alexandra Road was refused a second time at an Epsom and Ewell council meeting on July 10.

The application was first thrown out in 2015 following concerns about the site’s location, level of car parking and traffic, and the effect on the character of the neighbourhood.

The new application for the £5m development in Epsom includes car parking, some landscaping but plans for residential units have been scrapped.

Councillor Jan Mason (Residents’ Association/Ruxley Ward) said the supermarket giant should “do far better” on the design of the building if it “wants to come to a lovely area such as Epsom”.

Although Aldi said it had “refined” its proposals, carefully designing an “attractive, bespoke Aldi food store” which would “respect the surrounding area”, councillors were still concerned about its location.

Despite Surrey Highways advising the development “would be unlikely to result in a severe impact” on local traffic, councillors remained sceptical. Speaking before the debate, Ward Cllr Julie Morris (Lib Dem/College Ward) said there would be a “huge” impact on local residents who already feel the surrounding residential roads are a “rat run”.

“The one thing you can’t put in a spreadsheet is common sense,” Cllr Chris Watson (Residents Association/ Ewell Court Road) said. He argued that regardless of “clever” data from the county council, “common sense” says it is a busy junction which could result in queuing traffic.

Agreeing with him, other councillors said the “already challenging junction” is “fraught with danger”. It was agreed it was in the interests of residents, motorists, pedestrians and children crossing to go to school that councillors had to reject the application.

However, Cllr Clive Woodridge (Residents’ Association/ Ewell Village Ward) argued it was not viable to refuse the application on traffic and road concerns. He said Surrey Highway experts have judged the development acceptable and this could not be easily defended at appeal.

But Cllr Mason called the development a ticking “time bomb”, which could lead to a fatal collision if plans goes ahead.

Speaking to the committee, local resident Leah said: “The council has had feedback multiple times that local residents don’t want a food store here.” She cited Aldi’s own research from its application that 58-61% of local residents objected to the proposal.

Around 91 letters were sent opposing the scheme, arguing it was an ‘unacceptable location’ for a food store at a busy junction. Concerns were raised that traffic would be exacerbated, a pedestrian crossing would be dangerous and the brownfield site should be saved for affordable housing.

_{Aldi superstore. (Credit: Marques Thomas/Unsplash)}

An “underestimation” of suicide risk and significant mental health ‘failings’ contributed to the death of a vulnerable teenager, a Senior Coroner has found.

Locket Williams, described by their family as “a lovely person with a huge character”, was just 15 years old when they tragically killed themselves in September 2021.

Senior Coroner Richard Travers concluded that there were a number of key failures by Surrey and Borders Partnership (SABP) NHS Foundation Trust’s Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) which contributed to the death of the vulnerable teenager, who goes by they/them pronouns. The three-week inquest concluded Friday 31 May.

Locket’s older sister, Emily, said: “Hearing the coroner recognize what we have believed for three long years—that failures by CAMHS contributed to Locket’s death and ultimately meant Locket lost all hope—is heartbreaking.

“We’re thankful for the Coroner’s respect for Locket’s identity, which was so important to them, and we sincerely hope this process will help prevent more tragic deaths like Locket’s in the future.”

Described by their family as “vibrant” with a “massive heart”, Locket “brought colour to everything they participated in” their family said.

They had a long history of mental health difficulties, resulting in self-harming behaviours and three previous suicide attempts throughout within seven months of 2021. 

Evidence heard at the inquest highlighted “illogical conclusions” that Locket was deemed “low risk” by clinicians, despite their ongoing suicidal ideation and three suicide attempts in close succession, the family’s lawyers said. 

Coroner Travers found that Locket’s high risk of suicide was “underestimated” by clinicians, as there was an “insufficient account” of Locket’s long-running risk, which meant Locket did not receive the treatment they needed. 

Commenting on the Coroner’s findings, the family’s solicitor, Elle Gauld from Simpson Millar’s public law team, said: “Given Locket’s three suicide attempts and deteriorating mental health, CAMHS’ approach repeatedly defied logic and palpable evidence of suicidality, bypassing the patient’s express wishes and placing an unrealistic burden on a family already in crisis. Treatment was not commenced in a timely manner”

Long waiting lists for Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and a shortage of therapists meant that, although clinicians all agreed CBT was necessary, Locket remained at home. Without access to the required support and treatment, their mental health continued to deteriorate, the lawyers for the family said. 

