Gladys

Spit, don't swallow.

It is shambolic and, sadly, seems to reflect on the whole service (which I have always found excellent, when you get there). I have another experience which involved an urgent scan being required by a close family member. The referral was urgent, ie within a week, but it took 6 weeks to get the scan; there seemed to be a Bermuda triangle that sucked us down. Thankfully, the dreaded outcome was not present, but how is something referred by a GP as super-urgent caught up in the appointments system? Again, once we got to the appointment the clinicians were excellent. Not so the system that got us there. If it had been the worst diagnosis expected, how much could be attributed to a crap system?

Yes, the system has been running force a while but you had the option to stop receiving text reminders, iirc. The concept is good, the execution is not. It seems like there are several system running that cannot talk to each other. For example, when I see my consultant, he writes out a slip for the next appointment which I then take to the reception so the appointment can be booked, not there and then, but I receive a letter in the post some days later. By no means am I a techie, but surely automation of the entire booking process is relatively simple and there must be existing systems available "off the peg" that include a reminder function that works.

So, we are told by the health minister that the text reminder system for hospital appointments is expected to solve the missed appointment numbers. It is only being trialled in a couple of areas. However, I have had experience of this with some regular appointments I have. They are usually at 8.30 in the morning, but the reminder I get is for 9.00. On the first occasion, I arrived at 9.00 as per the reminder thinking the appointment had been changed. But was told that the system does not recognise appointments before 9.00. There are other "quirks" such as getting the appointment time wrong for a lengthy treatment, which throws the whole timetable out for the department and could mean that the patient is sent home because the treatment cannot be completed in the time left. The reminders also do not say which department the appointment is with, so if you under a couple of departments, I am sure it would be quite easy to turn up to the wrong department. I gather that these anomalies have been reported, but the system has not been tweaked. How difficult is it to get this relatively simple process right? The system should be turned off until these bugs are eradicated.

Never mind, it will soon be Christmas. https://images.app.goo.gl/x6VpCRq7b6XTdQj56

I am in favour of any opportunity to put a traffic cone on a statue.

That will be handy for him, up in Jurby.

Ooh I shall start reading it again, then.

I can forgive typos, but not using the wrong word. Anyway, I find myself increasingly misapprehended these days!

Not sure how it is "appropriate". It is a badge of honour for Guardian readers to use it, almost like they are signalling their acceptance of the frailties of their beloved organ in pursuit of truth. BTW I used to be a Guardian reader!

Please stop calling it the Grauniad. I first heard it referred as such nearly 40 years ago, and even then it was an old story to be "in on".

It's advice.

As John said, insurance is an indemnity that covers you for the loss. So, provided you have had a couple of quotes then there is no reason for the insurer to reduce your claim. Unless, that is, included within the quotes is an element of maintenance rather than repair, in which case they will adjust the amount to reflect the repair only.

For a highly qualified woman she was very poor on delivering facts, avoiding any question by saying she doesn't have the info. Completely unprepared and did not inspire confidence in the science behind ER, or the cause itself. Most of her argument was based on emotion (even hysteria), which as someone with a doctorate, she should have avoided. It was painful.

Or understanding.