[2025] EWHC 2684 (KB)

Ds Brownsell stated:

“The allegation at Cawston Park centred on charging for extra care which may not in fact have been provided. There were no allegations of similar activity at Kelling Park. During the investigation, Frank Ginnelly of NHS was tasked to look at Kelling Park invoices to see if anything untoward emerged. Had anything emerged, then activities at Kelling Park may have been included in the investigation.”

Challenged on this issue by Mr Metzer DS Brownsell said that Kelling Park was not part of Mr Deveney’s allegation, that the Claimants were not running Kelling Park and no evidence of fraud was raised by the NHS and they did not look at this institution or at the Children’s home. He stated that the investigation team considered Kelling Park to be separate and that he did not think that he affected the Team’s thinking (also referring to Mr Chancellor having said that there was no extra care at Kelling Park). DS Brownsell was clear that he did not see the relevance of what had happened at Kelling Park to the investigation at Cawston Park.

Mr Metzer suggested similarities between Kelling Park and Cawston Park including that they have the same philosophy; however DS Brownsell said he did not know the detail of Kelling Park as he did not investigate it (although he did have the evidence from Mr Chancellor’s first statement, which he set out in the summary). I am satisfied DS Brownsell was setting out his honest belief at the time, and also that it was a reasonable view on the basis of all the evidence obtained and the focus of the investigation.