Heraeus Medical, a German firm that supplies approximately 75% of the bone cement used by the NHS, was temporarily forced to halt production following a fault in a packaging machine at its main site.

Whilst bone cement production has since restarted, national guidance was issued by NHS England to alleviate concerns regarding procedures that require the cement at both waiting list and emergency level. At the time of that guidance, the NHS estimated that only around two weeks’ supply remained, creating a potential gap of six to eight weeks while Heraeus Medical addressed its supply issues.

Bone cement is a critical component in many hip and knee replacements, as well as certain revision and infection-management procedures. With Heraeus Medical indicating that supply limitations are expected to last for up to two months, the NHS’s immediate response was to prioritise urgent cases and patients in the greatest clinical need. However, further developments have since emerged, and NHS Supply Chain has confirmed that two clinically assured alternative products have now been secured in an effort to avoid disruption to both waiting list and emergency care provision to patients.

Short-Term Solutions

Without suitable alternative arrangements, the shortage would have inevitably raised difficult questions about delay and decision-making for patient care in upcoming weeks, particularly as the NHS remains responsible for the care delivered to patients and owes every patient a duty to exercise reasonable skill and care in the provision of treatment.

In addition to managing the remaining Heraeus Medical stock, the NHS has now sourced alternative bone cement from Zimmer Biomet and Johnson & Johnson. The products from the respective suppliers have been described as “clinically assured” and are intended to maintain continuity of care at both a waiting list and emergency level.

Sourcing alternative bone cement could materially reduce short-term risk for the NHS, but clinical negligence concerns may still arise if avoidable harm results from unreasonable delay or unjustified planning decisions, despite the NHS’s proactive response to the unexpected supply disruption.

Looking Ahead

For a patient, the experience of delay can be deeply distressing, particularly where pain and reduced mobility are already part of daily life and months of waiting for appropriate surgery have already been endured. When multiplying that experience across the tens of thousands of patients awaiting hip and knee replacements on NHS waiting lists alone, clear communication, appropriate monitoring and careful risk assessment remain imperative in ensuring that required standards of care continue to be met.

It is hoped that the securing of alternative bone cement should significantly reduce the possibility of what could have been widespread postponements, but what remains to be seen is how the NHS will manage distribution of the new bone cement stock to mitigate the possibility of avoidable harm to patients.

Where concerns arise that treatment has been unreasonably delayed or that harm has resulted from substandard management during this period, legal advice may be appropriate. Contact our team of specialist Medical Negligence Lawyers today to see how we can help.

Article written by Mason Hallam, Trainee Solicitor in our Medical Negligence team

The post Safeguarding Standards of Care Amidst the NHS Bone Cement Saga appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The ruling has clarified a new position for child claimants in clinical negligence cases; the previous of which stood for over forty years.

The Previous Position

In essence, ‘lost years’ refer to the period of life that a person can expect to lose because negligence has shortened their life expectancy. As that person would likely have earned income and supported themselves or others, monetary sums in the form of ‘damages’ are sought by the victim to compensate for the earnings and financial benefits that they are now highly unlikely to ever receive.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, the recovery of ‘lost years’ damages were constrained by the Court of Appeal case of Croke v Wiseman [1982]. In that case, the Court held that young children could not recover lost years damages, though adults could. The rationale behind this was largely rooted in two concerns:

• Dependants – The Court ruled in Croke that ‘lost years claims’ were connected to whether the injured person had, or might one day have, financial dependants. This was inconsistent with previous prominent cases dealing with ‘lost years’ compensation such as Pickett v British Rail Engineering Ltd [1980] and Gammell v Wilson [1982], which made no such principle.
• Speculation – As it is likely to be relatively more difficult to make assumptions about a child’s education, career path and income decades into the future as opposed to an adult, the Court’s view on assessing ‘lost years’ compensation for children was that it was too difficult to predict based on available evidence.

As a result, although adults could receive compensation for the income they would lose during their shortened lifespan, children injured at birth or in early childhood were largely unable to secure ‘lost years’ compensation.

