Government suing firm linked to 'Baroness Bra' for £122m because of 'buyer's remorse' after Covid contract, High Court told
The bra tycoon and Tory peer had recommended PPE Medpro, which went on to provide 25 million 'faulty' surgical gowns during the coronavirus pandemic.
PPE Medpro is now being sued by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), with Government lawyers claiming the gowns couldn't be used because they were not sterile.
The department wants more than £121 million back from PPE Medpro, plus storage costs of over £8 million.
PPE Medpro is also accused of supplying the gowns without CE markings, which shows if a product meets certain medical standards.
The consortium, led by the Tory peer's husband Doug Barrowman, was awarded contracts by the former Conservative administration.
Following a month-long trial at the High Court in London, lawyers for PPE Medpro said in closing that the Government had ordered 10 years' worth of excess gowns by December 2020.
Charles Samek KC, for PPE Medpro, said in written submissions: 'That simple fact explains why, once the PPEM gowns landed in the UK, they were no longer needed or wanted.'
He described the Government's assessment at the time as 'wildly and hopelessly wrong', adding: 'DHSC's obvious buyer's remorse was channelled into looking for ways to escape from a contract it wished it had never made.'
PPE Medpro has issued a counterclaim saying DHSC owed a duty of care to the company to advise it on compliance with the contract.
Mr Samek said DHSC approved the gowns without seeing a valid CE mark because they did not need one, adding that it is 'obvious' that PPE Medpro 'did not have and did not pretend to have a valid CE mark'.
Testing of 140 gowns after delivery showed that 103 failed to meet the sterilisation standard, the court was previously told.
Mr Samek said that after delivery to the UK, the gowns were kept in shipping containers for 'at least three months'.
Contamination therefore likely happened 'subsequent to delivery, most probably during the subsequent transportation, storage and handling of the tested gowns', he added.
Paul Stanley KC, for DHSC, said PPE Medpro did not follow a validated sterilisation process and did not keep sufficient records.
He said the bioburden, or level of microbial contamination prior to sterilisation, was not properly assessed and that PPE Medpro has been unable to show evidence of this assessment.
In written submissions, he said: 'The absence of such documentation is compelling evidence that the assessment of bioburden did not take place.'
He continued: 'DHSC invites the court to find as a matter of fact that this fundamental step in a validated process for sterilisation was not done.'
The barrister also referenced photographs that he said showed how the gowns were not manufactured in a way that would reduce microbial contamination.
These included workers wearing short sleeves, gowns trailing on the floor and personnel wearing street shoes and working without hair protection, he said.
Mr Stanley denied that DHSC owed a duty of care to PPE Medpro and said DHSC 'is entitled to repayment of the price, and to recover damages for storage costs'.
He added: 'The gowns were not sterilised using a properly validated process and were not, as a result, compliant with the contractual standard or (in the true commercial sense) 'sterile' gowns at all.'
Closing submissions are expected to conclude on Thursday with a written judgment given at a later date.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Transplant tech keeping organs alive for longer wins 'engineering Oscar'
The University of Oxford's spin-off OrganOx has won the MacRobert Award - the so-called 'engineering Oscar' - for its device that can keep human organs alive outside the body for twice as long as putting them on ice, dramatically increasing the number available for transplant. Constantin Coussios, co-founder and CTO of OrganOx says the tech "fools organs into thinking they are still inside the body."
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Fury of elderly residents living at retirement flats in upmarket seaside resort who condemns Age UK plans to evict them and sell off building to investors
Elderly residents living in one of Britain's most expensive seaside towns have blasted plans to evict them from their homes and sell off the building. Age UK, formerly known as Help The Aged, says it has made the 'hard decision' to look at selling its property known as Woodcot in Salcombe, Devon. The house had been left to the Plymouth Guild of Social Services by philanthropist Elizabeth Jennings in 1976 before being passed on to Help the Aged, which became Age UK and has been used as retirement rentals for elderly people ever since. But the charity is now looking at selling the buildings, with reports suggesting at least two investors are involved in talks. Jane Macdonald, 78, a retired airline stewardess moved into Woodcot in 2007 said rumours had been circulating before residents were officially told the 'upsetting' news around two weeks ago. She told MailOnline: 'We are in shock, we are all really upset by the news. 'They can't just kick us out like that 'I have been here nearly 20 years and if they are going to kick us out they should find us other accommodation. 'I think Age UK is being quite naughty about this. The whole town is quite horrified about this and people are on our side. 'I would be very sad to leave after 18 years.' Salcombe Town Council has asked for the properties to be granted protected status as an 'Asset of Community Value' in a bid to South Hams District Council. The town council's mayor Jasper Evans told MailOnline of concerns about a lack of information from Age UK on the future of the flats overlooking Salcombe Harbour. He said: 'It's a Grade II listed property on a lovely spot and there are real worries now we've found out Age UK are exploring a potential sale. 'We're absolutely concerned about what the future holds for the people currently living there and what might happen for them next.' The house - thought to be one of the largest properties in Salcombe is divided into 11 flats with one detached house in the grounds - sits in 14-acres in the centre of the village dubbed Chelsea-on-Sea because of its popularity with second home owners, But the majority of rooms are empty with just six residents remain living there in four properties, something many say they can't understand. Simon Henn, 83, who shares a pretty two-bed detached house in the grounds with his wife, said: 'We are very sad but it has been on the cards for years. 'We have had 20 years here and there can't be many places nicer to live. 'Age UK has been a very good landlord but there is a feeling in the house that it's been ignored over the years. 'I find it very difficult to justify them paying a subsidy that could be between £150,000 and £200,000 per year to keep six people in this marvelous setting. 