PLEASE NOTE: This family met some carers in all homes we were in and nurses and professionals, that were competent and kind, some we are still in touch with today, who support us and whom we are friends with.

We write these notes so that you are more aware than we were.
These are some of the comments made in mum Renee’s Adult Social Care Case File notes AND Medical notes requested under Freedom of Information Act from both Mid Essex NHS Hospital Trust, from Adult Social Care and the then William Julien Courtauld Hospital.

Reading these notes about Katie Warren and our family trying to care genuinely for their mother appalled us. We found the remarks and the impression that they give extremely distressing not to say shocking. The fact that these records are what professionals believe about a family unquestioningly is frightening. They present a distorted picture of a family and circumstances.

Hence resulting 4 years of complaint processes and legal action by our family.


You can see some of the original document pages of these notes containing these comments at “Our Documents” under “About Us” section from the home page of this website under the document names below . There are many more written than we are showing you here. We are publicising them on this website for information purposes, to show you how opinions can be written down and mistruths and incorrect facts – and believed by all whom subsequently read them, about a family that are untrue. How this can lead to professionals seemingly acting to freeze out the family from their loved ones care, acting to the family in a very controlling manner. This can’t go on.

They paint picture, as the Executive Director of Adult Social Care said to us during her apology, “that can lead to a family treated unfairly” and the most important thing of all – the genuine concerns which they are raising not being listened to as they should, because the onus is put on a family that is seen simply as complainers and the elderly person suffers as a result.


They show a picture of conspiring to distance the daughter Katie Warren from her mother’s care when she was the one highlighting the poor care.






“Unfortunately communication between Mrs Warren and the home broke down and Mrs Dewey was transferred to xxxxxxxxxxxxx home”.

Our comment:
This is completely untrue and misleading. Mum was not transferred because of a breakdown in communication with the family. This placement was only ever agreed as a temporary placement to receive correct and competent nursing care when mum was moved from the residential home where she sustained pressure sores, and whilst the family and Adult Social Care found a home suitable for Renee and acceptable to her family who were requesting the correct care. Infact the manager who made these remarks asked Katie Warren if her mum could stay. This home could not adhere to a care plan, wrong dressings were put on mum’s sores, a nurse pointed their finger in Katie Warren’s face etc – and although mum’s sores were healing now it was through constant vigilance of the family. This home has since been in special measures with CQC.


“could not recall any (falls) mum had there”. “Mrs Warren was not happy about her being there”.

Our comment:
mum had 2 falls here hitting her head. A number of weeks later after having moved from this home she was diagnosed with a brain haemorrhage and the consultant said it would have happened during this timeframe. Either the home manager is lying or she doesn’t know, we don’t know which is the more scarier.

Mum went to this home from Broomfield Hospital for rehabilitation, we were told by Adult Social Care that this is what would be happening, this home was not a rehabilitation home. Yes we wanted her moved when we realised it was not what we were told and nearer to us, she should never have been placed there miles from her family in the first place, apologies have been received from Adult Social Care and Broomfield Hospital.
“….. Mrs Warren deemed unacceptable (delay) and was aggressive to carer … the manager intervened and advised the daughter that her aggressive behaviour was not really acceptable”.
Our Comment:
What is not clear here is that Katie had already questioned quite a number of things here in this home. This was yet another thing, having made sure that the home had all information about mum’s appointment, the time, that the sandwich they offered checking in advance it would be ready so we could leave, mum was not even ready, the sandwich wasn’t made, nothing was done. It was in nothing to do with an emergency, the senior carer that was called said they had forgotten. The system once again disorganised. Clearly when I arrived everyone was surprised that mum had an appointment.

When I complained I was told by the senior carer that my mother was one of the xx people in here and does not get special treatment in a very rude manner. I asked why nothing was handed over from shift to shift. I was told they had not got enough staff. I said that was not my problem and I did not want my mother affected by their staffing problems. I have to repeat that throughout this there were two lovely carers who were getting mum ready and looking very embarrassed. They later said that’s why we have no staff! As I walked out I spoke to the manager about the way the senior spoke to me and I was accused of being aggressive to her, which I was not, but I certainly was not happy after numerous raising of concern s.

It seems that even if a family member questions anything or has a concern, let’s not hope a few concerns, and raises them in any kind of concerned manner it is deemed aggressive and everyone goes on the defensive. This has to stop.

“Mrs Warren took Mrs Dewey for her hospital appointment and did not return Mrs Dewey to the home. The manager sent urgent fax referral on XXXXXX to the Review Team regarding Mrs Warren’s behaviour and Mrs Dewey’s welfare”.

Our Comment:
On the appointment mum nearly collapsed, she looked ill and weak. We would not return her to this home at which we had raised concerns numerous times about different things including mum’s health and pain. Two members of staff at this home, and one senior member, had pulled Katie Warren aside to point out things they seemed concerned about. Both seemed worried and were whispering as if things were not being taken care of and they didn’t want anyone to hear them telling Katie Warren. One, that mum may have a UTI and hadn’t been well that day, seemed very confused and advising me to question it. Katie asked “why are you whispering, why haven’t you questioned it?” She didn’t answer.