The Effect of CCC

In short, the Supreme Court have now made it clear that children can, in principle, recover ‘lost years’ damages in the same way as adults can.

It is now the responsibility of the Court to assess the evidence available in each case and determine ‘lost years’ compensation using established methods, which can include actuarial tables (such as the ‘Ogden’ tables) and other statistical evidence. Many of these established methods have been introduced and implemented since Croke and have improved the feasibility and consistency of estimating ‘lost years’ damages.

As a result, the law now treats shortened life expectancy consistently so that so far as compensation can allow, everyone can be put back in the position that they would have been in had the negligence or injury not taken place. After over forty years, the focus is on whether the financial loss can be demonstrated, not whether the person is old enough or whether they have (or will ever have) anyone that is dependent on them.

Heightened focus will undoubtedly be placed on ensuring that ‘lost years’ compensation for victims of negligence remains proportionate and based upon reliable, robust evidence.

Our team of specialist Medical Negligence Lawyers are dedicated to providing expert guidance and helping people through every step of the way of such claims. Contact us today to see how we can help.

Article written by Trainee Solicitor, Mason Hallam

The post The ‘Lost Years’ Now Found – Exploring CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The review has identified “weaknesses in leadership, clinical governance, organisational culture and contract management over many years” leading to cancers being missed and many women receiving surgery more extensive than was medically necessary. This included the removal of lymph nodes and mastectomies.

The BBC have identified that nearly £6million has been paid out by the trust to clinics that were run privately by their own breast cancer surgeon.

Over 200 cases have been identified of patients who have suffered due to the trust’s treatment, leading to the medical records of 1,6000 patients being examined.

This follows a separate review that took place in July 2025 by the Royal College of Surgeons after concerns were raised.

The women that underwent treatment at County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust have told the BBC that they felt ‘butchered’ after the treatment they received, and that the unnecessary delays they experienced in both diagnosis and treatment lead to the experience feeling significantly more stressful and upsetting.

Alongside the failings in both diagnosis and treatment, many women have described their experience as having a lack of compassion, and that it took their dignity from them.

The trust’s board have put an ‘action plan’ in place in response to these reviews. They have confirmed that they will look at strengthening leadership and accountability. Trust Chief Executive Steve Russell has apologised to the affected patients, saying “you put your trust in us and in some cases that trust was not met. We didn’t offer the high quality care you needed and deserved.”

Our Medical Negligence team hear regularly from individuals and families who have been affected by sup-par cancer treatment.

Whilst we recognise the current pressures faced by NHS staff, the issues raised in these reviews can lead to avoidable harm, including:

•             Unnecessary or extensive surgery

•             Failure to perform timely procedures

•             Delay in treatment leading to permanent injury or even death.

We’re here to help

Contact us today for confidential advice if you have concerns about treatment you or a loved one received at The County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust (or elsewhere). Our team, are true specialist Medical Negligence Lawyers, dedicated to helping people in situations like this.

Article written by Medical Negligence Paralegals, Abi Scott & Eloise Locker.

The post Investigations into breast cancer treatment at County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The decision comes after families of bereaved mothers and babies pressed for a full investigation into care at the trust’s two major hospitals. In June this year both of the trusts’ maternity units were graded as “inadequate” by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), where it was cited that there were shortages of midwives and doctors, unsafe storge of medicines and a culture of fear preventing staff from speaking out.

The BBC carried out an investigation in 2024 which revealed that the deaths of at least 56 babies and two mothers at LTH over the past 5 years could have been prevented.  Wes Streeting emphasised that the inquiry will look beyond recent events, extending back over years of service, to give affected families “the honesty and accountability they deserve” and to stop the normalisation of deaths of women and infants in maternity services.

Bereaved families who have lost babies at the trust have welcomed the announcement. Their hope is for meaningful change to break the cycle of repeated errors and poor leadership.

The independent inquiry is likely to be similar to the recent Nottingham inquiry, and the bereaved families hope that senior midwife Donna Ockenden will lead the review, as she is currently leading the Nottingham review and has previously led the review into maternity failings at Shrewsbury and Telford.

