News

People receiving NHS Continuing Healthcare (CHC) who do not die “as quickly as expected” are at increasing risk of having their funding withdrawn, even if they remain profoundly ill and their needs are unchanged. This is according to a recent investigation by the charity Age UK, which looked at the statistics around Fast Track NHS CHC Funding.

The Fast Track Pathway is designed to allow NHS CHC to be put in place very quickly by a single clinician for people with a rapidly deteriorating condition that appears to be entering its final phase. It differs from the Standard Pathway in that there is no need for a full eligibility assessment carried out by a multi-disciplinary team, which can take many weeks to arrange and carry out.

Age UK’s report found that while there has been virtually a halving of the numbers of people being assessed as eligible on the Standard pathway over the past six years, the numbers found eligible for Fast Track CHC over the same period have increased by almost a third (30%). However, there has also been a massive 35% increase in the numbers of people having their Fast Track funding withdrawn following a review.

This is something we hear all the time at Just Caring Legal: many calls to our helpline are from people perplexed as to why their relative’s NHS CHC funding has been withdrawn when their care needs remain the same. Often the local NHS ICB, which administers the funding, justifies this by claiming that the needs have “stablilised” – even if this is only because they are being better managed. (Well-managed needs are still needs.)

The general picture, according to Age UK Charity Director Caroline Abrahams, is of an NHS CHC system which “seems to be moving away from being a source of longer term care funding for profoundly frail and unwell older people, to one focused more and more on short, sharp injections of cash to support those at the end of life. This is to the extent that if a person does not die as quickly as expected, they are at increasing risk of having their CHC funding taken away.” However, this was never the intended purpose or function of NHS CHC. It has arisen because ICBs, under pressure to make savings from their CHC budgets, are making decisions aimed at rationing funds rather than following the guidelines. As a result, many older people with ongoing chronic health problems, and associated high levels of care need, are missing out on life-changing funding that should be theirs. They are also failing to get the joined-up health and social care they desperately need. The end result, of course, is that they incur sky-high care bills that can easily run into hundreds of thousands of pounds. “In this way the NHS is pushing its own financial responsibilities onto older people and their families or, in the case of those on low incomes and with few assets, onto their local authorities,” Abrahams pointed out.

Has your NHS CHC funding been withdrawn, leaving you not knowing where to turn? Or perhaps you have an NHS CHC review coming up and fear that you will lose your care package? If so, check out our Resources section to find out more about your rights and what you can do. Or contact us for a free initial assessment of your case and a full explanation of our NHS CHC Services and how we can help.

Posted by Rosalind Hughes, founder, Just Caring Legal on 05/02/2025

A family that spent six years battling to obtain NHS Continuing Healthcare funding for their vulnerable mother finally won after a completely separate and Independent Review of their case. They received tens of thousands of pounds of wrongly paid care fees as well as a long-overdue apology.

After what they described to the Telegraph newspaper as a “gruelling ordeal”, the family also received a four-figure compensation payment from Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board for the unacceptable mishandling of Hilda Bowler’s case.

The case demonstrates the incredible lengths that local NHS boards will go to to deny these payments to families, and the sheer importance of not giving up, even in the face of repeated refusals.

Mrs Bowler’s family highlighted the poor quality of the ICB’s processes throughout the assessment. There were documents with errors and omissions, including several sections that had been cut and pasted from another assessment. Eventually NHS England carried out an Independent Review which confirmed the ICB’s failings and referred the case back to them. The case dragged on for some time further until eventually the ICB appointed a truly independent panel to reassess it. This panel concluded overwhelmingly that Mrs Bowler did indeed have a primary health need.

“It is an utter disgrace that when she was at her most vulnerable, and in the grip of this terrible disease, the NHS tried to deny her the financial support that we have now proved she was entitled to,” Mrs Bowler’s son-in-law told the Telegraph.

“I was staggered to discover that they were simply lifting passages from reports written about total strangers and including them in Hilda’s report. It was so blatant.”

He added: “The whole process was shambolic. It wears you down and it makes it very hard for families to get closure after someone has died when this is hanging over you.” Mrs Bowler sadly died in 2020 at the age of 92. But the family persevered to reclaim the money Mrs Bowler should never have paid in care fees.

Battles over NHS Continuing Healthcare do indeed wear families down. Often here at Just Caring Legal, we hear from them when they are at their lowest and just about ready to throw in the towel. We know how easy it is to feel gaslighted, frustrated, exhausted. This is part and parcel of the bureaucratic maze that is NHS CHC. It is a system that has evolved to put people off rather than help them get what they are entitled to.

If this is you, then don’t give up. Get in touch with us instead. We will give you a reality check and a thorough assessment of the merits or otherwise of fighting on. You too might eventually get what you have been entitled to all along. And hopefully, it won’t take six years.

Posted by Rosalind Hughes, Founder, Just Caring Legal on 03/02/2025, updated 09/12/2025

A flurry of letters to the Guardian newspaper last month has shed new, much needed light on the opaque NHS Continuing Healthcare system.

Several correspondents shared their experiences of  navigating a “complex” and “cruel” system designed to ration NHS funds, leading many to have to seek expert help as their relative’s health deteriorates.

Dr Michael Duxbury, who has tried to access the funding for his 91-year-old Mum, wrote on 29 December 2024 that NHS professionals never signpost people to it. Then, when you do find out you can apply for it, “The hoops to jump through and bureaucratic blocks are immense.”

He went on: “She has mixed dementia, is bedbound and requires 24-hour care… The chances of me being successful without legal help is minimal – and I’m a retired medical doctor! I can’t help feeling that the system is deliberately set up for people to fail, which seems particularly cruel as you are dealing with a very vulnerable and ill demographic, to say nothing of their carers.”

Dr Duxbury’s letter clearly hit a nerve with readers, as the following week, there were several more on the subject. The first, from someone who had worked in the health and social care sector for more than a decade, confirmed that “decision-making [on whether someone is eligible for the funding] is undoubtedly influenced by an overarching need to gatekeep spending”.

The writer pointed to NHS Digital statistics showing that NHS CHC eligibility numbers per population size have decreased between 2017-18 and 2023-24. This is despite the fact that more people than ever before are living with complex needs. The writer put this down not to decreasing awareness but to a drive to “protect the NHS purse”.

The writer described the “farce” of local authorities and Integrated Care Boards (local health bodies who administer the funding) spending taxpayers’ money “arguing about who should pay for someone’s care when their eligibility is disputed. These are complicated systems for families to navigate, which lead many to seek legal advice at a time when the condition of their loved ones may deteriorate further.” This has certainly been our experience here at Just Caring Legal.

Janet Maitland from East Finchley also wrote in to say that when her relative had to go into a care home, “the first request for information was not about his health but his financial position. So they learned immediately that he had savings and owned his flat. From that moment on, in every meeting about CHC funding, where I spoke for him as he does not have the capacity to do so himself, it was clear that the money was the most important thing about him. In the end, I was defeated by people determined to minimise every medical problem he has.”

Again, this is a familiar story to us here at Just Caring Legal, even though questions about finances should never precede an assessment for NHS CHC (the funding is not means-tested).

Angela Huxter from Wantage in Oxfordshire, told the paper that she had tried three times to get CHC for her husband with no success and had to find more than £7,800 every month for his care. “I understand his care home recently received CHC for two residents posthumously, which shows what a cruel system this is,” she added.

Here at Just Caring Legal, we hear stories like this on a daily basis. Have you tried to access NHS continuing Healthcare funding for a relative without success? Are you sick of wading through the red tape? Tired of banging your head against a brick wall? If so, you may need our services.

Just Caring Legal is a solicitors’ firm that has been specialising in NHS CHC funding for years. We have recovered hundreds of thousands of pounds challenging unfair decisions like those described in the Guardian.