The other senior member, telling me quietly, “get a second opinion” when the doctor had visited.

Katie Warren would not take her mum back here, took her to her own home, called Adult Social Care and put in a list of concerns about this home. You can read this list under Our Documents on this website, under Complaint Note to Adult Social Care about care home. The day after the home put in concerns about Katie Warren we believe in recrimination, and if it wasn’t this, why didn’t they listen to our concerns. This home has since been in special measures with CQC.


“an air mattress was required, a turning chart was implemented every 3 hours and referral completed to the tissue viability nurse”

Our Comment:
None of this was done without raising concerns, complaints leading to a case conference being called because of this and without questioning and bringing in other professionals after raising alarm by the family. And even then the family had to continue to fight for this correct care, which is why we demanded competent nursing and care and for mum to be moved somewhere she would receive it.

Why was there not an air alternating mattress and turning chart in place already? Mum’s pressure sore on her heel was Grade 4-5.

“…. had they know that Mrs Dewey was going away they would have informed the local district nurse team …”

Our Comment:
The care home certainly knew and it is in their own resident notes.

“Lack of effective communication and recording led to a breakdown in the management of Mrs Dewey’s pressure care …..”

Our Comment:
The family were ‘never’ told about mum’s pressure sores at all and discovered them whilst taking her away for a few days.

“… Mrs Dewey fell out of bed at XXXXXXXXXXX and because of this and a delay in assessing bed rails, a waking night sitter was approved ….”

Our Comment:
This is not why a bed sitter was put in place. It was because the family were terrified and would not leave Renee until she was moved. They wanted her wounds looked after properly and to not fall out of bed again. We were never told of any assessment for bed rails at all. And why was this left until now if it’s true? Adult Social Care said they would arrange bed sitters for mum’s safety until she could be moved. But even then showed really no concern that our complaints were of any seriousness. She would have been left with inadequate pressure care and no protection from falling out of bed if it weren’t for the family. The family would not accept it and were put under extreme stress and great pressure at this time in an environment acting as if there were nothing really wrong.


“…Mrs Warren requested to observe the changes of dressings to Mrs Dewey’s heels at all times ….this was often difficult to achieve as Mrs Warren visited in the evenings and dressings were changed at various times …”

Our Comment:
Omitted is “why” we wished to be present at all dressing changes. This is implying we were somehow over-controlling, this was not the case. Mum sustained grade 4-5 pressure sores without our knowledge, had received a lack of duty of care in how she was looked after up until this point and she had been calling out in pain. She asked us to stop “them” hurting her and we promised she would never be alone again when they cut necrotic (dead) flesh off her feet. We also had to ensure that care plans were being adhered to – and correct dressings were being applied otherwise she would not heel. Still correct dressings were not being applied at this home (and not just one time as the notes read, a number of times dressings were incorrect and not ordered in) and pain control was not being given before dressing changes.

We were always available to come into this home when dressings were ready to be changed. It is untrue Katie Warren was only visiting in the evenings, she was there every day all different times of the day. We were more than willing to work with this home completely, to achieve mum’s healing and resent any implication that we were not.

“(home manager’s name) stated that Mrs Warren stayed overnight frequently … Mrs Warren made it difficult for the carers to carry out their job due to her high expectations”.

Our Comment:
This is untrue. Katie Warren terrified stayed one night in this home, after her mum said she was roughly handled and threatened with rape by a male carer during the night. She requested this carer not to go near her mother and the police were called.

This home manager knew exactly what we felt and why Renee was being moved to his home before he agreed to care for her and tend her awful wounds. He agreed to us being present at dressing changes, he agreed to providing the correct care, he knew how frightened we were and all the alerts and concerns about her care having been raised.

It is not “high expectations” to expect and receive basic, kind and correct care to the elderly.

Is it too high an expectation to ask this home manager to stand by his word, to adhere to the care plan agreed, to apply correct dressings to wounds, to have a nurse not scream in her face when asked a question, and to request that the daughter does not hear her mother calling out so loudly from her bed for help from outside these premises on arrival one day, culminating in asking calming why this happened being shouted at by a nurse in charge who later came back and apologised saying they did not have enough staff and so on? We ask you to make up your minds.

“ … he (the manager) had not heard from the social work team regarding long term plans for mum staying at his home. If Mrs Warren had been considering permanency for her mother he would have given notice”.

Our Comment:
PLEASE NOTE: This manager had said to Katie Warren “we thought you were pleased with the care and we hope you will stay, we want you to stay with us” Believe us or not.


“XXXXXXXXX care home do not have any problems with Mrs Dewey or her daughter. … they have a good relationship with her daughter.

Our Comment:
This note shows and proves our attitude was not a problem. However things changed when we found out mum had Grade 4-5 pressures sores and we obviously started to raise concerns.


“According to SETSAF 1… s.u. (service user) and others continue to be at risk of harm” and “that if the worker (adult social care worker) … remains anonymous, we will be unable to investigate”.

This is confirms reported risk of harm by Adult Social Care worker. It is incorrect that they would not be able to investigate, they should have investigated and didn’t.