At the trust, new chief executive Brendan Brown offered an unreserved apology to families, acknowledging that the trust had not always listened to or taken the concerns of parents sufficiently seriously. He committed the organisation to working openly, honestly and transparently with the forthcoming review.

Sir Julian Harltey who was Chief Executive of Leeds Trust for a decade has since resigned from his role at the CQC.

The details for the inquiry are yet to be finalised.

It is hoped that the outcome of the inquiry will prompt change in the trust, to include improvements in safety and reporting systems, to restore public trust in maternity services and ensure accountability.

What this means for patients

At our firm, we regularly hear from individuals and families who have been affected by birth injuries.

Whilst we recognise the challenging conditions faced by NHS staff, persistent underperformance can lead to avoidable harm, including:

•             Negligent management of high-risk births

•             Failure to perform a timely Caesarean Section

•             Birth trauma leading to permanent injury or even death

We’re here to help

Contact us today for confidential advice if you have concerns about treatment you or a loved one received at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (or elsewhere). Our team are true specialist Medical Negligence Lawyers, dedicated to helping people in situations like this.

Article written by Medical Negligence Paralegals Eloise Locker & Abi Scott

The post Independent inquiry announced by the Health Secretary into Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

Amandeep qualified at a solicitor in 2019 & has worked in multiple large firms in Birmingham, Nottingham & Coventry.

He has progressed in his legal career and is now focusing his time into Clinical Negligence Claims. His background in Personal Injury & Family Law has shaped Amandeep into a client focused, pragmatic & empathic solicitor.

In his spare time, Amandeep is a big petrol head and enjoys spendings time in the gym.

Welcome to the firm Amandeep, from all at BTTJ!

The post New member of our Medical Negligence team appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

This assessment, published by NHS England, marks the first time such national rankings have been made public. The league tables rate the performance of NHS trusts across seven key areas, including:

•           Waiting times

•           Emergency care performance

•           Cancer treatment access

•           Ambulance response times

•           Surgical backlog management

•           Financial sustainability

•           Patient flow and access to services

These figures allow members of the public to compare the performance of local hospitals — but they also raise serious questions about patient care standards, especially where delays or inadequate treatment may have had a serious impact on health outcomes.

A Disappointing Result for UHCW

UHCW, which oversees both University Hospital Coventry and Hospital of St Cross in Rugby, found itself only narrowly ahead of Countess of Chester Hospital and Queen Elizabeth Hospital in King’s Lynn, which ranked 133rd and 134th respectively.

In response to the results, UHCW’s Chief Executive Professor Andy Hardy expressed disappointment but reaffirmed the trust’s commitment to improvement.

“We are disappointed by our position in the national oversight table and we are looking at all the metrics to see where we can use our improvement methodology to make positive changes for our patients,”

How Do Other Local Trusts Compare?

The local picture isn’t entirely bleak. Nearby South Warwickshire University NHS Foundation Trust, which runs Warwick Hospital, was ranked 25th out of 134.

Meanwhile, George Eliot Hospital in Nuneaton came in at 121st place.

In the mental health sector, Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, responsible for community and mental health services, was placed 51st among non-acute NHS trusts.

Ambulance trust league tables have also identified that West Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust ranked 6^th out of the 10 trusts.

Government’s View – Transparency or Pressure?

The Health Secretary Wes Streeting defended the release of these performance tables, describing them as a tool to increase transparency and accountability across the NHS and enabling patient choice.

However, some trusts have voiced concerns about whether the chosen metrics truly reflect the complexity of modern healthcare delivery, especially in underfunded or overburdened areas.

What This Means for Patients

At our firm, we regularly hear from individuals and families who have been affected by medical delays, surgical errors, or mismanaged care — often in the hospitals flagged in these national performance tables.

Whilst we recognise the challenging conditions faced by NHS staff, persistent underperformance can lead to avoidable harm, including:

• Missed or delayed diagnoses
• Surgical complications
• Inadequate emergency care
• Poor post-operative follow-up

We’re Here to Help

Contact us today if you have concerns about treatment you or a loved one received at University Hospital Coventry, Hospital of St Cross or any other Trust identified in the league tables. Our specialist team are true specialist Medical Negligence Lawyers, dedicated to helping people in situations like yours.

