Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

GP takes legal action against CQC in effort to re-open his practice

Exclusive A GP is taking the CQC to a tribunal to re-open his practice after disputing several of regulator’s inspection findings, in the first legal action taken by a GP against the regulator.

Dr Mujib ul Haq Khan of Granville Road Surgery in London - whose practice was rated ‘inadequate’ by the CQC - claims a number of the regulator’s reasons for taking the unusual decision to withdraw his registration were incorrect, including patients being put at avoidable risk, no employment checks of staff, and no structure in place for the reporting of incidents.

This represents the first time legal action has been taken against the regulator by a GP, although several secondary care and care home providers have taken action.

GP leaders have said that any successful legal action against CQC would be ‘absolutely enormous’, and could subsequently embolden other practices to consider similar action.

The CQC inspected Dr Khan’s practice on 6 January and identified several failings, rating it ‘inadequate’ in dealing with all six population groups, including elderly and vulnerable patients, and in how safe, effective and well-led the practice was.

It subsequently returned to the practice on 9 January to personally deliver a ‘Notice of Urgent Suspension’, which led to the practice being closed.

But according the care standard tribunal pleading document, due to be heard on 25 March, Dr Khan ‘denies the alleged breaches and/or that any such breach provided reasonable cause for the CQC to take such drastic action to suspend the practice.’  

The pleading document also points to the regulator’s inspection findings that Dr Khan was ‘very well-liked and respected by his patients’ and that his patients had provided ‘favourable feedback on the service they have received.’

The allegations that Dr Khan denies include:

  • Patients were put at avoidable risk because suitable arrangements to monitor safety were not in place;
  • Checks on staff had not been undertaken prior to their employment;
  • Staff were not clear about reporting incidents
  • The practice did not have systems in place for responding to risk, including an accurate fire risk assessment and staff to be clear about how to respond in the event of a fire.

The GP also claims that the surgery was being operated by locums who ‘were qualified and experienced’ and that they knew how to report incidents – and the CQC has yet to provide anything to the contrary.

Dr Robert Morley, chair of the GPC contracts and regulations subcommittee, told Pulse: ‘I’m unable to comment on the facts of this individual case but clearly this is a very significant development and the outcome will be of huge interest to the profession.’

He went on to add that any successful legal action against the regulator could open the doors to more practices to take similar action.

‘I would  imagine that if any practice were successful in taking legal action against the CQC following judgements it made in an inspection then the repercussions would be absolutely enormous  both for general practice and for the CQC. It would almost certainly embolden other practices to consider similar action as well as encourage the CQC to take a long hard look at its processes,’ said Dr Morley.

A spokesperson for the CQC said: ‘Due to the legal process surrounding the case of Dr Khan, we would be unavailable for comment until after the tribunal process is completed.’  

The first one day tribunal hearing between the CQC and Dr Khan will take place in London on 25 March.

Readers' comments (29)

  • We don't know any real facts about this and it may be that the CQC is actually right in what it has done in this case, nevertheless it would be lovely to see the CQC monster being held to account for a change so I hope he wins.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • ''The GP also claims that the surgery was being operated by locums'' and the GP was '‘very well-liked and respected by his patients’'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • There must always be the opportunity for a legal challenge-and if the CQC have "got it wrong" this time then "compensation" must be given and the errors corrected-this is only fair.
    We do not live in a Stalinist state (apparently) so no organisation can be "above the law".
    The CQC have taught GPs that "wrong doers" must be punished-which is entirely appropriate but the law must be applied to all "wrong doers".

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I am hearing that there are going to be big, big changes to the CQC post election.

    Once everyone has been inspected once, 95% of the work of the CQC has been done. It stands to reason that you can wind the whole back to the bone in order to save a lot of money.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • CQCs role should be to help practices and not come in a policeman's role.Many GP practices are converted residential homes and in most cases it is not possible to re-sign to present standards.Also the cost of addresing the changes are born by the practice and there is no NHS funding.Also GPs are paying CQC yearly fees so we they are accountable and we do have a right to challange .CQC is a new and there is a learning curve on both sides.They should also not walk into GP practices in a threatning fashion and this should be reported as well.I do accept that patients should be treated in an environement to deliver safe ,quality service without any harm.
    The GPC /BMA and LMC should seek feed back from GPs of their experience of CQC.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Agreed with above.....The general public rightly state "we pay your wages! so we must call the shots".....no problem with that concept.....however in the same vein....."we pay the CQCs wages, so surely "we must call the shots?".

    The CQC are used to GPs being endless slagged off, ridiculed and menaced by "the bill payer" ie the taxpayer-they seem to agree with this treatment of GPs.......but this time WE are the "bill payer" of the CQC.

    What goes around comes around..........

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dr Khan, have some insight. If you rely on locums and your staff have no clue on how to report incidents then the CQC was right. I hope you win though :D

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I wish my patients respected and liked me for doing nothing to them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • When GP's (who actually run surgeries by locums) request their patients to give feedback as part of their revalidation process, I wonder what the patients would write in their feedback about such doctors. May be they might write something like - ''I like the doctor and respect him very much because I am glad I dont get to see him anymore''.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Someone needs to sue CQC - not sure that this one sounds like a winner though!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say