Why not check out the Resources section of our website for more information? You can call us today on 0191 556 1078 or send us a message to arange an initial assessment of your case. Our expertise might just make the difference between securing the funding you are entitled to and having to pay thousands a month in care fees.

Posted by Rosalind Hughes, Just Caring Legal, on 04/02/2025

Just Caring Legal has sent an open letter to Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) across England to challenge what we believe to be widespread abuse of the eligibility process for NHS Continuing Healthcare. The letter is published below. People all over the country have been getting in touch to tell us that they have been effectively shut out of their NHS Continuing Healthcare eligibility assessments. They say NHS CHC assessors have contacted them to ask for their views on their or their relative’s care needs. But then they have completed the Decision Support Tool – the detailed document used to help assess care needs – in a separate meeting, without them or their relative present. This is against both the spirit and the letter of the National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare, which guides ICBs on how to carry out NHS CHC assessments. So we have written to all ICBs in England demanding to know the rationale for what appears to be the wholesale abandonment of their person-centred principles.  We are demanding that ICBs complete assessments in line with the principles and processes of the National Framework – or face the extra work caused by the enormous number of appeals against ineligibility that will inevitably result if they do not.

---

Open letter to ICBs

June 2021

To whom it may concern:

Re: recent nationwide policy on exclusion of individuals and/or their representatives from completion of the NHS Continuing Healthcare Decision Support Tool

It has come to our attention that many ICBs across England are following a revised policy on NHS Continuing Healthcare eligibility assessments. Under this policy, assessors are contacting individuals and/or their representative(s) by Zoom or telephone to ask for their input on their care needs, but then completing the Decision Support Tool afterwards without the individual and/or their representative(s) present.

This is clearly an abuse of process and in breach of their legal duties under the National Health Service Commissioning Board and Clinical Commissioning Groups (Responsibilities and Standing Rules) Regulations 2012 (the Standing Rules).

The revised policy is contrary to both the spirit and the letter of the National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare (the National Framework). Paragraph 67 of the National Framework states that the process of assessment for eligibility of NHS Continuing Healthcare and all associated decision-making should be person-centred. This means placing the individual at the heart of the assessment and care-planning process.

We would remind you that under the Standing Rules, in carrying out their duties in relation to NHS Continuing Healthcare, CCGs must have regard to the National Framework (regulation 21 (12)).

Paragraph 68 of the National Framework sets out the elements of a person-centred approach, including ensuring that the individual and/or their representative(s) are fully and directly involved in the assessment process.

It should be noted that the National Framework definition of “representative” includes any friend, unpaid carer or family member who is supporting the individual in the process as well as anyone acting in a more formal capacity (e.g., welfare deputy or power of attorney, or an organisation representing the individual).

The National Framework (PG 4.3a) requires that all reasonable efforts should be made to involve the individual and/or their representative in the assessment process.

It also requires the MDT meeting to be arranged in a way that enables that individual and/or representative(s) to give their views on the completed domain levels before they leave the assessment meeting (PG note 24.2).

The DST specifically requires the MDT to record (PG 4.3):

• whether the individual was involved in its completion
• whether they were offered the opportunity to have a representative
• whether the representative attended the DST completion
• the individual’s view of their own care/support needs
• whether the MDT assessment accurately reflects these
• whether they contributed to the assessment
• whether they agree with the domain levels selected
• reasons for any disagreement on the domain levels selected.

It is the role of the NHS Continuing Healthcare coordinator to support the person and their representative(s) to play a full role in the eligibility consideration process, by organising the overall process in a manner that maximises their ability to participate (PG 20.1). It is also their role to ensure that the DST is completed in accordance with the requirements in the National Framework and relevant standing rules/regulations.

The departures we are seeing across the country from these integral requirements of the National Framework are now so frequent as to point to a system-wide shift in processes. We therefore demand total transparency and clarity on the rationale for the wholesale abandonment of the person-centred principles which form the very core of the NHS Continuing Healthcare process. We require ICBs to make public any revised guidance, programme of work or policy changes from Government or NHS England that they may be working to when conducting NHS CHC eligibility assessments effectively behind closed doors.

Furthermore, we demand that you take immediate steps to ensure that NHS Continuing Healthcare coordinators and MDTs are organising and carrying out their duties in relation to the eligibility assessment process in compliance with the Standing Rules and the National Framework.

This requires that they:

• arrange MDT eligibility assessment meetings in such a way and at such a time as to maximise the ability of the individual and/or their representative(s) to fully and directly participate in the completion of the Decision Support Tool;
• make all reasonable efforts to ensure that the Decision Support Tool is completed at the virtual MDT meeting with the individual and/or their representative(s) present, that all domains are discussed within this meeting and the scoring is decided within this meeting with the individual and/or representative(s)’ views of their care needs given full weight alongside the professionals’ views;
• ensure that the individual’s/representative(s)’ view of their own care/support needs and whether they believe the MDT assessment accurately reflects this view are recorded;
• discuss and record the views of the individual/representative(s) on what they believe are the correct domain levels and the domain levels selected by the MDT;
• record the reasons for any disagreement on domain levels between the individual/representative(s) and the MDT.

If the MDT retires to discuss its recommendation following the completion of the DST, it must communicate the outcome to the individual and/or their representative(s) as soon as possible (Practice Guidance note 24.3 of the National Framework). The individual and/or their representative(s) must not be forced to wait until the eligibility decision is made and communicated to them by letter to learn the outcome of the DST and the recommendation of the MDT. Any failure to meet these requirements may be deemed an abuse of process, representing clear grounds for appeal of any subsequent decision.

I look forward to your full co-operation in this matter and a response clarifying your current stance.

Yours sincerely

Rosalind Hughes

Just Caring Legal

Posted by Rosalind Hughes, founder, Just Caring Legal, June 2021

Just Caring Legal has won an appeal for NHS Continuing Healthcare funding on behalf of a Northumberland family after exposing a catalogue of  flaws in the assessment process.

“We won our appeal five months after the death of my wonderful, kind, gentle father in law,” the client said. “Ros was a lifeline. Her support through this process was fantastic.”

Family told relative would have to pay for care “because he could afford it”

The family approached Rosalind Hughes, founder of Just Caring Legal, following a chance conversation with a friend. They needed help after NHS commissioners told them they would have to pay full care fees for one-to-one nursing care for their father in law “because he could afford it”.  Northumberland ICB refused to pay NHS CHC even after a multidisciplinary assessment panel had recommended he was eligible.

“After delving into the case I found there had been many procedural flaws in the assessment process,” Rosalind explains. “For example, the ICB did not inform the family that the assessment process was taking place in hospital. They did not invite them to attend even though this is clearly a part of the process under the National Framework.

NHS CHC is not subject to means-testing

“NHS CHC is not reliant on a means test – money and assets don’t come into it at all. Yet the family had to complete a financial assessment. The ICB said they would have to “get him out of hospital as he could pay for his own care”.

“Unfortunately this sort of thing is very common – clients are often not aware that they should not disclose financial information before a CHC decision. It is irrelevant.”

Challenge relied on specialist knowledge

Just Caring Legal’s specialist knowledge allows us to challenge NHS CHC assessment decisions that were not supported by sufficient evidence. “We were able to force the ICB to accept that they could not support the view that the patient did not have a primary health need,” Rosalind explains. “Nor could they back up their assertion that there were “exceptional circumstances” that meant they did not have to follow the recommendation of eligibility.”

The successful client added: “The process of getting CHC funding is just ridiculous – no wonder so many give up. Without the support from Rosalind and her in-depth knowledge, we would have given up.”

Now THIS is the TV expose of what is regularly reported as ”the scandal” of NHS Continuing Healthcare we have been waiting for.