Coroner Travers said there was a ‘failure’ to assess the likelihood Locket could be kept safe while waiting eight months for Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (‘CBT’), a treatment she was ready and willing to engage in. 

Failures in communication between social services and CAMHS were also identified, leading to crucial information being missed in Locket’s assessment and care. CAMHS failed to attend Core Groups meetings held by social services to protect Locket, as a vulnerable child. 

Locket was passed from service to service, with no continuous care from the same clinicians or who was responsible for Locket’s care, lawyers said. 

Speaking of the family’s loss, Locket’s mother, Hazel Williams, said: “We hope the lessons learned from their death highlight the urgent need for change and prevent future tragedies. We are grateful for the thoroughness of this inquest and the potential for positive changes in managing mental health services for young people.”

SABP has 56 days to respond to the senior coroner’s findings. Coroner Tavers has asked the NHS Trust to report whether there is now a system in place to ensure that young people referred to CAMHS are seen and treated promptly, and that clinicians are acting in accordance with the Trust’s guidelines.

A Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust spokesperson said: “We are extremely saddened by the tragic death of Locket Williams and our deepest sympathies go to their family and friends. 

“We are carefully reflecting on the Coroner’s findings and the questions we have been asked and will respond within the given timeframe.”

_{Image: Locket. (Credit: Simpson Millar law firm) Coroners Court in background – Google}

A driving instructor said he’s on a “one man crusade” to fix the roads around Redhill Aerodrome Driving Test Centre.  Martin Pitchley, 57, said he was “shocked” at the road conditions in Redhill, Surrey.

Unreadable road markings, overgrown hedges blocking speed signs and poor road conditions were some of the issues raised by the driving instructor.

“It’s not very fair for students taking their test with all these problems with the road which is caused by poor road management by the [county] council,” Martin said.

Emailing Surrey County Council (SCC) on June 3, Martin said nothing has been done to fix the issue.

A SCC highways maintenance officer said the vegetation covering road signs will be removed as part of the rural cut back of Earlswood and Reigate South on July 19 . Fixing chevrons and replacing speed signs have also been requested on a list of works to be done.

Students who are just about to take their driving test come out of the centre not knowing what the speed limit is on that road, according to Martin. He claims a speed sign had been knocked over and lying down in a hedge for over six months.

Outside the driving test centre is the 40mph Kings Mill Lane, but Martin says there is no signage until a good few hundred yards up the road.

He said: “It’s not fair to be giving students tuition and telling them there should be a speed limit here but there’s not one, or it’s knocked down.

“It’s an unsafe speed for that road” he added, “It’s got so many sharp bends, and big lorries yet students are expected to drive 40 mph up there.

“It’s like a one-man crusade really. It’s not really fair for the students going up to the test centre and taking their test with all these problems with the road.”

Not only worried for his driving students, Martin said he was concerned for the general public including pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.

“They are very severe and dangerous [roads] for any motorists, either for a learner or a full-time experienced driver,” he said. “They have to drive up these roads and find there’s a big steep dip in the roads or uneven roads that will make them steer awkwardly or crash their car.”

According to Crash Map data, seven ‘slight’ accidents and two ‘serious’ incidents with vehicles have occurred on Kings Mill Lane between 2018-2022.

Martin said the county council has had enough time to fix the issues with the road and wants to see change. He said: “I just want this issue to be resolved so students can go up to their driving test, get a fair test, and members of the public are not going to get hit by a speeding car.”

A SCC spokesperson said: “We appreciate the concerns raised and our Highways officers have been in communication with the individual to talk through the issues.

“The grass verges in question will be cut as part of our twice per annum rural cuts – information on where and when these take place are available on our website.

“Requests to replace speed signs in the area have been raised, however these need to be prioritised against other requests across the county and officers will review this as soon as they can.”

Image: Driving instructor Martin Pitchley, Credit: Road Rules Driving.

Surrey County Council (SCC) has been ordered to pay out £1,500 by the social care ombudsman for a ‘service failure’ in defaulting its legal duty to provide SEND transport to and from school. The local authority is already predicted an overspend of £7.3m on SEND school transport for its 2024-25 annual budget.

A family has received £1,500 after Surrey County Council (SCC) failed to provide a child with complex medical needs school transport adding pressure to the family. The boy missed 27 days of education as well as special needs provision, causing his mother and the wider family “avoidable” distress.