Article written by Medical Negligence Solicitor Elizabeth Bellamy

The post University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust Ranked Among Worst in England appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

Kirsten joined BTTJ in June 2021 as a Paralegal in our Medical Negligence Department having completed a Law degree at Manchester Metropolitan University. Kirsten started her LPC LLM in January 2022 and passed it in June 2023.

She was promoted to the position of Trainee Solicitor in January 2024. Her training contract involved working in practice areas including clinical negligence, deputyship and family law.

Lizzy joined BTTJ in June 2021 as a Paralegal in our Medical Negligence Department having completed her Law degree at The University of Law.

In January 2024, she passed her LPC LLM qualification with Distinction from the University of Law.

Lizzy was promoted to the position of Trainee Solicitor in January 2024. Towards the end of 2024 she started training in our Private Client team.

Both are qualifying into The Medical Negligence team. Headed up by Partner Tom Barnes, operating nationwide, the team spend their time, experience and knowledge helping people who have been affected by preventable medical treatment mistakes and negligent treatment and deal with a wide range of cases including orthopaedic injury, gynaecological and birth injury, fatal cases, dental and eye injury claims.

Huge congratulations to them both, very well deserved after all of their hard work! From all of your proud colleagues at Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The post Two of our trainees qualify as Solicitors appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

AvMA was established in 1982 and today the specialist clinical negligence panel is a highly sought after quality mark for Medical Negligence specialists and a recognised mark of expertise.

Richard joined our Medical Negligence Department in 2010 following a career at The Law Society and Solicitors Regulation Authority. He became a partner at BTTJ in 2021.

He has experience of a very wide range of Clinical Negligence cases including Orthopaedic, Oncological, Urological, Infection, injury during surgery and the management of long term conditions such as diabetes and Crohn’s Disease. 

He handles cases from inception to completion, including trial where necessary. He enjoys broadening his medical knowledge with complex and unusual cases.

Richard and the team work on Medical Negligence cases nationwide and have been successfully helping people obtain the answers and compensation they deserve for many years. Contact us if you feel you have been affected by substandard medical treatment or a preventable medical mistake.

The post Richard Stanford welcomed to the AvMA Specialist Clinical Negligence Panel for a further 5 years appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The programme this year has a focus on Cancer and Oncology whilst also covering many other key medico-legal topics at such an important time for Clinical Negligence practitioners.

The post AvMA Annual Clinical Negligence Conference appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.

The University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) NHS Trust acknowledged that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) only recommends using temozolomide for six months. However, it was revealed recently that at least one patient received the drug for over 15 years!

Chief Executive Officer at UHCW, Prof. Andy Hardy, told the BBC HERE , “We take very seriously any allegation that care provided by a member of staff, past or present, may have fallen below the standards we would expect for our patients. I can confirm we are undertaking an internal review of this matter and, once that has been completed, we will consider what further steps may be necessary.”

Temozolomide is used to treat an aggressive form of brain tumour called glioblastoma. Only 2% of patients with this type of tumour survive longer than 10 years.

The discovery of these extended chemotherapy treatments has prompted calls for a thorough investigation and accountability for the affected patients. Brindley Twist Tafft and James, home to Coventry and Warwickshire’s leading medical negligence team, is closely monitoring the situation and offering support to those affected. Medical negligence law allows patients who have suffered harm due to substandard care by medical professionals to seek compensation. This legal framework ensures that healthcare providers are held accountable for their actions and that patients receive the justice they deserve.

The internal review by UHCW will be important in determining the extent of the situation and ensuring that lapses in patient care do not occur in the future.

Please contact our expert Medical Negligence team for confidential advice if you or a close one has been affected in any way.

The post Clinical Negligence in Coventry: Long-Term Chemotherapy Raises Concerns appeared first on Brindley Twist Tafft & James.