Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Cherrycroft has always had a difficult existance. Orginally known as Wilkinson House and then Cherry Croft. When through a series of owners ( small and large care home providers). Had a brillant manager at one time but when new company took over, they removed manager and put in one of their own staff. Standards gradually declined and with frequent changes of staff and ownrs, high quality care was not consistent. Was placed under 'guidance' via NHS/Southwark Social Services/Care Quality Commission who had regualr meetings to try and increase the standard of care.

When this failed - it was agreed that residents moved elsewhere and the home deregistered and closed. Some one I knew who lived there was transferred to a home in West Norwood.

Hi Pugwash, thanks for replying to my message.

Would you mind telling me how recently Cherrycroft was deregistered and when the person you knew was transferred please. I was only informed on Thursday evening by the Care Home that they had no residents (or clients as they called them). Was a complete surprise to me as the CQC's last report, published in October 2012, gave them all green ticks, and didn't seem to have a problem with them. I have spoken with CQC and they have no information and there's certainly no recent report on Cherrycroft. I am awaiting a call from CQC, but that won't be until Monday. Do you know where I would find any information regarding the deregistration?

Thanks for your help. Look forward to hearing from you again.

Regards

Jean

Hi Snowy

Thanks for the message.

I have seen the last CQC report and the CQC gave them all ticks to say they were compliant.

This is what makes it even stranger that it has no residents there.

I called the CQC yesterday and spoke with a 'Compliance Manager', who wasn't really that helpful.

She told me that "She had heard through the grapevine, that there were no residents at Cherrycroft and didn't know what was going on"

What kind of outfit is CQC?

She thought that maybe they were going to sell the building as "after all it is a business".

Don't seem to care too much about the way the elderly people are treated. They no doubt have been transferred to different care homes, so now they have to settle in again. Lets hope that wherever they are it's a lot better that Cherrycroft. Keep digging for information on Cherrycroft please !

Jean

it would be upto the funding social services departments to find alternative placements for the residents there, but they will not give information about individual residents. As for the staff - they may have been re employed by the company who owns Cherry Croft. generally happens if a care home company has other homes in the area. Southern Cross staff were sent to other care homes or re employed by the new company.

Odd that CQC could not comment. If there are considerable safeguarding concerns CQS work with Social Services/ NHS and Police to sort out everything. I wonder if there were strong signs that the owners were going bust and residents were moved out. It could be that the building itself did not meet current building regs for care homes. The place was built in either the 1960s or 70s - definately the 70s as I found a resident from there wandering in the street and took her back there.

  • 1 month later...

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

    • was the price not displayed on the menu?
    • It has come to this author’s attention that the world of 4+ admissions — that most enigmatic of educational rites — continues to bewilder even the most composed of parents. Fear not. For in a former life, I was not merely a humble observer, but a seasoned educator of over twenty years, and Head of Pre-Prep for a distinguished dozen. Now, with quill exchanged for touchscreen, I have taken to that most modern of salons — Instagram — to dispense guidance, answer frequently whispered questions, and illuminate the shadowy corners of school selection with clarity and calm. Each post bears my signature twist: a blend of insight, levity, and the occasional raised eyebrow. Should you find yourself adrift in the sea of admissions, I suggest you peruse my latest dispatch. It may well be the lifeline you seek. The Delicate Dilemma of the Summer-born 4+ Scholars Yours in solidarity and scholastic savvy, Lord Pencilton  🎩✏️
    • Perhaps Gooseygreeny was not familiar with the wildlife before Gala was imposed on the park, since when its value to wildlife has deteriorated. The Park had never been disturbed before, as the council had respected it as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, so only the Common was licensed by them as a site for events. The first time Gala held their event, there was a tree with woodpeckers nesting in it right in the middle of the main field they used and thrushes, blackbirds and great tits nesting within the shrubs and trees immediately surrounding the field. The woodpeckers were thriving on ants from the anthills in the grass. To those of us who used to enjoy watching the wildlife, it was very obviously a Site of Importance for a variety of birds. Despite being accessed by the public and their dogs, it had been relatively undisturbed,  which was one of the main reasons why it was so special and why I have been opposed to the Gala festival being held during the bird nesting season.
    • So dangerous!    Can you be more specific about the road this was in and when you report it?  Maybe there’s some CCTV footage available
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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