The provider suspended the child’s transport after no longer feeling able to meet the boy’s change in medical needs, on June 15, 2023. The boy waited for his school transport to pick him up the next morning but it did not arrive to collect him. It was not until lunchtime until the travel provider informed the Council that it had suspended its service.

SCC speedily offered the mum a travel allowance while it explored longer term solutions but she felt ‘pressured’ into taking  this as she did not have the time to recruit carers. The travel allowance is a more cost-effective option than managed transport services.

Report documents detail the “avoidable distress, frustration and inconvenience” that the child’s transport withdrawal caused his family. The social ombudsman said “the council did exactly what we would expect in the circumstances it found itself in” and it now has contracts with two ambulance-style providers able to transport children with complex medical needs.

A SCC spokesperson said it would not comment on individual cases and “although the report does recognise that we put appropriate mitigations in place, we accept the findings from the Ombudsman report and sincerely apologise for any distress caused”.

They added: “We know how important it is for children and young people to have access to their education setting, however a lack of suitable providers has meant that some children who require specialist provision for high and/or complex medical needs have had to wait longer for appropriate arrangements than we would like. In these circumstances we always work actively with families to find a solution and offer measures such as personal travel allowances in the interim.”

The ombudsman demanded the council pay his mother £1,000 in recognition of his missed education and SEN provision during the period he had no transport to school, plus £500 for the ‘avoidable distress’ it caused her and her family.

An overspend of £7.3m, all based on home to school transport, is already predicted one month into SCC’s new budget for 2024-25. In 2023, SCC saw an overspend of £12m on SEND transport, with nearly a third of the transport costs being to independent schools outside of Surrey.

Rising demand, more travel days and anticipated increase in the number of children who need transport have contributed to a pressurised budget. SCC said it is reviewing all discretionary travel arrangements, tightening applications and is actively promoting personal travel allowance to manage costs.

A SCC spokesperson added: “We have seen a 64% increase in education, health and care needs assessment requests across Surrey since 2020, which has naturally had a knock on effect with a year on year increase in demand for Home to School Travel Assistance (HTSTA) as many children and young people with an education, health and care plan require HTSTA. This has resulted in a predicted overspend for this service.”

_{Image: Credit: Arriva436 CC BY-SA 2.0}

A Surrey trainee police officer, who ‘joked’ he would rape a domestic abuse victim, has been sacked from Surrey Police.

PC Samuel Wilton, a trainee officer since 2023, admitted gross to misconduct at an accelerated hearing on June 26.

Fellow officers reported PC Wilton ‘joking’ that “if she [a woman] was a domestic violence victim I would still rape her” on a night out in Five and Lime Bar in Guildford on January 5.

Comments made by the trainee officer included: “If they were single, I would break her in half”. He also said: “If there was a Domestic Violence (DV) victim who was fit, I would rape her” then adding: “If the DV victim was fit and dead, I would still rape her”.

The training group, for which PC Wilton was part, had received training about professional behaviour and standards expected in the police force on the very same day that he made the comments.

PC Wilton was then placed on restricted duties. Still in police training, PC Wilton was never on front line duties.

Allegations against PC Wilton were proven in the hearing, and he was found to have breached the Standards of Professional Behaviour amounting to gross misconduct. “I am absolutely disgusted with myself,” PC Wilton said during the hearing, as he told inspectors about his life-long ambition to be in the force. He added: “I will never forgive myself of a lifetime of focus for a moment of madness.”

PC Wilton assured the hearing that he has “grown as a person”, reflecting ‘daily’ on his comments. PC Wilton also said he has taken reading courses he has taken on sex and gender equality to educate himself.

“I am more than this incident and this mistake,” PC Wilton told the hearing as he asked for a second chance. He added: “In my naivety and thoughtlessness, I have contributed to the [misogynistic and abusive culture] that the police try to eradicate.”

However Peter Gardner, Assistant Chief Constable for Surrey, concluded: “For the public interest you should cease public duty immediately.” He stressed that, although the incident amounted to gross misconduct, there is no evidence or allegation that PC Milton is a threat to the public. 

The hearing heard that, drunkenness was “no defence” for his behaviour, as agreed by both investigation officers and PC Wilton, who said he never intended to offend anyone.

The misconduct hearing noted the trainee officer does not regularly drink to excess and so ‘could not have foreseen’ his conduct.