We have fully apologies from Adult Social Care. It is not acceptable of course that other vulnerable elderly people may be suffering if alerts are not investigated as they legally should be.
“Daughter made it clear that the service user was not staying and that her intention was placing her in a Bupa home in XXXXX”
This implies that Katie Warren was exhibiting controlling behaviour or was trying to influence proceedings which was not in the best interest of Renee or against her wishes. In fact the opposite is true – and with the full backing and support of Adult Social Care, and having made complaints about Renee’s care to them and we thought we were working alongside them (or so the family were led to believe), to secure now excellent care for Renee having sustained awful pressure sores. This was all the family was ever trying to do – and Adult Social Care had agreed to place Renee into this home to receive correct nursing care temporarily whilst another home was looked for by them that the family were happy with and would provide ongoing excellent care. Adult Social Care were actually finding a few options to present to the family and together they and the family were going to visit them so the family could be sure that she would now receive the best care, this was their suggestion.
It also implies that Adult Social Care felt that Katie was making decisions independently and over their head, which she was absolutely not doing, infact the family thought Adult Social Care were helping them to get best care for Renee. There was never any intention that Renee stay in this home. She just had to be moved out of the one she sustained the pressure sores in – and quickly in the family’s opinion because the nursing was not competent.

“XXXX (social worker practitioner) mentioned that daughter is aware SOVA (safeguarding alert) was raised”.

Our Comment:
No we were not advised that a safeguarding alert was raised by an Adult Social Care worker regarding mum’s care.

“Although service user yet to transfer to XXXXXXXXXXX home, daughter spent two hours on Friday and Saturday observing staff and returned Sunday to observe garden but the manger asked her to leave”.

Our Comment:
This is implying that this is strange or controlling behaviour by Katie Warren in doing this. And it is written as if social workers, who were supposed to be supporting the family to make sure Renee has good care now after sustaining pressure sores in a home and heals from them, and helping Katie to find a good home which is what they promised, as if she is somehow doing something they don’t know about. They also promised to give the family a choice of a few good homes that would not look after Renee well and the family would settle for no less. They always promised and knew that Katie would not let her mum go to any home she had not thoroughly vetted. This was the agreement. This should have come as no surprise at all! That Katie would observe any new homes at different times of the day for sure and in two or three visits. Observing the garden?? This is exaggerating an agenda that to our family clearly everyone around us had. It is in our opinion as a lot of these comments you will read a “character assassination” of Katie. Sadly Renee’s pressure sores seemed to come a sad second place. But not for Katie Warren. These notes should be supporting a family trying to procure very good care for their mother, not attack them.

“I suggested that unless the daughter is given some boundaries, new home may have similar experiences as past homes (with her)”. “I asked if there was any history of mental illness”.

“XXX suggested although some allegations may be exaggerated, some are substantiated; that daughter’s behaviour may be linked with her recent losses: she lost her dad whom she was close to and recently split with her husband. … It seems that because she’s the only one left, daughter may be focussing on her (mum)”.

Our Comment:

We apparently needed boundaries as a family because we were questioning poor care.

Unfortunately Adult Social Care could not find any evidence of mental illness with Katie Warren; they just went eventually through a 3.5 year complaint process with our family and ended up apologising for the errors made and the comments made such as these. Disgusting. We ask who is held accountable.

How can anyone reading these notes have an objective views about families and what is actually going on?

The suggestion that Katie Warren losing her Dad as to the reason why she would be raising concerns and not being very happy when these concerns were not listened to time and time again. Trusting the system to move homes for her mum Renee, when each we found out and in our opinion did not offer the standard of care they should with the family being frightened their mother would not heal or worse would develop more pressure sores due to substandard care is despicable.

Katie Warren’s husband by the way is still alive; she hasn’t had another husband, and has none that are dead. This is fabricated, a lie and misinformation.

Katie Warren was not unnecessarily focussing on her mum because of her grief or any mental health illnesses – she was focussing on her mum because she was not being cared for properly and had gained gross pressure sores.

Again no understanding about Renee’s wounds and the genuine concerns we had as a family about her care.


“I suggested that since we need to support the home it may be best for all professionals and xxxxxx (Social Worker) to meet without daughter and service user to discuss the best way forward; that we need clarity – home needs to know past difficulty … “

Our Comment:
This is written when Adult Social Care is supposed to be supporting us the family to get mum good care and keep her safe. We can’t read any mention of this.

Please bear in mind safe alerts came from Katie Warren – and one of their own staff raising a Safeguarding Alert from the previous home regarding pressure sores received there. Mum Renee requested that her daughter to be present at all meetings regarding her care. Adult Social Care did not respect this.

Katie Warren arrived at this particular home with at least 3 alternating air mattresses not working, watching her mother lifted in slings that were causing bruising to her legs. Adult Social Care had agreed and knew that Katie Warren was demanding good basic care and competent nursing care to heal her mother’s horrendous pressure sores and she would not stand for less at any home that she was moved to. It was agreed that Katie Warren and Adult Social Care work together to find homes that would adequately nurse and look after Renee. They offered they find some options and they visit them together. This was the agreement made. Instead of this it reads in numerous comments like this, “without the daughter”, that behind the scenes Katie Warren was being treated as some kind of problem and being frozen out of decisions, when it was Renee’s right to have her there and everyone knew it.

