Infected blood scandal: Bereaved families say loved ones who died after being contaminated were being ‘used for research’

Published

1 year ago

May 8, 2024

admin

Bereaved families who lost loved ones in the contaminated blood scandal say they have seen evidence that proves their relatives were being “used for research” without their knowledge and despite clinicians knowing the risks.

Historical notes in medical records found by campaigners are said to show that some patients being treated for the blood clotting disorder haemophilia in the 1970s and 1980s were given blood plasma treatment which doctors knew might be contaminated and infect them with hepatitis.

Clinicians involved in the treatment have maintained they wanted to study the links between the haemophilia treatment Factor VIII and the risk of infection.

Jason Evans, director of the campaign group Factor 8, believes that instead of stopping treatment, clinicians lobbied to continue trials, even after identifying the association between hepatitis and the treatment.

He has found notes alluding to the research in his own father’s medical records.

Mr Evans, whose father died in 1993 after being infected with both HIV and hepatitis C during the course of his treatment for haemophilia, said: “It is appalling that hundreds of people with haemophilia across the country were knowingly infected with lethal viruses under the guise of scientific research.

“These secret experiments, conducted without consent, show individuals were treated as mere test subjects, not human beings.

“The fact that this could happen on such a scale, over such a long period of time, is almost incomprehensible.”

Documents – obtained through Freedom of Information requests and medical records provided by families – reveal a timeline of the trials, led by a senior medic who worked for the now defunct Public Health Laboratory Service, say campaigners.

Becka Pagliaro from Waterlooville, near Portsmouth, said she was “shocked” to find notes about the trials in her father’s patient notes.

Her father Neil King was co-infected with both HIV and hepatitis C while receiving treatment for haemophilia. He died in 1996 when he was 38 years old.

“When I got his medical records I saw he was part of this research which I know was something that he would not have agreed to, so that was done covertly,” Ms Pagliaro said.

“I was really shocked – I wondered first of all whether I had received someone else’s medical records because I could not believe what I was seeing.”

Janine Jones’ brother Mark Payton died when he was 41 after being co-infected with both hepatitis C and HIV.

“When I saw the research was on my brother’s records I thought: ‘What’s this?’ And after asking a few questions I didn’t get anywhere,” said the 59-year-old from Warwickshire.

“It was only the last few months that it really came to light – they were being used for research.”

Emma Frame, from South Shields, said that her father had never agreed to be part of studies but found multiple references to them in his medical records.

Ms Frame said: “I have all of his records which is where I came across these studies.

“There is no information other than this doctor’s name, a treatment and then a date. With my dad it was recorded several different times.

“It’s absolutely mind-blowing the information that is out there that has been hidden.”

Jeffrey Frame was co-infected with HIV and hepatitis C and died in 1991 when he was just 39.

Ms Frame said that in the mid 1990s she also discovered that the NHS had kept some of her father’s “samples”, which had not been discussed with the family.

“They still had actual physical samples of my dad who had died years previous,” she said.

Tens of thousands of people were infected with contaminated blood through infected blood products or blood transfusions, largely between the 1970s and 1980s.

People were infected with hepatitis or HIV, and in some cases with both.

An estimated 3,000 people have died as a result, while those who survived have lived with life-long health implications.

Des Collins, senior partner of Collins Solicitors, which represents 1,500 victims and their families, said: “There is now overwhelming evidence that the NHS failed patients on a number of levels in the 70s and 80s and certainly in ways we find shocking and abhorrent.

“We are looking forward to Sir Brian Langstaff’s final Inquiry report in a few weeks’ time, which will lay out the wrongs perpetrated in comprehensive fashion.

“Not only will this reinforce the case for compensating victims and their families, but importantly will shine a light on the lessons to be learned so that mistakes of the past are never repeated again.”

The Infected Blood Inquiry will publish its final report on the scandal on 20 May.

UK

Man, 76, charged after children fell ill at summer camp

Published

10 mins ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Man, 76, charged after children fell ill at summer camp

A 76-year-old man has been charged with child cruelty offences after youngsters fell ill at a summer camp.

Jonathon Ruben is accused of three offences of “wilful ill treatment of a child” relating to three boys.

Police received a report of children feeling unwell at a camp being held at Stathern Lodge, near Melton in Leicestershire, on Sunday.

Officers said paramedics attended the scene and eight boys – aged between eight and 11 – were taken to hospital as a precaution, as was an adult. They have since been discharged.

Ruben will appear at Leicester Magistrates’ Court on Saturday.

A statement from Janine McKinney, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said: “The Crown Prosecution Service has authorised the prosecution of a 76-year-old man with child cruelty offences following a police investigation into a summer camp held at Stathern Lodge, Leicestershire.

“This decision has been made after reviewing a file of evidence from Leicestershire Police.

“Jonathon Ruben, will be charged with three offences of wilful ill-treatment of a child relating to three boys. He will appear at Leicester Magistrates’ Court on Saturday, 1 August.

“This has been an extremely upsetting and shocking moment for the community, and especially for the children and parents most directly affected.”

Leicestershire Police said the owners and operators of Stathern Lodge are separate from the people who use or hire the venue, and are not connected to the incident.

It added in a statement: “This is an active criminal investigation and we ask that people do not speculate further about the incident, particularly on social media platforms.

“Leicestershire Police continues to work closely with partners ensuring that full safeguarding is provided to all those affected.”

The force has referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct over its handling of the incident.

UK

What is the car finance scandal – and what could today’s ruling mean for motorists?

Published

15 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

What is the car finance scandal - and what could today's ruling mean for motorists?

The UK’s Supreme Court is set to deliver a landmark ruling today that could have billion-pound consequences for banks and impact millions of motorists.

The essential question that the country’s top court has been asked to answer is this: should customers be fully informed about the commission dealers earn on their purchase?

However, the Supreme Court is only considering one of two cases running in parallel regarding the mis-selling of car finance.

Here is everything you need to know about both cases, and how the ruling this afternoon may (or may not) affect any future compensation scheme.

What is the Supreme Court considering?

The Supreme Court case concerns complaints related to the non-disclosure of commission. This applies to 99% of car finance cases.

When you buy a car on finance, you are effectively loaned the money, which you pay off in monthly instalments. These loans carry interest, organised by the brokers (the people who sell you the finance plan).

These brokers earn money in the form of a commission (which is a percentage of the interest payments).

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of three motorists who were not informed that the car dealerships they agreed finance deals with were also being paid 25% commission, which was then added to their bills.

The ruling said it was unlawful for the car dealers to receive a commission from lenders without obtaining the customer’s informed consent to the payment.

However, British lender Close Brothers and South Africa’s FirstRand appealed the decision, landing it in the Supreme Court.

What does the second case involve?

The second case is being driven by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and involves discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs).

Under these arrangements, brokers and dealers increased the amount of interest they earned without telling buyers and received more commission for it. This is said to have incentivised sellers to maximise interest rates.

The FCA banned this practice in 2021. However, a high number of consumers have complained they were overcharged before the ban came into force. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) said in May that they were dealing with 20,000 complaints.

In January 2024, the FCA announced a review into whether motor finance customers had been overcharged because of past use of DCAs. It is using its powers to review historical motor finance commission arrangements across multiple firms – all of whom deny acting inappropriately.

The FCA also said it is looking into a “consumer redress scheme” that means firms would need to offer appropriate compensation to customers affected by the issue.

An estimated 40% of car finance deals are likely to be eligible for compensation over motor finance deals taken out between 2007 and 2021, when the DCAs were banned.

To find out how you can tell if you’ve been mis-sold car finance, read the following explainer from our reporter Megan Harwood-Baynes.

How does the ruling affect potential compensation?

In short, the Supreme Court ruling could impact the scale and reach that a compensation scheme is likely to have.

The FCA said in March that it will consider the court’s decision and if it concludes motor finance customers have lost out from widespread failings by firms, it is “likely [to] consult on an industry-wide redress scheme”.

This would mean affected individuals wouldn’t need to complain, but they would be paid out an amount dictated by the FCA.

