Wirral Council – Drowning In The Mire

Hello Verity here, I’m afraid today’s story has left Lord and Lady Wirral Leaks’ gaster truly flabbered.  Yes Wirral Council have admitted FINALLY that actually vulnerable people to whom Wirral Council had a duty of care where systematically overcharged to a much greater degree than they had originally admitted.  


 It seems whistle-blower Marty M wasn’t just “a bit mad” or a conspiracy theorist to rival David Icke, but a man of integrity who spoke the truth, despite the deep personal cost. We at Leaky Towers have long suspected a cover up, yet we wonder why now they have suddenly come clean.  Damage limitation?  (It’s rather late for that dears, the Councils PR team has to be one of the most inept in the country, as disaster follows disaster, follows failure, follows scandal)  Perhaps there is discovery of yet another smoking gun?  😉  Perhaps, indeed!

 We predict in the coming weeks there will be the usual talk of lessons learnt, of moving on, a clean slate, of improved PI’s and of the great strides the department has made.  Elected members will be confused and befuddled by pie charts and graphs and by the magical wonder that is the point and click power point presentations (that any reasonably IT literate 12 year old could produce.) And for fear of looking like the oak headed Luddites they are Councillors will pretend to understand this tomfoolery and nod sagely. (A word of advice from Eldritch, our plain speaking Head Gardner : “Ask this – Erm excuse me but what the actual fuck do these charts mean, in like, the real world?” )

However, have lessons really been learnt?  Because sadly even the briefest of glances at the CQC website would show that some things never change, and that people are STILL at risk.  (See below)…  Has anything really changed at Wirral Council DASS?  Feel free to let us know, because we really are all ears (and eyes)



 Richmond Residential Home 



The assessment and care planning processes did not protect people from receiving unsafe or inappropriate care.

  People may not be protected from abuse because adequate arrangements have not been put in place.

 Systems for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service were not sufficiently robust to ensure that people were protected from unsafe care.

 Records were not held securely to ensure that confidentiality was maintained.


 Edgeworth House


People who use the service were not protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had not taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.”


Mersey view Residential Home


 Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills – The provider was not meeting this essential standard. Staff had not received appropriate levels of training, development, supervision and appraisal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s