Care Standards Tribunal, 2025-05-19 (Westhope Limited v Care Quality Commission)
| Jurisdiction | United Kingdom |
| Court | Care Standards Tribunal |
| Neutral Citation | [2025] UKFTT 00548 (HESC) |
| Date | 19 May 2025 |
| Registration Number | 2024/01197/EA |
1
First-tier Tribunal Care Standards
The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social
Care) Rules 2008
2024-01197.EA
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKFTT 00548 (HESC)
Hearing held at the Royal Courts of Justice
on 3-7 March 2025
(with a deliberation day on 15 April 2025)
BEFORE
Simon Lewis (Judge)
Ms L Jacobs (Specialist Member)
Ms J Everitt (Specialist Member)
BETWEEN
WESTHOPE LIMITED Appellant
- and -
CARE QUALITY COMMISSION Respondent
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
The Appeal
1. This is not a simple case. The appeal (“the Appeal”) is brought in relation to a
decision by the Respondent (“the Decision”), set out in a written notice of decision
dated 9 July 2024 (“the Notice of Decision”), to vary a condition of the Appellant’s
registration as a service provider, so that it no longer be authorised to carry on
the relevant regulated activity (accommodation for persons who require nursing
or personal care) at one of three locations: a residential home for up to 7 people
with autism or learning disability or similar (“the Location”). The Location is known
as Westhope Place. The other two locations are known as Westhope Lodge and
Westhope Mews. All three are in the town of Horsham. As set out further below,
though, the Appellant is part of a much larger group (“the Group”). The Appeal is
brought under, and relates to, the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (“the Act”).
2
The Hearing
2. The Appeal was heard over five days in March 2025 (“the Hearing”). The Hearing
was conducted in public. Although it was a hybrid hearing, all witnesses, panel
members, and counsel attended each day in person. The Hearing was recorded.
The Appellant was represented by Anna Wilkinson (counsel); the Respondent by
Jemima Lovatt (counsel).
Evidence
Documents
3. We had before us a core bundle of documents (“the Bundle”), running to 2,697
pages electronically. The Bundle was available in both electronic and paper form.
By consent, a formal report from the Respondent regarding its assessment of the
Location from March 2024, was added to the Bundle. In addition, we had regard
to skeleton arguments and closing written submissions from the parties.
Witness Evidence
4. We read witness statements, and heard oral evidence, from three witnesses for
the Respondent and five for the Appellant. The Respondent’s witnesses, in this
order, were: Trudy Lockyer (CQC inspector); Sheralee Davies (CQC inspector);
Jane Jewell (an CQC operations manager and manager of Ms Lockyer). The
Appellant’s witnesses, in this order, were: Zoe Loizou (a regional manager at the
Group and, for a short period, the former interim manager at the Location); Lucy
Bridger (former Director of Supported Living at the Group); Dan Svensson
(former Chief Operating Officer for Independent Living at the Group); Pauline
Paterson (Director of Quality and Regulation at the Group); and Heidi Smoult (a
consultant engaged by the Group). Three witnesses provided supplementary
statements: Ms Lockyer; Ms Jewell; Ms Paterson.
General Point
5. We read/heard a large amount of evidence, some of which was relatively detailed
or technical. We considered all of the material evidence we read/heard, or which
was otherwise brought to our attention, even if we do not refer to it expressly or
in detail below. In what follows we have sought to record matters we considered
to be of particular significance.
Preliminary Application
6. On or around 11 February 2025, the Appellant made a written application (“the
Preliminary Application”) to strike out the Respondent’s response (or otherwise
bar the Respondent from taking further part in the Appeal), under rule 8 of the
Tribunal Procedure (Frist-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care
Chamber) Rules 2008 (“the Rules”), on the basis that the Respondent’s response
had no reasonable prospect of success. The Respondent provided written
submissions, dated 19 February 2025, in opposition to the Preliminary
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting