On Monday, July 26, a number of elderly and sick persons got up earlier than usual, some after an almost sleepless night, due to the excitement caused by what was to happen in the morning.
They all had an appointment at St Luke's Hospital Out-Patients' Clinic and the hospital transport had to call for them them at the usual time - around 7.30 a.m. (though sometimes it is there even as early as 7.10 a.m.)
By 8 a.m. the vehicle had still not turned up. And by 8.30 (the time of at least one appointment at St Luke's) it still hadn't put in an appearance.
A phone call to St Luke's brought the news that the vehicle for the area in question had still not left but that it would eventually arrive. In fact it did so at 9.45 a.m. at one address and later at others.
This meant that it was 10.30 a.m. by the time the out-patients arrived at St Luke's. Among them was an 82-year-old gentleman whose appointment had been fixed (since May 15) for 8.30 a.m. and who found out on arrival that the doctors who had to see him had already left and the clinic had closed, presumably because there were no more patients to see.
What's more, some nurses were greatly astonished to see him arrive so late, but then they understood that it was no fault of his own. They suggested another appointment for him on August 2, but the man in charge of appointments said that the nearest available date for a "new case" as opposed to "a follow-up" was September 20. Waiting from May 15 to July 26 is long enough, but having to wait till September 20 is outrageous.
It resulted that the reason for the late arrival of the vehicle was that it had broken down and that it has taken long to repair it.
But, if another vehicle could not be sent, couldn't someone at St Luke's have phoned first the out-patients, to let them know the reason for the long delay, and then the doctors, so that they could have waited for them, or at least fixed another, nearer appointment for those who arrived too late? In these days of mobile phones and computers it could not have been too difficult.
As it is, this lack of communication, of co-ordination and of consideration for others, of the staff at St Luke's resulted in a lot of hassle and worry for the elderly, sick out-patients as well as for their carers, their relatives and their friends. In fact it was a real ordeal which must never be repeated.