Decision of the Registered Homes Tribunal held at Peterborough on 11 November 1985
Appeal by Mrs C K Phillips against the decision of the Peterborough Health Authority refusing registration of the premises at Fairview Nursing Home, l92 Park Road, Peterborough as a Nursing Home.
For the appellant: Mr M J Peters (Solicitor)
For the respondent: Mr D R Peacock (Assistant Solicitor East Anglia Regional Health Authority)
Witnesses called for the appellant: Mrs C K Phillips, Father Tom Murray
DECISION
The Tribunal unanimously decided that it should allow the appeal and grant the registration.
REASONS
The appellant started Fairview Nursing Home in 1982. Though the owner of the enterprise, she takes no part in the day to day running of the home. This is under the control of a qualified matron and staff whom the matron engages.
Mr Peacock, who appeared for the respondent authority very fairly told the Tribunal that there had not been any fault to be found with the manner in which the home had been run. The only reason for refusing the registration was that the authority did not consider the appellant a fit person to carry on a home because on 8 March 1985 she had been convicted on two counts of personation at the parliamentary election in June 1983 and sentenced to two months imprisonment concurrent on both counts.
Mrs Phillips gave evidence before us of the circumstances of the offence which was unchallenged and which we accept. She had taken an active interest in national politics only since November 1982 and she was canvassing at the 1983 election. She arranged for electors to apply for postal or ballots where they wanted them. In the two cases with which we are concerned she herself cast the votes for the persons who obtained the right to vote for post. She knows each of these persons well, one of whom had had arthritis and the other of whom was taken to hospital some days before polling day. Neither was under her care or living in any property controlled by her.
Having seen and heard Mrs Phillips we are satisfied that she acted more out of inexperience than out of a deliberate intention to obtain votes for a party to which it was not entitled.
This conviction - as with any conviction which may be an indication of an applicant's moral suitability to run a rest home or a nursing home - has to be considered in the context of whether to 8110w the applicant to run the nursing home would be likely to affect adversely the interests of the residents in the home.
The Tribunal was entirely satisfied having heard Mrs Phillips and Father Murray who gave evidence on her behalf that the residents of the home would not be adversely affected by allowing Mrs Phillips to be granted registration of the nursing home.
Mr Peacock was concerned lest a decision to allow the appeal would create an undesirable precedent, and make it difficult for authorities in the future to refuse applications where applicants had convictions involving dishonesty. The Tribunal wishes to make it perfectly clear that its decision is based on the particular facts of this case. It does not regard Mrs Phillips' conduct as indicative of any likelihood that she would take advantage of any of her patients or that they would be prejudiced by allowing the registration of the home in her name. This is a case quite different from one where a person has been guilty of an offence of dishonesty from which she has obtained some personal benefit.
15 November 1985
Signed J C R Fieldsend
M E Brown
J R A Chawner