“Daughter is complaining about this and also accusing the home of using unsuitable sling to transfer service user. Home is worried about their male carers facing similar allegations of rape daughter made against male staff at XXXXXXXXXXX.”

Our Comment:
Okay this is shocking to the family.
Firstly, the slings were questioned as each time they had to lower mum to the bed because they would not use toileting slings saying they were unsafe. But each time they would be causing repeated bruising unnecessarily to mum’s legs. Are family’s not allowed to question anything?

Secondly, Katie Warren did not make allegations against a male carer, Renee, her mother did. Did the professionals expect Katie to do nothing, to not listen to her mother reporting this? The implication is that Katie shouldn’t have told anyone. That she made the allegation not her mother. And that she is a liar and trouble-maker, to the point that she would accuse male carers of something they didn’t do.

We, the family, will leave you to make what you will of this. It makes us feel very sick to read these comments, and so frightened for the elderly and their families to know that opinions, assumptions and lies can be believed by professionals and perpetuated ongoing in case files blurring the real picture, concerns for the vulnerable elderly person.


“…. (the home) has given the service user notice not because they are unable to meet her needs but because of daughter’s behaviour, they may wish to draw on their power to keep daughter away – if she causes disturbance – for example, they may call the police who will advise steps to be taken”

Our Comment:
Katie Warren is accused of this behaviour which is untrue. This comes because she and Adult Social Care knew that this would certainly be the case, would question care that would not be conducive to her the healing of her mum’s pressure sores. Adult Social Care guaranteed she would now receive excellent care. Katie Warren, after removing mum from the home that she received these sores with Adult Social Care, going to a temporary placement nursing home to receive competent nursing and onto now to a supposed excellent home to receive correct care ongoing, she was not going to accept seeing air alternating mattresses 3 times not working and legs being bruised in the way in which her mum was hoisted. She was never ever abusive in her behaviour as accused. It seems questioning care (when you are right to do so) is deemed aggressive and abusive.

The family feel violated when there are suggestions to call the Police? If anything the family feel they should have called the Police and criminal charges should have been brought for causing wounds to an elderly person. In hindsight they would have done.

“PT (physiotherapist) at St Peters said that she is worried about daughter who has not yet ‘put the knife’ on her – because so far she has offended xxxxxxxx care home and xxxxxxx nursing home …”

Our Comment:
The phraseology used is appalling. Certainly if anyone “had the knife put in them” it was Katie Warren. This is the same physio who agreed that the residents should be positioned better and should not be being wheeled around in their wheelchairs without footplates as this a. may injure them and b. Cut off circulation at the knees not helping pressure sores in the heels. But did not ensure the home did it.

Putting the knife in? Is this what is called raising genuine concerns about a vulnerable elderly person’s care in a care home or hospital.


Safeguarding of Vulnerable Adults Alert taken out by Adult Social Care SDS Facilitator regarding Renee’s pressure sores.

SETSAF Form Page 2
The questions and answers on this form in this employee’s opinion:

Does this person continue to be at risk of harm? YES
Are there other people who may be at risk of harm? YES

Why would she raise this, because there was no risk?
The family has been paid out £28,000 in a legal action and they feel it should have been a lot more, considering what Renee and they were put through. Disgusting.

GP taking objective view: “daughter …. wants to care for mum there (at home) as long as there is a full care package, she feels that only she can give the care that she wants mum to have and I agree”.

Adult Social Care say “He (GP) wanted to know if I had started to put the care package in place”, he said “he is a qualified medical practitioner who has given an up to date report with recommendations and if I don’t act he’ll go and see his GP”.

Two pages later – after speaking to professionals involved in this case who apparently have given him the “history” of the “daughter being stressed and the relationship with service user (mum)being not good … daughter’s house is so small the equipment will not fit”
GP is now saying, based on these incorrect assumptions and without any foundation, “he now believes it is vital to have service user assessed away from daughter, and concerned about daughter’s mental health and CPN (Community Psychiatric Nurse) has advised her to see her GP”.

Our Comment:
We guess the GP was outnumbered. But we thank the GP for at least starting to take an objective view.
No one advised Katie Warren to see her GP about her mental health.
The family’s house was not too small and we received a full care package to get mum home where it was her request all along and her human right to be.
It is wrong that professionals are seemingly swayed to fit an agenda against families based on unfounded allegations, assumptions and opinions.
The family would like to point out that off record a number of professionals actually furnished them with some information that helped them get mum home. Make of that what you will.

Katie Warren did not say she will care for her mum “as long as there is a full care package”.  The family requested a full care package because Reneé now needed a full care package due to the poor care received in hospitals and care homes (sanctioned by Adult Social Care) and would not accept any less than they believed Reneé was entitled to.  This implies the family would not have had her at home without this and this is incorrect.  Just because a family sticks up for their rights when an elderly vulnerable person has been wronged, there should not be assumptions made about their character.

