Could Guildford and Waverley’s Integrated Care Partnership’s shock announcement that it will no longer support Cranleigh Village Health Trust’s (CVHT) 20-year-long battle to build a Private Nursing Home and community beds be the final spanner in the works?
Is CVHT – now officially ‘Billy No Mates?’
Both the most recent planning application WA/2020/0965 and a planning appeal have both been POSTPONED.
According to an announcement on the CVHT’s website:
During the past week, Guildford and Waverley ICP (Integrated Care Partnership) have unexpectedly advised Cranleigh Village Health Trust (CVHT) that they are no longer able to formally support its proposals relating to the creation of 16 Community Beds within the planned 64-bed care home on Knowle Lane. This decision is based on ICP’s application of the newly introduced NHS’s Comprehensive Model of Personal Care.
Now there’s a funny old thing. Just last week the very same ICP, which includes Surrey County Council, had its supporting letter – dated 18 August 2020- lodged on Your Waverley’s Planning portal saying it supported the very same scheme! They say a week is a long time in politics – perhaps even less if you work for the NHS? No surprise there then – we understand that the NHS and a succession of PCT’s and CCG’s and Uncle Tom Cobley’s have been so**ing the beleaguered charity and its donors who doggedly supported it, for donkey’s years!
You can read the letter here: document-7995913
We digress…
The ICP also state that their accumulated evidence suggests that patients do much better if, when recovering, they are able to go home accompanied by an appropriate level of support.
This change of ICP stance is, we understand, a reflection of their assessment that the nature of community healthcare is changing, particularly in the past year, and that there will be a significant shift away from bed-based care for older people.
No surprise there then. The charity’s supposed partner HC-One is being taken to court for failing in its duty of care to shedloads of its Scottish residents – after employing staff from Kent. 
So what the hell is going on – with Cranleigh’s private nursing home and HC-ONE?
Say the charity… It is clear, however, that the community will continue to need care home beds (as well as hospital beds). Indeed, CVHT’s research, which was submitted with the planning application showed a high demand for care home beds, and it also showed ICP’s previous position to be in favour of the care home setting.
So in other words – they ain’t giving up until the Fat Lady Sings:
Wakey, wakey – where have you been CVHT during the bumpy Coronacoaster ride that nursing homes all over the country have been on since early in March when the dreaded COVID gave them all a punch in the proverbial?
Most of the old, and the bold old, have told us here at the WW they are either going to live in an annexe/at the bottom of their kids’ gardens or drink themselves under – they ain’t going into nursing homes – no Siree.
Whilst the ‘home-care’ policy is well-established and will obviously have some impacts on care-home occupancy patterns, the degree of such impacts is quite uncertain. Therefore, CVHT will continue to explore how the planned Community Beds will be provided in Cranleigh, and so restore those lost at the Cranleigh Village Hospital in 2006.
In other words folks! This dumb outfit, which has trousered over £1.8m of your hard-earned cash will continue pouring even more of your money down ‘Your Waverley’s overflowing planning pan? Because they just cannot get their heads around the difference between a hospital bed and a continuing care bed!
Following this very recent ICP policy update, CVHT says it will now rigorously assess how they can best fulfil their primary objective of providing appropriate health care support for the local community; this will include consultations with key local stakeholders. In addition, CVHT has arranged further discussions with ICP and Surrey County Council in order to assess the potential for a modified policy.
Ah-ha – so now we know that the ICP and Surrey County Council combined to have their policy all wrong and CVHT will help them modify it?
To facilitate their option-assessment process, CVHT has asked Waverley Borough Council to postpone their evaluation of the current Planning Application. CVHT has also asked the Planning Inspectorate to postpone the hearing of the Appeal against the previously refused Planning Application from 2019
Watch this space as the controversy which has split Cranleigh asunder continues…
Last week
Drop the whole thing into the Long Grass – People In Cranleigh – Don’t want a Care Home that serves the Private Sector and a few beds for the rest of Surrey… Cranleigh needs additional Investment into it’s Own Hospital or more improvements to what they already have.
To be honest when I moved here 6 years ago I was told to sign up to the Loxwood Medical Centre as I was more likely to be seen. They have been amazing over the last few years and I will forever be grateful to them – But I do feel guilty that I should be using Surrey not Sussex?
Surely with all the developments agreed in Cranleigh we shouldn’t even have to rely on donations from local residents.. I simply don’t get it.
This message is now coming over loud and clear from many residents who contact us publicly and privately.
It would appear that most residents love there in the eastern villages want the charity to call it a day. The WW finds the whole saga quite fascinating. How many more stakeholders need to tell this outfit to find somewhere else to play because their game is over.
Is it not time this so-called charity admits failure. Who is financing this and why???? Give the people of Cranleigh their land back I will pay the pound. I am sure there are better ways to use this land that will benefit a majority of Cranleigh, not just a few. Well done ICP in recognising that feelings about care homes have changed a lesson CVHT should listen too.
I so, so wholeheartedly agreed with the approximate four to five thousand residents who signed a petition objecting to this scheme. It seems the charity is only about itself, not the residents. Thank you ICP for realising this is not needed in our village we have enough care homes with beds available to cope with our needs.The rest of us are building Granny flats.
We presume you are referring to the petition raised against the previous, larger application. Perhaps someone could inform us how many signatures on the present, postponed application.
As for the granny flats, we suspect Waverley Planners will be swamped with applications in the future as more families want to look after their own – rather than squander their life savings on highly inflated care home fees?
When I first came to lovely Cranleigh we had a good informative website which disappeared overnight. On querying this it appears it was part of a Mafia War over a piece of land sold to CVHT for a £1. It was soon obvious that the village was at war. I really hope now this latest decision by ICP will be heeded by CVHT and they will accept the wishes of their residents and return the land and end the war. Life has changed post COVID I for one feel its time to do the right thing CVHT and lets us all return normality.
As you are a new resident we presume you are referring to the Cranleigh Community Board – run by a Cranleigh parish Councillor Hannah Nicholson? A board that once boasted over 9,000 followers, some of whom dared to make their views known on their objections to the private care home and overdevelopment of the site. However, the board is no more and has morphed into a propaganda exercise for CVHT/Cranleigh Chamber of Trade (which is not speaking on behalf of all its members by all accounts) and the Bamford Crowd that like to think they run the Cranleigh show.
Perhaps, they might now realise that they are the only ones backing the deal – which the Integrated Care Partnership – quite sensibly, realises is toxic, not in-line with current and future health practices, and wants nothing more to do with?
We have just heard that one Cranleigh resident has suggested that either donors pay for the building to house community beds on the site – or a rehabilitation centre for mental health, built and run by charitable contributions.