The panel concluded that the incident could damage the police’s reputation and make the public think less of the police.

Recent high-profile incidents such as Hampshire police officers sending discriminatory whatsapp messages were highlighted as part of a perceived ‘culture of misogyny’ within the police. Investigating officers said they wanted to send a very clear message of “there is no place for you in the police service” if misconduct is found.

The misconduct hearing concluded that “anything less than a dismissal would not achieve the purpose of misconduct proceedings” and “fail to maintain public confidence and the police’s reputation”.

Acknowledging PC Wilton’s regret, lifetime ambition to be in the force and commitment to the civic duty, Assistant Chief Cons said in his closing remarks: “Please don’t let this determine the rest of your life”.

Numerous character references were given to the hearing from PC Wilton’s former colleagues, mostly female, including those from his time in the RAF. One female colleague said the comments were “completely out of character” for PC Wilton, with others praising his ‘teamwork’, ‘professionalism’ and ’emotional intelligence.

Deputy Chief Constable Nev Kemp said in a statement to the press after the meeting: “The comments made by PC Wilton are deeply offensive and disgraceful for any police officer to make, whether on or off duty and simply cannot be condoned.

“I am pleased that his colleagues reported his behaviour without delay. This demonstrates that this standard of behaviour is not tolerated in Surrey Police, and I commend them for taking the immediate action that they did.

“Fortunately, PC Wilton has never carried out any frontline duties or come into contact with members of the public as a police officer. His conduct on that night falls far short of the high standards and example expected of our officers and staff in order to maintain the trust and confidence of our local communities.”

PC Wilton will have five working days to lodge an appeal against his dismissal.

_{Image: Surrey Police ethics print on wall at Mount Browne HQ. (Credit: Emily Dalton/LDRS)}

Labour’s proposal to add VAT to private school fees has ignited a fierce debate in Surrey, home to numerous prestigious independent schools. The policy, aimed at generating £1.5 billion to improve state education, has drawn both sharp criticism and staunch support from local residents, educators, and politicians

One Surrey grandmother explained that her grandchildren go to private school and says she thought it is a “ridiculous” policy on “hard-working people”.

Labour has said that if it wins the general election it plans to remove tax exemptions that private schools enjoy, generating around £1.5billion. The most significant of these is scrapping VAT exemptions on private school fees.

Critics say taxing private schools does not hit the super rich but hurts middle-income parents. Cllr Kate Fairhurst (Conservative/ Reigate) said: “I am very concerned that Labour’s plans will punish families striving and investing for a better future for their children.”

Private schools could make cuts to absorb the added VAT cost, Labour Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves has said, so it is not passed on to parents.

Profoundly objecting, Roger Jones, a previous Conservative candidate for Dorking. said: “Private schools would have to axe a third of its [departments]”, causing the most affluent of pupils to move to other fee paying schools” or in the public sector. He added the suggestion of cuts as an option is rooted in the Labour’s envy of the privately educated.

With the money raised, Labour said it will improve standards in state schools by employing 6,500 teachers, improving schools and careers advice, as well as helping pay for mental health support staff in every secondary school.

Surrey has around 140 private schools: including primary, secondary and special schools. Fees vary between schools, but the cost of independent education in Surrey is above the national average.

They range from £18,975–£38,367 per year for day pupils and from £25,290–£47,535 per year for boarding. With an addition of 20% tax, this would hike the figures to £22,770- £46,040 annually for day pupils and £30,348- £57,042 for students at boarding schools. To those who can just about squeeze £18k for a year of schooling, the added VAT may make the private sector unaffordable.

“It would be a huge backward step for the county,” added Roger Jones He said: “Should Labour find themselves in government, then this policy will disadvantage every single child of school age and those yet to come.” He argued that taxing private schools would cost the state more than it is projected to generate as more children would move to the public school system.

One woman, who wished to remain anonymous, expressed concerns that the influx of previously private schooled children in the state sector could put strain on already struggling public schools. “Walloping private schools isn’t going to make the state schools better and the money raised will be a drop in the ocean compared to the financial needs of the sector,” she added.

Concerns were raised about the tax not affecting prestigious schools, like Eton, where the woman claimed the pupils are from very wealthy families. She said: “The imposition of 20% VAT won’t even begin to affect the attitude of [those] who are brought up by such schools to believe that they are superior to everyone else.”