However, no matter what the court decides, the FCA could go ahead with a redress scheme.

The regulator said it will confirm if it is proposing a scheme within six weeks of the Supreme Court’s decision.

What impact could this have on lenders?

Analysts at HSBC said last year the controversy could be estimated to cost up to £44bn.

Alongside Close Brothers, firms that could be affected include Barclays, Santander and the UK’s largest motor finance provider Lloyds Banking Group – which organises loans through its Black Horse finance arm.

Lloyds has already set aside £1.2bn to be used for potential compensation.

The potential impact on the lending market and the wider economy could be so great that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering intervening to overrule the Supreme Court, according to The Guardian.

Treasury officials have been looking at the potential of passing new legislation alongside the Department for Business and Trade that could slash the potential compensation bill.

The Treasury said in response to the claim that it does not “comment on speculation” but hopes to see a “balanced judgment”.

UK

Full details of Heathrow’s plans for a third runway revealed

Published

16 hours ago

August 1, 2025

admin

Full details of Heathrow's plans for a third runway revealed

Heathrow Airport has said it can build a third runway for £21bn within the next decade.

Europe’s busiest travel hub has submitted its plans to the government – with opponents raising concerns about carbon emissions, noise pollution and environmental impacts.

The west London airport wants permission to create a 3,500m (11,400ft) runway, but insists it is open to considering a shorter one instead.

In January, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that the government supports a “badly needed” expansion to connect the UK to the world and open up new growth opportunities.

But London mayor Sir Sadiq Khan is still against a new runway because of “the severe impact” it will have on the capital’s residents.

Under Heathrow’s proposal, the runway would be constructed to the northwest of its existing location – allowing for an additional 276,000 flights per year.

The airport also wants to create new terminal capacity for 150 million annual passengers – up from 84 million – with plans involving a new terminal complex named T5XW and T5XN.

Terminal 2 would be extended, while Terminal 3 and the old Terminal 1 would be demolished.

The runway would be privately funded, with the total plan costing about £49bn, but some airlines have expressed concern that the airport will hike its passenger charges to pay for the project.

EasyJet chief executive Kenton Jarvis said an expansion would “represent a unique opportunity for easyJet to operate from the airport at scale for the first time and bring with it lower fares for consumers”.

Thomas Woldbye, the airport’s chief executive, said in a statement that “it has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow”.

“We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity,” he added.

“With a green light from government and the correct policy support underpinned by a fit-for-purpose, regulatory model, we are ready to mobilise and start investing this year in our supply chain across the country.

“We are uniquely placed to do this for the country. It is time to clear the way for take-off.”

The M25 motorway would need to be moved into a tunnel under the new runway under the airport’s proposal.

London mayor still opposed

Sir Sadiq says City Hall will “carefully scrutinise” the proposals, adding: “I’ll be keeping all options on the table in how we respond.”

Tony Bosworth, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, also said that if Sir Keir Starmer wants to be “seen as a climate leader”, then backing Heathrow expansion is “the wrong move”.

Earlier this year, Longford resident Christian Hughes told Sky News that his village and others nearby would be “decimated” if an expansion were to go ahead.

It comes after hotel tycoon Surinder Arora published a rival Heathrow expansion plan, which involves a shorter runway to avoid the need to divert the M25 motorway.

The billionaire’s Arora Group said a 2,800m (9,200ft) runway would result in “reduced risk” and avoid “spiralling cost”.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander will consider all plans over the summer so that a review of the Airports National Policy Statement can begin later this year.

It also comes after Sky News reported on a Heathrow Airport-funded group sending leaflets supporting a third runway to thousands of homes across west London.

The group, called Back Heathrow, sent leaflets to people living near the airport, claiming expansion could be the route to a “greener” airport and suggesting it would mean only the “cleanest and quietest aircraft” fly there.

Opponents of the airport’s expansion said the information provided by the group is “incredibly misleading”.

Back Heathrow told Sky News it had “always been open” about the support it receives from the airport. The funding is not disclosed on Back Heathrow’s newsletter or website.