Inspection on 06/12/05 for Aaron Court

This inspection was carried out on 6th December 2005.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Aaron Court 01/11/07

Aaron Court 30/07/06

Aaron Court 13/07/05

Aaron Court 17/03/05

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Aaron Court Aaron Court 328 Pinhoe Road Pinhoe Exeter Devon EX4 8AS Lead Inspector Louise Delacroix Unannounced Inspection 6th December 2005 1.20pm X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Aaron Court Address Aaron Court 328 Pinhoe Road Pinhoe Exeter Devon EX4 8AS 01392 279710 Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Salisbury Care Limited Manager post vacant Care Home 24 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (24) of places Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The Responsible Individual must obtain NVQ2 in Care by 2006 Date of last inspection 13th July 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Aaron Court is registered for 24 residents of retirement age. Mr Jay Patel is the Responsible Individual for the Home, having taken it over earlier this year. Currently, a maximum of 21 residents live at the home as bedrooms registered for shared occupancy are used on a single occupancy basis only. The home is built in a residential area of Exeter, close to local shops and a hotel. There are patio areas to the rear of the home, and car parking at the front. There are two lounge/dining areas, and a covered area for people who wish to smoke. Stairs or the stair lift accesses the first floor. All bedrooms have en suite toilet facilities. Because of some environmental aspects i.e. lack of shaft lift and a steep slope in one corridor, admission of someone with restricted mobility has to be carefully considered. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The unannounced inspection took place in the afternoon over five and a half hours. During the inspection, residents were seen watching the television, receiving visitors or spending time in their rooms. There was one resident in hospital. Eight residents, visitors, three members of staff, the acting manager and the owner all contributed to the inspection. As part of the inspection, a tour of the building took place with eleven bedrooms inspected. Paperwork was also looked at, which included fire records, care plans, medication administration, staff files, communication book and accident records. Five comment cards were received, which had been completed by two residents, two visitors and one health/ social care professional. These were all positive about the service provided. Presently there is no registered manager at the home but there is an acting manager who joined the home in September 2005. She has experience in the health and social care field. This report should be read in conjunction with the inspection report of 13th July 2005. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? There is evidence of how the health needs of residents are being met. Medication sheets are now completed appropriately. There is an improved range of activities with trips out and external entertainment, plus visits from Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 local churches. Residents now have lockable storage space. Fire equipment has been checked. What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1,3,5,6 Prospective residents are able to gather information about the home from written information and by having the opportunity to visit. EVIDENCE: A resident said that they had received the home’s statement of purpose and spoke about the services offered within it. The service user guide is clearly displayed. Care records show that assessments take place before people move to the home and where appropriate some also contained information, which had been provided by Social Services. Several of the residents spoken to had the opportunity to visit the home before moving in, other people had chosen for residents/friends to visit on their behalf. One person could not remember how the decision had been made. The home does not offer an intermediate care service. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10 Small changes to the care plans and monthly reviews would help ensure that residents benefit from a continuity of care and a review of all their personal needs to ensure they are being met. EVIDENCE: As part of the inspection, three people were met and where possible conversation took place about their thoughts on the service. Their care plans were then looked at and staff were asked about their care needs. Daily records were detailed and appropriately worded. The resident or their representative signed care plans, which is good practice. However, there were some gaps in the information available about how to address regular patterns of behaviour. From one care plan, there was a regular reference to the person’s ‘wandering’, which staff and a resident confirmed as being accurate. However, there was no guidance as to how this was to be addressed or what type of approach staff should take. Since early November 2005, another resident had been reluctant to eat or drink. Staff had documented concerns, for example, by saying ‘little eaten’ and they had been instructed to ‘push fluids’ but there was no accurate record of Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 the amounts of fluid or food that the person had drank or eaten to ensure that their dietary needs were being met. Another resident was often tearful but again there was no guidance to staff regarding the approach to take. However, it is good practice that staff record residents’ emotional needs, as well practical care issues. Monthly reviews of residents’ care needs are recorded but these would be improved by a holistic approach to include all aspects of care i.e. social and emotional. The acting manager felt this could be easily achieved because of the quality of recorded information. The acting manager has worked hard to promote the importance of good communication, including an information board, which a member of staff confirmed. They felt this