'This is one of the most expensive postcodes in the whole country and we are here paying council house rent 'At the same time this house was given to the charity by a very generous lady to help older residents and Miss Jennings would be devastated if she knew what was happening. 'I would like to see them better use the space, there are so many ways this place could generate income and still remain a part of Age UK.' Mr Evans said he and his council colleagues had put questions to Age UK and were awaiting answers, though had been told there were high maintenance costs as well as under-occupancy as factors behind the possible sell-off. He added: 'What happens with Woodcot is a highly sensitive topic for many people living here and we're keen to hear from residents.' Family members of people currently living there accused the owners of a 'betrayal', with one activist reporting Age UK to the Charity Commission. She told the Telegraph: 'Should charities be disposing of extremely valuable assets to raise income whilst at the same time evicting the people who they are supposed to be helping? 'Not to mention the impact that the loss of the property will have on the local community. It's a betrayal and it's quite shameful of Age UK. 'Many people, my own mother included, have lived out their final years there in contented peace and quiet. It is a truly fabulous place. 'It is very much part of the local community. How does selling the property for development benefit the people they are supposed to be helping, or the wider community - many of whom want to live there?' An elderly resident who moved into Woodcot two decades ago described being told previously by Age UK she would 'never have to move' - only to receive the bombshell information in recent weeks that the home could soon be sold. She said: 'I feel, along with the other residents, that we should be allowed to stay here for the rest of our lives. 'Instead we face the prospect of being evicted so the house can be sold off at huge profit to developers for luxury apartments - it's just not right.' The property originally built in 1797 by London merchant James Yates has more recently been converted into self-contained apartments. Age UK says no one has yet been evicted from their homes at Woodcot, where average house prices approach £1million, nor received notice to depart. A spokesman for the charity said: 'We can confirm that sadly we've made the hard decision to explore selling Woodcot. 'We're looking into a number of things before a final decision about a sale is made and therefore do not expect anything to happen until 2026 at the earliest. 'None of the tenants have been evicted and no notice to terminate any tenancies has been given. 'We decided to speak to the tenants and let other key people in Salcombe know at this very early stage because we thought it important to be transparent about our thinking. 'However, doing this early does mean that unfortunately we don't have a lot more information or answers to questions at this stage. 'We're committed to communicating with and supporting tenants through this difficult time.' The spokesman added: 'We understand that the property is much loved locally and that different views and beliefs have developed over time about the nature of the transfer of Woodcot to us and the role of the property in the community. 'However, many of these aren't founded. The transfer of the property to Help The Aged did not include any restrictions that would stop it being sold or required Help The Aged as a charity to run it as a residential home for older people. 'All charities have a legal responsibility to ensure they are making the best use of all the funds and resources available to them to deliver their charitable objectives and that's why we believe it is right for us to explore a sale.' Salcombe earned its nickname, punning on the affluent west London area of Chelsea, as almost half its dwellings are owned by outsiders - often using their properties as second homes or holiday lets. MailOnline told last month how residents were celebrating after a developer failed in trying to overturn a rule that newbuild homes should only be sold to locals. The Planning Inspectorate ruled that Valentine London could only sell its four new luxury apartments in Salcombe to people planning to live there full-time. South Hams District Council had brought in the locals-only rule in its 2019 Salcombe Neighbourhood Plan. Salcombe has in recent years become one of Britain's most expensive seaside towns, even rivalling Sandbanks in Dorset which is often described as a 'millionaire's playground'. MailOnline has contacted Age UK and South Hams District Council for comment.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Britain's state pension triple lock system deemed 'unsustainable' as the cost is set to rocket to THREE times the original projection by the end of the decade
Britain's state pension triple lock is set to cost three times as much as originally expected by the end of the decade as the ageing population piles further pressure on public finances. Figures from the Office for Budget Responsibility show the policy – which sets the level of increases in state pension – is expected to cost £15.5billion annually by the 2029/30 financial year. That is almost three times the projected cost of £5.2billion a year when it was first introduced in 2012. The triple lock protects pensioners by setting the annual rise in the payment at 2.5 per cent, the rate of inflation or the rate of wage growth – whichever is the highest. The 2012 forecast failed to predict how unstable inflation would be in the coming years. The pledge looks set to add to the ballooning cost of paying the state pension, which currently stands at £138billion or 5 per cent of the size of the economy. The OBR projects that the bill will rise to 7.7 per cent by the 2070s, with more than half of the increase accounted for by the triple lock. It seems likely that it will add to the concerns that the policy is costing too much – though any move to axe it would be likely to prove politically toxic. OBR chairman Richard Hughes said the triple lock was 'one of a series of age-related pressures that pushes upward on public spending steadily over a number of years'. Combined increases in health and pension spending were helping to steer the public finances to an 'unsustainable position', he added. Mr Hughes said of the triple lock: 'When it was designed, we had one understanding of how volatile the outlook for inflation and earnings was going to be. 'As we've all experienced in the last few years, inflation and earnings have turned out to be much more volatile. We've seen double-digit inflation in the UK which was not envisaged when the triple lock was introduced. 'That contributes around a half of the extra cost of pensions going forward – it's not just demographic changes, not just the ageing society.'