There are a number of sentences in these pages as follows which use phraseology you maybe would not expect to hear in Case File Notes:

• “at least the service user will be under the care of St Peters where the daughter will not be allowed to dictate to staff”
• “she is of the opinion that best option may be to give direct payment to daughter to manager her mother’s care – I personally feel we need to learn from past experience and stop daughter’s manipulation”
• “… it would be best for service user’s admission (to hospital for assessment) as this may be the only way to gain power back – staff would need to put restrictions against daughter if necessary”.
• “xxxx explained that it is daughter’s pattern to get one professional against another and for this reason it’s best for service user to go to St Peters where we can break this cycle”.
Our comments:
There was manipulation going on but we hope you will see that it wasn’t from daughter, Katie Warren.

Katie did not dictate, manipulate, try to gain any kind of power, or have any time or energy to be planning to get one professional to act against another.

We hope you will also see that no-one stopped to consider that the daughter was doing all she could to protect her mother from receiving more awful pressure sores and to heal the one’s she had – like any daughter, any family would.

The only cycle that needs to be broken is that elderly people should not be receiving preventable pressure sores down to the bone – and families need to be encouraged to speak up and supported when they do so and not be made to feel pressurised and intimidated to shut up.


“I suggested that in servicer user’s best interest that she complete a NNA (nursing needs assessment) independent of the daughter, who from our records, appears to have been influencing services that have been provided to the service user”.

Our Comment:
The service user (Katie Warren’s mother) wishes were known, that her daughter be involved in all assessments and decisions about her care, after having received horrendous pressure sores. Yes Katie Warren was influencing services otherwise her mother would not have received adequate care and healed. She may have died as Case Notes Quotes 15 says about the pressure sores becoming septic, one was infected, but not septic due to the intervention of Katie Warren and her husband influencing decisions, treatment and services !

“If after assessments, she needs nursing XXX asked if I will complete SOVA (Safeguarding of Vulnerable Adults alert) to protect service user from daughter”.

Our Comment:
Comments like this make us feel sick and shudder with fear. This suggestion from a community matron, who does not know Renee, and obviously feels that sustaining grade 4-5 pressures sores if acceptable for vulnerable elderly people in homes clearly. That an elderly lady whose daughter has been fighting with all she has for acceptable care and treatment to heal her mother and find out what has been happening to cause these wounds, it deemed the person her mother must be protected from?? It is unbelievably shocking to read – and so very painful that professionals who you think are helping families are against them because they are acting on information that is someone’s opinion, not factual many times, and the concerns the family member has about their loved one’s care is completely inconsequential it seems. Not only was Renee not protected by the system, her daughter wasn’t listened to and then her character is assassinated. Please get advice and help if you feel this may be happening to you.


“… xxxx explained that the last GP felt that if the pressure sores became septic then it may kill service user” .. “She is diabetic”.

Our Comment:
News to us as a family, that mum’s pressure sores could potentially kill her. Although this is what we suspected and why we demanded competent nursing and moved home. It would seem to make sense then why the daughter and family were concerned and questioning the care and asking for the correct care?

Renee was never diabetic. The incorrect factual information is frightening.

“I suggested that before any information is shared with the daughter it may be important to bear in mind in the past, she used suggestions as facts and used it against professionals (riser recliner – OT assess XXX XXXXXX)”

Our Comment:
When Reneé received pressures sores that may have killed her * the daughter and family complained about the treatment and care being received by the home and district nurse team. Adult Social Care were involved. The family educated themselves on pressure care and realised that in the main pressure sores are avoidable and this shouldn’t have been happening. They were appalled. They wanted competent nursing and not in that home, they wanted the correct treatment, dressings, procedures in place such as turning (which should already have been happening), and any equipment to relieve pressure including a chair. It was not Reneé’s fault she had sustained pressure sores or the family, and Adult Social Care should not sanction homes and services that cause end up with residents have pressure sores.

Adult Social Care suggested that their OT come out to explain about chairs and a couple of manufacturers they arranged also to come out. We thought Adult Social Care were trying to help us help mum, not writing things like this about them.

If there exists a chair to relieve pressure to help wounds heal that by the Court Expert Nurse Witness Professional should not have happened in the first place, then Adult Social Care should provide it and do all they can to help heal the vulnerable person. This is what was discussed here.

They didn’t provide a chair, and this home didn’t provide an air alternating chair cushion, the family bought two themselves.

Again if you question professionals this is seemingly what is written about you even ones you think are trying to help you and even if your concerns are genuine.

And this quote by a matron carrying out a Nursing Needs Assessment, that we complained about also when we eventually saw what was written in it, “we may need to consider if it may be best not to have the home at daughter’s fingertips, with professional/service user focussed staff who if need be may be firm with the daughter; also not too near the daughter – but not too far away”.

Our Comment:
Clearly the system was trying to distance Katie Warren from her mother who was trying to protect her and raise concerns.