We were pleased to see BBC’s Panorama delving into the care crisis last week. The programme showed that many local authorities are failing to meet even their statutory duties on social care. But while it did refer to NHS Continuing Healthcare funding, it didn’t go far enough in explaining who should receive it, and why so many people don’t get it even though they should.

Scandal of NHS CHC laid bare for all to see

Yesterday, however, BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire show laid bare the whole scandal for all to see. They shone a light on, according to one desperate mother  fighting for the funding for her severely disabled son, “the dark side of the NHS, the hidden side”.

And we inwardly cheered when Derbyshire said NHS CHC “feels like it’s been a neglected issue for a long time. But not any more.”

Families wrongly using their savings to pay for care they should be getting for free

The programme spoke to numerous families who had used their life savings to pay for care after their local Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) wrongly denied the funding. The numbers affected across the country ran into many thousands, Derbyshire said.

Dr Paul Williams MP, a GP and member of the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee, told the show: “As a doctor it makes me feel really upset that there are people that so clearly need the support of the NHS and who aren’t getting it”.

“NHS England asked [ICBs] to make £855 million of savings by 2020-21 in CHC and I fear the only way they are going to be able to do that is by raising the bar [for eligibility] even higher.”

Dr Williams revealed: “I have worked inside [an ICB] and I have seen this happen. There are good people working there, but they are struggling to balance the books and there is a certain amount of subjectivity about the criteria. In some areas three quarters of people who apply get refused, in other areas only 5 per cent get refused. So there is massive variation going on here.”

Meanwhile, a caller to the show said she had left her job as an NHS CHC nurse assessor after just three months. “Basically the job was removing money and services from patients. Ethically I couldn’t do it. I was on fast track too – for terminally ill patients.”

“People are ending up selling homes they don’t need to sell”

Conservative peer and former pensions minister Baroness Altmann told Derbyshire the scandal amounted to a “monumental failure of government policy” – she agreed that ICBs were rationing NHS CHC to control their costs.

“Meanwhile someone has to look after your loved one and people are ending up selling homes they don’t need to sell because they turn out in the end to have been eligible [for CHC] after fighting for a year or two.”

What further evidence is needed that the system is broken and is failing people at their most vulnerable – after they have paid into that system all their lives? As one desperate daughter put it: “Mum and Dad are of the generation where if they couldn’t afford it they didn’t have it. They saved hard for their retirement and stood on their own two feet all their lives. And now they need that help and it is just not there.”

Do you have your own story like those featured on the BBC?

Just Caring Legal is a solicitors’ firm that has been specialising in NHS CHC funding for years. We have recovered hundreds of thousands of pounds challenging unfair decisions like those featured on the BBC. Whilst we praise the NHS for all the fabulous work it does, we regularly hear about this ”scandal” from our clients and we are dedicated to fighting it.

So call us today on 0191 556 1078 or send us a message via the website to arrange an initial discussion of your case and to see whether we can help.

Here at Just Caring Legal, we have been following closely the campaign by former Rear Admiral Phillip Mathias to raise awareness of the problems surrounding NHS Continuing Healthcare. His open letter to Government Ministers was eloquent and moving in its description of his own two-year battle for the NHS care funding his mother was entitled to.

He called NHS CHC “possibly one of the biggest financial scandals in the history of the NHS”. Now, in a new open letter published recently to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick, he has gone even further.

“I believe there are sufficient grounds and evidence to investigate [NHS England Chief Executive] Simon Stevens for the charge of Misconduct in Public Office,” he wrote.  During Stevens’ tenure, he continued, “many thousands of old, ill and vulnerable people have been denied the healthcare funding to which they were legally entitled.”

“The award of CHC funding is a matter of law, not policy. If the eligibility criteria are met, it is a legal entitlement, which is not discretionary or subject to affordability. Mr Stevens failed to act, Mr Matthias states, even though he was aware that “there were major and widespread failings in the CHC process.”

