“No party explained the importance of attendance at the haematuria Clinic to Mr”

The coroner’s concerns

This report was published as a scan, so its text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.

— i. No party explained the importance of attendance at the haematuria Clinic to Mr. Watt or his wife ii. | The letter communicating the cancellation of the clinic was not sent to the deceased, nor was it placed on the medical records ili. There is no documentation relating to the referral to urology and forward management of the haematuria within the medical records iv. On each occasion that the medical team consulted with renal or urological physicians in seeking advice how to manage their patient, the consultation was conducted through the most junior doctor on the ward (FY 1) v. Aurologist was not asked to review Mr. Watt in circumstances where a malignancy was suspected and he was suffering from weight loss and haematuria both of which are recognised symptoms associated with bladder cancer vi. | The evidence has shown (although it does not relate to the death) that Mr. Watt was discharged from the hospital even though he was scheduled to have an OGD at the hospital on the date of discharge, which it appears that the physicians were unaware of.

An extract. Read the full report, including the circumstances of the death, on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.

Source

judiciary.uk, Prevention of Future Deaths reports, 2015-0145

Added to Minute Book

8 Oct 2026

Reuse

We show short extracts and link to the original. We don’t host the full report.

Something wrong, such as a date or who it was sent to? Report a mistake

Is this report about someone close to you? You can ask us to remove names from our pages.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, judiciary.uk. Open Government Licence v3.0