111 call centre executive wasted £275,000 in a bid to hush up scandals
But he blamed lack of cash for the shambles at his service
The head of a disgraced NHS trust used thousands of pounds of public money to gag former staff members – despite claiming the trust did not have the funds to run a safe service.
Chief executive Ken Wenman ran up the extraordinary legal bills to prevent damaging stories about him being reported.
These include claims he had sexually harassed a paramedic, and had forced a female member of staff to undergo a ‘humiliating’ internal examination during an employment claim against South Western Ambulance Service NHS Trust.
Today’s revelations follow a damning report by the Care Quality Commission earlier this week, which gave the trust the first ever ‘inadequate’ rating for a 111 service.
The CQC probe was prompted by an investigation by the Daily Mail, which revealed the 111 service – linked to the death of baby William Mead from sepsis after a call handler failed to realise he was seriously ill – was mired in chaos.
Teenagers were being left to answer lifeor-death calls, exhausted staff were falling asleep at their posts and deaths linked to the service were being covered up.
After the report was released, Mr Wenman – whose pay package is worth more than £256,000 a year – complained his trust had not been given enough money to run a safe service.
But it can now be revealed he has spent huge sums silencing former staff and the Press.
This includes more than £200,000 given to a woman – who wishes to remain anonymous – who was told she had to undergo a ‘painful and intimate’ examination to prove she had a debilitating health problem.
She said the examination was specifically ordered by Mr Wenman, despite her having already provided her full medical records. She was given the NHS money in a settlement which included a gagging clause so she could not discuss details of the case.
In a witness statement, which was prepared for a case against the trust but never heard, she said there was ‘no justification’ for the examination and the trust’s insistence on it was ‘unnecessary, vindictive and humiliating’.
In his response, Mr Wenman acknowledged it was ‘ the trust’s request that she undergo an examination’ but said there was ‘no intention whatsoever to victimise or humiliate her.’ he said it was so the trust could ‘challenge the assertion that her condition was a disability’.
Nearly £ 75,000 of public money was also used after Mr Wenman was accused of sexually harassing a paramedic, an allegation she later dropped.
Caroline Pascoe claimed she had been sacked unfairly for a relatively minor offence in 2009 after turning down Mr Wenman’s sexual advances. She claims that after calling her ‘sexy’ in a meeting, he sent her a text inviting her to stay with him at a luxury hotel.
During a tribunal hearing in 2011, Miss Pascoe was aggressively cross-examined by the top QC the trust employed, who is thought to have cost thousands of pounds per day.
She was accused of being a ‘ mendacious liar’ and of orchestrating ‘a £200,000 con’ to ‘extort money’ from the NHS. Despite her name being reported, Mr Wenman was granted anonymity.
After three days of cross examination, Miss Pascoe dropped her case – with friends claiming she had been ‘deeply traumatised’ by the way she had been ‘torn apart’ by the trust’s lawyers.
The trust later admitted it had spent £74,608 defending the claim. A spokesman said that ‘neither the employment Judge nor Miss Pascoe’s counsel raised any concerns as to the appropriateness of the cross-examination’, and Miss Pascoe withdrew her claim, with no payment made to her.
Mr Wenman was also subject to an investigation after pornographic images were found on his NHS laptop. he claimed the images had appeared by accident – and so was cleared of wrongdoing and simply asked to be more careful.
It has also emerged Mr Wenman, 60, spent taxpayers’ money taking HR manager and girlfriend Viki Pollard, 40 on a first class trip to London for an awards ceremony in 2009, staying in Park Lane.
he later faced accusations of nepotism after claims he appointed his son to a senior role for which he did not have the experience. however an investigation by the trust cleared him of nepotism.
It said he had no role in James Wenman’s ‘substantive appointment’ as clinical development manager – a role he still holds.
Last night a spokesman for the trust said the proceedings involving the woman who underwent an examination were ‘ settled by agreement’, adding: ‘ The trust commissioned an independent investigation into the issues raised ... which found no further action to be necessary.’
They said that Miss Pascoe ‘ was not dismissed but resigned from the trust in 2010 during an appropriate disciplinary procedure’, adding: ‘Ms Pascoe was repeatedly invited to set out her allegations fully so that they could be investigated. The trust did commission an independent HR consultant to carry out an investigation. None of the allegations were upheld.’
On Miss Pollard, they said: ‘Miss Pollard did attend an awards ceremony ... because the trust had won an award. As a member of the HR team, she was an appropriate person to represent the trust along with its chief executive.’