The letter points out that CHC funding has become even more unjust and unlawful over the period of Mr Stevens’ leadership of the NHS. “In terms of reasonable excuse or justification, it is difficult to imagine what this might be, other than the need to reduce CHC funding due to financial constraints – which would be illegal.”

While Just Caring Legal cannot comment on the legal merits of Mr Matthias’ accusations of misconduct, we agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments in his letter. Every day, we hear from our clients that elderly and vulnerable people are failing to receive the funding they need and deserve to help them live. NHS CHC should be available for all those with a primary health need, no matter how great their assets and savings. It should cover all their care costs whether at home or in nursing care. And people should not, in the words of applicants, require a PhD to prove they are eligible.

Yet the stories of Mr Matthias and many thousands of others show that the whole NHS CHC system is not working as it should.

Are you one of the thousands who has been denied NHS CHC?

If so, we want to hear from you. Because we may well be able to help.

Just Caring Legal is a solicitors’ firm specialising in NHS Continuing Healthcare Funding. Challenging decisions of ineligibility for NHS. CHC is what we do every day of the week.

Call us today on 0191 556 1078 or email us at [email protected] to arrange an initial discussion of your case. Our expertise will maximise your chances of securing the money you need to meet your vulnerable relative’s care needs.

It was so good to see BBC’s Panorama’s shining a light on the terrible things going on in the UK care system recently.

The two part series exposed the true extent of the crisis in care funding. We met vulnerable people forced into selling their homes to pay for care. Families battling a confusing and inadequate funding system. And several people who just didn’t know where to turn any more.

The dismay, exhaustion and sheer desperation on their faces was difficult to watch. Yet almost anyone who has come into contact with the UK care system in recent years will know exactly how they felt.

Unfit-for-purpose system lets people slip through the net

BBC social affairs correspondent Alison Holt showed a cash-strapped council struggling to meet even its statutory obligations towards those needing care in its community. NHS and local authority funding bodies fighting over who was responsible for funding care, with relatives left in limbo. Elderly people with dementia facing a move to a new and unfamiliar setting after their money runs out, because the council are unlikely to pay for their current one. Men and women at the end of their tether trying to cope with their relative’s illness with little or no support. And all the time, the most vulnerable in our society slipping through the net, alone, scared and at constant risk of injury, illness or worse.

The programme could have gone further in busting care funding myths

Despite the excellent job of raising awareness, however, the programme in our view could have gone much further in busting some of the myths around care funding. We heard numerous times about the means test for local authority care funding. How people who fail it have to sell their homes to pay for care.

What didn’t come across clearly enough, however, is that anyone who needs care due to a primary health need should not pay a penny towards their care. This is because they are eligible for NHS Continuing Healthcare. This applies to many people with advanced Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis or dementia, all of which featured in the programme.

Many people don’t know about this funding, and often nobody tells them it exists. It combines health and social care, and is funded by NHS Clinical Commissioning Groups.

For someone who needs high levels of care due to an advanced degenerative condition, an assessment for NHS CHC should be the first thing to happen, not the last. And no one should be asked to provide information about their financial means, housing situation or anything else until it does.

Yet only one person in the programme, Rita, was shown to apply for and receive NHS CHC – for just a three month period. This was following a gruelling assessment process that really took it out of her family. “We are constantly worried about where she is going to end up,” her daughter said.

For those in the programme struggling to care for relatives at home, there was no mention of NHS CHC. This is a shame because another myth is that NHS CHC is only available for those in nursing homes. It isn’t – it can pay for care anywhere. The test is the nature and/or intensity and/or complexity and/or unpredictability of the care needs – not where the care is delivered.

Did you recognise yourself in these stories?

Did you recognise your own situation or that of your relative in the Panorama stories? If so, don’t struggle on alone any longer. With our specialist expertise, we can guide you through the confusing funding system; advise you on your eligibility for NHS CHC; and represent you through the gruelling and complex process, maximising your chances of getting the funding you need. For your free initial consultation, call us today on 0191 556 1078 or email us at [email protected].