This was at a time when multiple homes in our opinion provided poor care and/or did not take care to stick to care plans or provide adequate equipment or equipment in working order and the family had had enough and decided this could go on no longer, there was no option, and decided to change their life and house and have mum home with them to be looked after 24/7. This human right was initially we were told not going to be possible, and we had to use the services of MP, solicitors, elderly care specialist solicitors and advocates to instigate Renee’s rights and wishes. Going on to receive apologies from Adult Social Care, Central Essex Community Services and 4 years of legal action settled out of court by the district nurses (NHS Commissioning Board and care home mum was living in at the time of receiving pressure sores.

…. allegation she (Katie Warren) made against a male carer … and (the home) were not prepared to tarnish their good reputation (3 stars) or risk a repeat with their own male staff”.

Our Comment:

The is referring the previous home Reneé was in.  Katie Warren did not make an allegation against a male carer, her mum Reneé reported this to Katie, that she was improperly touched and threatened with rape.  Tarnish their reputation?  There doesn’t seem any concern with the allegation, the focus is again is misguided and seems only to tarnish Katiie Warren’s character with something she didn’t do.  And why did Adult Social Care not correct them?


“…went to live with daughter in log cabin in the garden”.

Our Comment:
This is what we mean by comments that are completely and utterly untrue and influence decision-making, comments like this have been misunderstood in the relaying of this information and the understanding of this information by the recipient.

“the daughter came out of service user’s room saying service user had a cut head (this was not there while GP was examining service user).

Our Comment:
This is enough to make a family’s blood boil, implying that the daughter in this case would in any way hurt the service user, her mother who she was doing everything to protect. The cut was there all along, the GP was not observant and the family had already asked for second opinions about his attendance to mum and the decisions he was making.

This is what happened. Renee tripped and toppled with her frame whilst daughter was helping her walk out of room into corridor. She called staff, the GP happened to be around. Mum was hoisted to wheelchair, GP checked her in hallway (but in our opinion half-heartedly), not really even much looking at her.

When daughter was sitting with her afterwards in her room she noticed a small cut to her head, looked like her glasses may have caused it when she fell possibly, she called the staff, and a staff member just wiped it and left it. We questioned whether she was okay and they said yes GP had looked at her, they did not seem concerned about mum, more concerned about the daughter. Family believe because daughter had asked questions about previous care for example witnessing missed medication, and bad back pain Renee had etc.

“… daughter said GP said that service user had multiple infections …”

Our Comment:
Katie Warren did not say this.

“… (home manager) raised concerns “ that the daughter had move her mother out of her home

Our Comment:
Katie Warren and Kevin Warren had already contacted Adult Social Care to report the care in this home and that they are not taking Renee back and need a home that offers good care.

“… GP and XXXXX has concerns about the daughter ….”

Our Comment:
Not as many as Katie Warren and family had about them. The GP was not good and the home poor. And any family it seems who raises such concerns has the tables turned on them.

“… had a long conversation about steps we may be able to take to protect home from daughter’s behaviour” … “ .. spoke with PC XXX (police) who said there are no orders they can put in place to restrict daughter’s behaviour”

Our Comment:
The family has no words for some of the things that Adult Social Care did here all behind the family’s back – finding ways to protect homes from Katie Warren’s behaviour! Are they mad? When Katie Warren was trying to safeguard her mum! This is condoning substandard care in care homes. Condoning, in words of an expert court witness for nursing, negligent care that resulted in grade 4-5 pressure sore wounds down to the bone and resulting in a settlement payout of £28,000 to this family. To speak to the Police to restrict Katie Warren’s behaviour which consisted of questioning care and making sure, with social care she thought supporting her, that care was adequate to heal her mother’s wounds. Dumbfounded. The only people that should have been going to the police was the family and we wish we had and advice you without a shadow of a doubt to do so if this is happening to you. And to tell


“… Mrs Dewey is disorientated, but aware of where she is, due to frequent moves in residency. She has requested daughter be involved in decisions”.

Our Comments:
This once again continues the theme of frequent moves, caused by daughter for no reason at all of course, as the sole reason for any disorientation. The reason she may have been disorientated was many.

1. Mainly she had a subdural haematoma, brain haemorrhage, this seems to be omitted as a reason, when her memory was fluctuating and she was on epileptic medication to stop the seizures caused by this – from falls in a care home.
2. This also caused sensory impairment which was no picked at all.
3. These moves it fails to mention were due to sustaining horrendous pressure sores and failure in family’s opinion to sustain consistent pressure care management.
4. Having had an infected pressure sore, and numerous urinary tract infections, many undiagnosed or not treated in time and a chest infection in this hospital, which Katie Warren had to point out 3 or 4 times that she was worried about before any treatment was given. Again daughter being ignored when there was genuine concern.
5. Being given food she couldn’t eat, drinks she couldn’t reach added nothing to her disorientation of course.
6. Call bells that were too short to reach the bed despite numerous questioning of this by daughter, no doubt resulting in why she was deemed doubly incontinent which actually she wasn’t at home with us, must have made her feel very orientated.
7. Numerous professionals talking to Renee in bed (she had one eye and hearing in one ear) not loudly enough speaking into her deaf ear, and speaking to her without her daughter present which she requested also added to her confusion and made her very cautious.
8. Yes she did specifically request her daughter there, and her wishes, her human rights were not granted many times which made her very worried and asking what is happening every time we visited.
9. Left laying bed when she should have been sitting out in a chair because the hospital did not have a suitable safe chair really helped her orientation.

