Patient care could be in jeopardy as a property dispute threatens a busy GP surgery in Carlshalton, by our Sutton correspondent, ROSE HILL
Up for sale?: the owners of the Carshalton Fields GP surgery have given only a short notice to quit
Some 4,000 patients of the Carshalton Fields Surgery on Crichton Road could be forced to seek a new GP after the practice was given just two months to vacate the property by their landlords.
The notice period is just one-third of that recommended by the NHS, and potentially places an unmanageable workload on the local health service, with so many people seeking alternative local health care at the same time.
Representatives of the Carshalton Beeches surgery’s patient group claim that the landlords — Dr Raj Goel and Dr Kusum Goel, who were once partners in the practice — pulled out of an arrangement to sell the property to their successors when the lease came to an end.
The source claims the landlords also wanted to keep the lease agreement going beyond its expiry date, and accepted further rental payments in advance up to the end of March 2024, but then on January 31, issued the notice to quit.
The patient group says that the notice given is not enough time to find alternative premises, so the only option would be for the practice to close. All the GP practices in the area are at or close to capacity for patients.
“Patient care will suffer. And the volume of new patients could easily destabilise one or more of the neighbouring practices,” our source said.
South West London Integrated Care Board, the ICB (which replaced the local Clinical Commissioning Group in 2022), advises GP practices to hold at least six months’ notice periods on their surgery premises to allow for a safe transfer of patient care.
“So any notice period of six months or less does not give the practice time to find alternate premises before transferring care,” the source said.
“It effectively forces the practice to close. We believe it will take three to six months to identify, secure and fit out suitable premises before patient care can be safely transferred.”
Inside Sutton understands that approaches for help have been made to local councillors, Sutton Council, Sutton’s director of public health, and Elliot Colburn, the MP for Carshalton and Wallington. “We’re asking for support in lobbying the landlords to grant at least nine to 12 months’ notice so that we can evaluate alternatives to closing.”
According to the patient group, the landlords want to sell the property, which may require planning permission for change of use and possibly consent from NHS England.
“Any option other than remaining in the current premises will cause disruption to 4,000 patients. The shorter the notice, the more assistance these patients will need to register with alternate practices.”
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: In January 2024, Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for a SEVENTH successive year in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine
Why are GP Surgeries not owned by the NHS? Why are vital public services left to the whims of people whose only interest is in making a profit?
4000 people’s health care (and millions nationwide) are being put at risk just because of a political ideology that everything must be in the private sector. Our NHS should be owned and run by the public so it’s only priority is the health of the public.
From my half-forgotten potted history of the NHS, was it not the case that from the very start, doctors in General Practice were not NHS staff, but contractors who also had to arrange and manage their own premises? An accommodation was made, and it all bumped along nicely enough, until relatively recently when some – usually US-owned health insurance businesses – identified buying up chains of GP practices, taking on their patient lists and the guaranteed income from the Dept of Health that would generate.
That’s not what is happening here.
But it may explain why the suburban home that has served as a GP’s surgery may soon be on the property market.
I am sure that a doctor or NHS professional will be able to clarify the position.
Not very confidence-inspiring that our Green candidate didn’t realise that GPs have always been private businesses. Actually, I understand that some individuals are now NHS employees. As far as the Green health policies are concerned, I’m, worried that, if elected they’d legalise a whole panoply of ‘alternative’ regimes, including homeopathy and reiki
I know that GPs are in an odd situation of technically being self-employed but having very little freedom to do anything other than what they are told to do by the NHS. This fudge may have suited many doctors when the NHS was originally set up and is no doubt a cheap way for the Government to get out of some of the obligations they would have to GPs if they were directly employed. The question has come up more often recently about whether this is the best way to deliver health services. The current set up is not very attractive to newly qualified doctors and there is the danger you mentioned of GP practices being bought up by profit-hungry private businesses. This current story is another example of the pitfalls of leaving our health service and its infrastructure in private hands.
All of this is why I raised those questions, and personally I believe that having public services in public hands is the answer.
Public services in public hands, I can understand.
But thousands of small pieces of bricks and mortar property, often in converted suburban houses such as the one in Carshalton, risks tying up far too much NHS capital, surely?
After 40+ years of ‘selling off the family silver” I think we do need to revisit how assets were brought under public control when the welfare state was set up. I also think we need to look into nonprofit cooperative ownership and investment capital as ways of taking things out of the profit making sector. Buying up buildings is not the top priority in health spending but investing in the public sector estate will lead to long term savings that can be ploughed back into improving public services.
From what I gather Carshalton Beeches now only has one GP. So from a GP practice in partnership it has disbanded said partnership and has one GP.
There appears to be more to this matter than just a lease. In fact the lease dispute appears to derive from the abandonment of the partnership with messrs Goel.
Clearly they are unhappy with what has happened and have decided to exercise their ”perfectly legal” and lawful ownership rights” to have back their property. Obviously irrespective of the damage this may cause to 4000 patients and their health.
But are they alone in that? No I think not.
The SWL ICB may advise on 6 month leases but the law allow still no fault evictions. I could not find any exemptions for GP surgeries and there is nothing to prevent them using the house as a Surgery for private practice and even selling it, they could even use it for its original purpose as a residential house. I suspect the Council would jump at the chance for it to be a HMO or redeveloped into 4 perfectly legal overcrowded flats that could house families they find hard to house.
So that advise is just air and can never be secured even by contract.
So is there some tit for tat going on here?
Peter is right – Surgeries should not be subject to this kind of disruption.
Still the ICBs are set up to ensure integrated care for NHS patients. And herre is a crunch time for them to show they are actually a viable entity.
Let the Goels and the US chains fart in the rain and hiss at each other.
Its perhaps time for the ICB and the Health minister to have the concrete plans of mitigations to known risks and resolve the issue of patient transfer seamlessly and quickly so patients are not at risk.
If not then maybe its time to have a close look and an investigation into how this came about and how many more surgeries and patients have been put at risk by seemingly cavalier attitude to patients rights and care in Croydon and Sutton,