I am delighted to be able to wish Just Caring Legal a huge happy birthday, taking a moment to recognise two years of successful trading, and what a couple of years they have been!

Friday the 4^th March 2016 was my last day at a large Law firm in Newcastle after handing in my notice three months earlier. I had taken a leap of faith to become self-employed. My dream and my passion at that time was to single-handedly set up my own firm specialising in NHS Continuing Healthcare funding applications and the recovery of wrongly paid care fees. I didn’t have one client.

Taking my initial concept and transforming it into a busy, thriving Law Firm has been nothing short of the much-mentioned roller coaster journey. Challenging, stressful, and at times sad, yet undoubtedly the most rewarding and worthwhile of my career.

My clients repeatedly saying “I couldn’t have done it without you” and the emotionally challenging, vulnerable positions my clients and families find themselves within consistently push me on and drive me to grow this firm, as I know there are so many, many more people I can reach and help.

Success stories such as the gentleman that called and I was quickly able to identify the problem within his free initial consultation, give him instruction on his next steps, resulting in £3,000 per month of care being funded for the price of a phone call.

Or the Client whose father sadly had a severe stroke, was left completely immobile, doubly incontinent, unable to communicate and peg fed whilst spending over six months in hospital and despite this was given low and inaccurate scores to assess his eligibility for NHS CHC to pay for his care.

This client placed their trust in me and with robust written representation and clear evidence we were able to reconvene the MDT rather than appeal and have the scores corrected to severe within weeks.

As a result, the client’s father was fully funded and able to be moved from hospital to an appropriate care facility whilst saving £42,000 per year. This client said ‘’ I’m very grateful for the work you did for us Rosalind. I’m sure the result could have been different were it not for your input.’’

Clients regularly say that they are expected to pay for care if they have assets. They don’t realise that they are not expected to pay or have a financial assessment carried out if they or their relatives have ‘primary health needs’ such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, varying forms of dementia, catastrophic injuries and so on. I have helped people all over the country to secure NHS Continuing Healthcare funding and even travelled many miles to represent clients and maximise their chances of success throughout the assessment process. This is why I love what I do and the dream has now become a reality.

So, as I blow out the candles on the JCL birthday cake, I am going to make two wishes, one for each year. I know I shouldn’t share those wishes as they should remain secret, strictly between myself and the extinguished flame, melted wax and chocolate cake, but I’m going to make an exception and throw those wishes to the world.

My first wish is for more clients, and you might laugh and think that is surely the wish of every firm, but my wish is to reach more clients, to reach those who are so desperately in need. My passion is getting people the right decision as quickly as possible whilst navigating a complex and stressful process. I love nothing more than getting the right help to those in need at the beginning of an NHS Continuing Healthcare process, when they get the support they need within 28 days rather than the drawn-out exercise of 12 months or even a 2-3-year appeals process.

Apart from new clients reaching me through my website or by recommendations from existing clients, I would like to make even more connections with other Law Firms, Wealth Management companies, Accountants and Charities giving specialist, tailored guidance on the Continuing Healthcare process and the benefits for potential new clients of ‘investing money to save money’, protecting assets and ensuring ‘financial obligations’ are met by state funding where possible. Getting the right advice at the right time.

For my second wish, I wish to be able to widely share information, to impart my knowledge of Continuing Healthcare funding, so we all know of our possible entitlement when health takes a turn for the worse. I will blog and share as much as I can to inform the many people who still have no knowledge or a misguided understanding of NHS Continuing Healthcare funding.

People are still regularly accepting incorrect decisions, and it is these decisions that are costing potential clients and their families up to around £50,000 a year in care fees. And most important of all, it doesn’t matter how much money you have in the bank, if your needs arise primarily out of your health the NHS should find you eligible for NHS Continuing Healthcare and pay for your care fees, including accommodation if you are in residential care.

We can do better, we can do more and I can’t think of a better time than now. Let’s raise a glass to another successful year.