Many of these things have been apologised for by Central Essex Community Services now known as Provide.

“message from s/w (social worker) XXXXXXXXXXX care home will only take if daughter does not visit”

It is clear on this page that visits from prospective care home assessors are taking place and without the presence of the daughter which had been specifically requested by Renee and agreed by Adult Social Care. Also social workers are visiting Renee with the express wishes that Renee did not want this without her daughter present who she knew was asking for her human rights to go and live with her daughter.

The above comment epitomises what professionals think and what they have relayed to care home assessors about Katie Warren giving the wrong impression of a daughter protecting and looking out for her mother. It is disgusting that a care home would be given misleading information that would lead them to make a decision and comment such as this.

Is this what it comes to? A daughter and her family’s concerns about her mother’s care, after sustaining pressure sores down to the bone and unacceptable care standards throughout a number of homes talked about in this way? That anyone can think that a vulnerable elderly person who has requested daughter to be in all decision-making and requesting to go home to live with her daughter and family would not be allowed visit from that daughter in a care home in this country? It’s disgusting that such a conclusion should have been formed from untruths and opinions and misleading information.

“… she is refusing to eat … has been refusing diet on occasions”

Our Comment:
Renee was given food she couldn’t chew or would like to eat. The daughter pointed this out but was not listened to. The family were not told she was not eating as often as she was and they were not told that she had missed her medication day after day, (they found this after the event from case file notes), even though they were being assured she was in this hospital for assessment and possible rehabilitation and they would be fully communicated with after what Renee had been through – and was awaiting to come home to the family.

No wonder she looked weak and unwell and the family were terrified. The family felt as though they were being frozen out and the records show this. Meetings were held in this hospital where the family had advocates with them, had contacted their MP and solicitors. We advise you to do the same should you feel in this situation.


“… stop Warfarin… “ in medical notes

Our Comments:
Mid Essex Hospital Trust deny Renee was on Warfarin despite the notes reading to stop it. No vulnerable elderly person should be put on medication without the next of kin knowing, this is appalling. You have a right to check all medical notes at the bedside of a hospital ward, if they are not there ask for them. If you are refused call the Sister, then Lead Nurse, and if need be Duty Manager and higher if need be.


Pharmacist Notes: “Note that patient recently started on Tramadol despite being on Co-Codamol (Tramadol can cause seizures especially in combination with other meds that lower seizure threshold e.g. Mirtazapine) .. combination not ideal. Stop Tramadol)

Our Comments:
Renee was in hospital for seizures caused by her brain haemorrhage. Yet she was put on medication that prompted these remarks. Apologies have been given by Mid Essex Hospital Trust. We say, make sure you read the notes and make yourself at all times aware of everything that is going on. This is your right. Don’t let anyone tell you as next of kin it isn’t when you are looking after a vulnerable elderly person.

• “… service user refused to see me without daughter … she always says that she will agree with what the daughter says”.

Our Comments:
Yes that is because meetings were happening behind the family’s back, mum did not know what was going on and who was visiting her, and would ask us constantly who these people were. Yes she would agree with her daughter because she trusts her daughter and was not stupid and knows we were always looking out for her care, told her the truth and were doing our utmost to not let anything else happen to her.

• “Daughter totally ignored care assistant; every time the care assistant tried to say something, she would completely blank her out and turn the other way”.

Our Comment:
This is untrue. Or it could be when Katie Warren questioned the care, and she had a finger pushed in her face by the carer saying “I’m trained to NVQ2 in care and know what I am talking about”. It is rather frightening to leave your mother in the hands of such carers. (Please note we also met some lovely carers and stay in touch with them to this day who support us).

• “… (home) cannot meet needs because of daughter’s behaviour, they may wish to draw on their power to keep the daughter away – if she causes disturbance – for example, they may call the police who will advise steps to be taken”.

Our Comment:
Never did Katie Warren cause a disturbance. They were not meeting her mum’s needs this is why Katie was raising concerns. In hindsight the family wishes “THEY” had called the police themselves way before now and would advise you to do so.

• Before mum was moved to William Julien Courtauld Hospital for rehabilitation and assessment this was written, please bear in mind she was requesting and we were being refused for her to come home, her human right. “… at least servicer user will be under the care of St Peters (hospital) where daughter will not be allowed to dictate to staff”
“I suggested that the home’s reputation would be further enhanced if they show strength of character and don’t submit to the daughter’s demands but rise up to the challenge for the benefit of the one who is important. XXXXXX (home director) asked if there was anything about the daughter that they didn’t know”.

Our Comment:
The family ask you what do they think they might not know? And ask why they just didn’t concentrate on making sure their air alternating mattresses were not faulty and working with the daughter to provide the care they promised, then there would have been no problems. Instead of looking at the daughter as if she “were” the problem.