Twenty-three-year-old Grace, who went to a comprehensive school in leafy Esher, said raising fees could increase elitism in private schools, making bullying and student dynamics worse. She said: “It’s no secret that private schools have a self-proclaimed elitist culture, and increasing VAT will mean the super rich will be more prolific in these schools.”

The vast majority of independent schools are classed as charities or non-profit making trusts. For-profit schools are not allowed in the UK so funds go towards running and improving schools.

Speaking to people on the doorstep, Guildford ’s Lib Dem candidate Zoe Franklin told the LDRS how a woman in Stoughton made “very careful and conscious spending decisions” to pay for a private school. She said the woman did not have foreign holidays and lived in a modest house to afford private schooling as they were unable to get into the local school of their choice that they felt would best support their child with special needs.

Labour’s policy would exempt private SEND schools Ms Franklin said: “It’s especially hard to hear people who say they feel they have to pay for private education for a child with SEND, because the right support just isn’t there in the state sector.”

Labour first announced this policy in its 2019 manifesto, under Jeremy Corbyn, but was brought back into the news limelight in 2023 by Keir Starmer. Worried parents started a Change.org petition against plans, attracting 145,446 signatures at the time of writing.

Starting in Berkshire, the petition argues parents who currently pay school fees on top of taxes used for school funding will be “adding to the state’s burden rather than opting to relieve it” by choosing an independent school. Critics have argued it is “reasonable” for a service provided by a business, like private schools, to be taxed in the same way as other goods and services. One person commented: “Both are voluntary choices when the state provides a free alternative.”

IPSOS polling, published November 2023, showed the majority of the public (57 per cent) support the Labour party’s proposal., with just under one in five (18 per cent) opposing the policy. Research found that even among 2019 Conservative voters, nearly half (47 per cent) support it, compared to a third (32 per cent) who oppose it.

Speaking on behalf of the party, Labour candidate for Reigate Stuart Brady said: “Introducing VAT on school fees is a tough choice being made against the backdrop of a very difficult economic and fiscal position Labour would inherit from the Tories. Labour wants to drive high and rising standards in all our schools, so that we can break down barriers to opportunity across our country.

“I’ve listened to stories from Reigate Constituents and am aware of the variety of economic and educational positions of those paying privately for education, including parents of children with additional needs. I know that most are not the super-rich. [But] Labour in government will spread opportunity to all parts of the country at every age and every stage.”

Plans to build 124 new homes around Guildford Cathedral have been thrown out by an inspector as the proposal would cause a negative impact on the distinct character and history of the building. Developers Vivid appealed after Guildford Borough Council refused the application in March 2023. 

The government’s planning inspectorate has dismissed the plans, which was said would financially support the cathedral. Tom Bristow, the inspector, concluded the proposal would result in a “clear adverse effect” to the historical and natural setting and significance of the Cathedral’s “lofty, dominance” and “imposing” character. 

Concerns were raised that of the 124 new homes, including 94 flats, Vivid intended to build, they “would have little affinity with the prevailing characteristics of the area”.

Mr Bristow gave great benefit to the community value of the Grade II listed grounds as locals said it was a “well-used public space”. He added that the “semi-natural and rugged state” of the cathedral grounds was “distinct and rare” in comparison with more formally landscaped, maintained land in the area.

Tristen Samuels, Group Development and New Business Director at Vivid Homes, said: “We remain proud of the proposals we put forward to deliver highly-sustainable new homes in Guildford – including 40% affordable which is so desperately needed. We will consider the findings of the Inspector’s report in the coming days.”

The inspector also found the money generated from the development would bring in just over a third of the £3,570,000 the cathedral needs for building repairs. Mr Bristow said: “Irrespective of the outcome of the scheme, the Cathedral will continue to be predominantly reliant on other sources of funding for upkeep.”

Interim Dean, the Venerable Stuart Beake, said the way forward is “challenging” and cast doubt on if the cathedral would be able to “operate in the same way”. He said an additional £150,000 was needed each year to cover the shortfall in day-to-day costs at the cathedral.

Mr Beake added: “Whilst naturally disappointed by the outcome, the cathedral chapter is determined to carry on delivering the mission of the cathedral in the community.”

Related reports:

New housing around Surrey’s cathedral in contention

Surrey County’s Cathedral citadel conserved…

_{Indicative Cgi Of Planning Application For Homes Near Guildford Cathedral. (Image: VIVID Homes)}