Jump to content

Recommended Posts

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They sometimes close for 1/2 day for staff

> training sessions..

>

> They have 100's of registered patients.. I

> cannot see it has closed without warning.. ??

>

> DulwichFox


Actually the last time I checked (approx 2 years ago) they had over 60,000 patients (no I haven't typed an extra nought) and they're still accepting new ones, which is why they're unable to provide any kind of service to the patients...

60,000 hellosailor? I don't doubt you and that is shocking!


My daughter is away at university in her second year and has tried to access a doctor's appointment. I can't remember the last time she went to the doctor and so I know she is desperate. I've even offered to phone on behalf of her but she doesn't want me to.


Apparently they have an on-line booking system!


So daughter wouldn't be able to get an appointment until nearly two weeks away.

When I visit my Mum's in Market Harborough I can get an appointment at her local clinic without ANY problem on the day - I've had to do this a couple of times as well as using their walk-in local hospital service. Frankly it's quicker for me to get the train to Market Harborough and ask for an appointment than it is for me to get an appointment at 'my' doctors - DMC.


HP

I had a minor operation earlier this week which was carried out at Kings College Hospital. The follow up was to have a dressing changed daily. I was offered an appointment for 25 Nov to change a dressing (yes a month later)! Now going to Peckham (Lister) to have this done. What's the point of having a medical centre with zero capacity? If the numbers stated earlier (60,000) are correct it's clear why this place is not fit for purpose...

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

    • Do you have a link to this? The only one i could find was on the 24th July
    • Yes and I heard the other day that there is a higher conviction rate with trials heard by only a judge, vs juries, which makes sense when you think about it.  Also - call me cynical - I can't help but think that this justice reform story was thrown out to overshadow the Reeves / OBR / Budget story.  But I do agree with scrapping juries for fraud cases. 
    • judges are, by definition, a much narrower strata of society. The temptation to "rattle through" numbers, regardless of right, wrong or justice is fundamentally changed If we trust judges that much, why have we ever bothered with juries in the first place? (that's a rhetorical question btw - there is no sane answer which goes along the lines of "good point, judges only FTW"
    • Ah yes, of course, I'd forgotten that the cases will be heard by judges and not Mags. But how does losing juries mean less work for barristers, though? Surely all the other problems (no courtrooms, loos, witnesses etc etc) that stop cases going to trial, or slow trials down - will still exist? Then they'll still be billing the same? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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