Telephone call to adult safeguarding “I spoke with xxxxx who gave me PC xxx xxxxxx’s number, I spoke with xxxxxxxx who told me there is no orders they can put in place to restrict daughter’s behaviour”.

Our Comment:
Do we live in a police state? That a family cannot complain about a vulnerable person’s care or they are treated like this?

”… so far Mrs D has had three mental capacity assessments which have deemed her to have capacity. What complicates matters it hat she seems to agree with daughter’s suggestions!”

Our Comment:
That is because they were not the daughter’s suggestions, they were her wishes that no-one seems to have been wanting to understand. Why? And further they were common sense, if you wish to be protected by your daughter and wish to live with her and her family.

Staff Nurse – “daughter is impacting on reports and will not stop talking or go away. He explained it’s not possible to ask her to leave because if staff did, then the public will have an opinion”.

Physiotherapist “… after 30 minutes of harassing and bullying daughter got an expensive wheelchair supplied, which service user doesn’t need”.

“William Julien Courtauld Hospital staff suggested WJC staff issued a SOVA against the daughter. I suggested that all SOVA’s so far have not helped – the idea is to ensure the service user is safe and this we plan to do – turn to legislation if necessary” “If the daughter has a Power of Attorney then we may have to apply to the court of protection”.

Our Comment:

Absolutely Katie Warren was not going away. No-one was going to neglect her mother any more, she made this clear to adult social care from the beginning of discovering the pressure sores. Yes the public would have had an opinion, one that hopefully they will have now in reading these notes and what happened to this family protecting their mother and at no time was Katie Warren or the family rude, they were asking questions, they would not accept poor care any more, in a care home, a hospital, anywhere else. And because they kept seeing it were left no choice but for Renee to come home to the family home and look after her 24/7.

Do the authorities really think a family does this lightly?
We would have liked nothing else for mum to have been looked after properly, it wasn’t happening.

This is not true. Physiotherapist is the one that previously told family about the tilting in space wheelchair that might be able to be provided and would help relieve pressure on mum’s sacral area and help heal this area and prevent her from getting these again. We were asking for all ways to heal her and this was one. And yes Katie did ask wheelchair service for it and yes she did get it for her mum.

SOVA’s have not helped so far because none of them were substantiated because the daughter has done nothing against her mother and has only been trying to protect her as any family member would do. Yes the daughter did have Powers of Attorney and to think that Adult Social Care would be prepared to think of going to the Court of Protection when all the daughter has done is to speak up about unacceptable care and try to find a home that will provide adequate care and then instigate her mother’s human right and wishes is really saying something about the system of social care in this country. And that is it doesn’t deserve the name “care”. It is defensive, misguided, and needs to look within at its own culture. It would be helpful if it did not waste public money by supporting care homes over families raising concerns about care and investigate as it should instead and take action because when it doesn’t it ends up taking up 3.5 years of complaint time and all that involves and paying out gesture of goodwill to families accused of things they did not do.

“I suggested that we must do all we can to protect placement breaking down and home needs to remain vigilant as judging from past experience, daughter will fulfil her plans one way or another if she decides she wants service user home”.

Our Comment:

Past experience of complaining about unacceptable care?
Vigilant of the family? Or of their own care? Does Adult Social Care mean vigilant in not putting Renee to bed with blood pouring out of a wound on her leg and the family discovering it after waiting outside the room whilst she was toileted? Or vigilant in that they should provide food that residents can eat, can chew, that is not rock hard, and that they actually like?
Or not leaving Renee in a toilet alone, when family arrived to visit and asked where she was and they literally ran to her room? Or that having fell out of bed a number of times previously and risk assessment alerting to have a crash mat and the high/low bed to be lowered, the family arrive to visit and the bed is not lowered? Or the alternating air mattress is not plugged in and mum has been laying on it for God knows how many hours?

Katie Warren did not “want the service user home”. Renee had received pressure sores that by the opinion of the Expert Court Witness – Nursing were preventable, and ongoing care promised to look after her and heal her was repeatedly failing in the eyes of the family who would not accept Renee suffer any more. Renee always wished to go home with her daughter and family and this is what the family fought for – and shouldn’t have had to fight for it.

Certainly the daughter would “fulfil her plans”, what kind of comment is this please?
Plans that her mother be safe – and HER wishes respected and her human rights upheld? Sure as hell the daughter would rather have died than to see her mother suffer any more. I doubt that’s the plans Adult Social Care meant.


We feel this is enough notes for you to see. We could go on and on and show you more examples of how staff didn’t listen to us. How crazy and surreal this situation was for us in trying to protect Renee (Katie’s mother).

We would direct you to “Our Documents” section of this website under “About Us” to see the originals of the pages of these documents above.

Here you can see various documents including apology letters, documents that acknowledge errors in service failure, evidence of payments to the family, and so on.



We are engaging with Adult Social Care, Mid Essex Hospital Trust, Provide (previously the Primary Care Trust) who have apologised to us (and others) – working towards driving forward positive change and improvements in the service provision to the vulnerable elderly and their unpaid carer families.