focus is positive. There was good evidence of how the health needs of three case tracked residents were being met and the outcomes for residents. There was evidence of appropriate liaison with GPs and district nurses. Residents’ invoices also recorded visits from a chiropodist and residents spoke about appointments with the hospital, which they said relatives accompanied them to. Weights are also recorded on a regular basis, although these could be stored more discreetly. Improvements have been made regarding the recording of controlled drugs. The amounts recorded, and double signed for by staff, tallied with the amounts kept. However, the controlled drug storage arrangement still does not comply with advice provided by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Two staff involved in the handling and administration of medication confirmed that they had received recent training. A tour of the building showed that residents who selfadminister medication have lockable storage in their room. Medication administration sheets were appropriately completed. One person who had PRN medication had chosen not to take this and this was recorded as refused. A visiting professional felt that medication was appropriately managed. Two residents were met who are called by their chosen nicknames. This is also recorded on their care plans. Generally residents spoke positively about the attitude of care staff and staff were heard knocking on doors. Wording is professional in the seniors’ communication book and in daily records. However, one person did comment that ‘some staff are interested in you…but others act like it is just a job’. They gave the example of a few staff bringing in a hot drink but not greeting the resident. Three people spoke about their favourite staff member, all of whom were of different ages and experience. Residents generally felt that their clothes were well cared for. Residents, visitors and a health/social care professional all said that visits could take place in private. All the double rooms are currently used as singles. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14,15 The range of activities are improving and there is on-going work to address the wishes of residents regarding the range and quality of the food. EVIDENCE: The owner has worked hard to address the lack of activities at the home. During the summer, residents confirmed that a trip to Powderham Castle took place and that more external entertainers visited the home, including Tranquil Moments (every two months), the Donkey Sanctuary and singers. The acting manager has also spent time arranging suitable entertainment at Christmas, including a meal at a hotel and a party for residents and their visitors. She also explained that the local schools would be visiting to entertain residents. Residents and a visitor confirmed the arrangements for the meal at a hotel. On a weekly basis, there is a gentle exercise class, which received favourable comments from several residents. The acting manager said that ministers of various denominations visit those residents who wish to see them, which a resident confirmed. The owner and the acting manager explained that carers are expected to provide an hour of activities in the morning and afternoon as part of their caring duties. Staff said they sometimes found this difficult and residents mentioned that this did not always take place, which was confirmed by the communication diary. One person said they enjoyed playing cards and completing crosswords with staff. However, there is good practice in recording Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 who attended the sessions so that an audit could be made as to who attends, how often they take place and to consider alternatives for those who choose not to be involved in group activities. Residents said that their visitors were made welcome, which visitors confirmed either verbally or via a comment card. Residents’ rooms are personalised and residents said they are encouraged to bring in their own items of furniture, which they appreciated, and could change the layout. Residents spoke about having choice as to where they ate their meals and whether they attended residents’ meetings or joining in activities. The owner said all residents have their breakfast in their rooms, fourteen have their meals in the dining room and eight for the teatime meal. The owner and acting manager described the steps they have taken to try and address the various food wishes of the residents. They said this has included creating a four weekly menu rather than the former two weekly, using fresh products and gaining feedback from residents’ meetings and questionnaires. The home has a cook. Nine residents gave their views on the food either verbally or via comment cards. One person said the food was good sometimes. Another resident felt that the food had improved since a discussion at a residents’ meeting and four others described the food as ‘fine’, ‘OK’ and ‘good’. However, three other people felt quite strongly that the food was poor. One person had raised that they had not received particular meals that they liked but on checking the menu, and the records detailing residents’ choices it was seen that they had received these preferred dishes. Choice was seen being offered and residents’ choices also demonstrated a range of items, particularly at teatime. The owner and acting manager recognise that addressing food issues may be an on-going issue. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16,18 There is a satisfactory and well publicised complaints procedure and the style of management enables residents to express their concerns or queries. EVIDENCE: Residents were positive about the owner and the acting manager, who they felt were approachable and kept in regular contact with them as individuals. They felt that they could go to both or one of them if they had a concern. Throughout the home, there are notices giving details of how to make a complaint. There has been one complaint made to the CSCI. One aspect was not upheld and the other was unresolved. On a previous inspection, a letter was seen from the relatives of the resident concerned, which contained positive comments about the care given. In response, to a previous recommendation the acting manager was due to attend Protection of Vulnerable Adults training the day after this inspection. Two staff members demonstrated their knowledge of this issue, were aware of their responsibilities to ‘whistle-blow’ on poor practice and who to contact, both internally and externally. They had both watched a video about recognising and responding to abusive practice. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,20,26 The home is clean and odour free with an on-going maintenance programme but the laundry facilities need to be improved to promote better infection control practices for the well being of the residents. EVIDENCE: The home was clean and odour free, apart from one bedroom. Staff discussed at handover how the carpet had been cleaned and suggested a regime for trying to keep it odour free. The owner explained how the two lounges and hallways are shortly to have new carpets fitted. In the meantime, he agreed to ensure that a carpet tear in the second lounge was fixed to prevent a trip hazard. Eight residents made positive comments about their rooms, which if they choose to they can lock. There are two lounges, both of which contain dining areas. Currently, there are seats for fourteen people leaving seven people unable to eat communally but a number of residents said they chose to eat in their rooms and the owner said that extra seating would be provided when needed, for example, at the Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 Christmas meal or if people changed their minds about where they ate their meals. Staff discussed their current infection control practices at the home for the residents with urinary and faecal incontinence. They said they had both been provided with appropriate hand gel to prevent cross infection, which they have been asked to carry with them and were seen to use. This is good practice; particularly as residents’ en-suite facilities do not have liquid soap or paper towels. Staff said that there are always stocks of disposable gloves and aprons available. However, the home has no sluicing facility for soiled laundry and does not have laundry sacks that dissolve in the wash to minimise staff contact. Currently soiled laundry is left to soak and rinsed. It was recommended on the last inspection that this practice did not continue. During the inspection, one washing machine became out of order and the owner agreed to hire/buy a washing machine with a sluicing facility and to send confirmation to CSCI. The acting manager said she has encouraged staff, if necessary, to wash items on a hot wash. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,29,30 Small changes to information kept on staff files will help ensure that the residents living at home are protected by a robust recruitment process. EVIDENCE: On the day of the inspection, the staff rota reflected the staff on duty. There are four care staff in the mornings, including a senior, three care staff in the afternoon and two in the evenings until 10pm. There is then a waking member of staff and a sleeping member of staff who can be called upon, if necessary. One visitor commented that there had been many changes in staffing but ‘the care is still good’. Staff files were looked at and generally contained the correct information i.e. two references, two forms of ID and CRBs/POVA First. However, one member of staff who was employed prior to the present acting manager did not have a reference from her previous care job, which the owner said they would address. Another member of staff had not completed a section on their employment form and the gaps in their employment history had not been followed up. The acting manager has in a short time of employment begun to address the training needs of staff via Plymouth University. These courses include infection control, I.T., equality and diversity and nutrition. The senior on duty confirmed that they are completing their NVQ 3, and had received training in 2004 in food hygiene, moving and handling and first aid, plus medication training. A carer on duty confirmed that they had completed an NVQ2 and had received Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 training in first aid, moving and handling and food hygiene, plus infection control. Another carer had received training in moving and handling and food hygiene. There induction records were looked at and the acting manager explained that she had discussed the ethics of caring with the member of staff. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,35,38 The home does not currently benefit from a manager registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Regular fire training and checks on equipment protect the residents. EVIDENCE: The home currently does not have a registered manager but has an acting manager in post, who is taking part in a probationary period. She has experience in working with older people in both health and social settings. She is currently studying for her NVQ 4 in care. The owner has not yet commenced training for a care qualification, which is part of the condition of his registration. The owner and the acting manager said that the home does not become involved in the management of residents’ personal allowances. Invoices were Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 seen for chiropody, papers and hairdressing, which are sent to residents’ representatives. Most radiators are covered, apart from two in communal hallways and one in the upper bathroom. The owner said these were not put on, which was the case. The bathroom felt warm despite this. The hot water temperature is recorded by staff when they assist residents with a bath and was within the appropriate range during the inspection. One first floor window was spot checked and found to be appropriately restricted. Three frail residents were aware of how to use the call bell system and people were seen sitting with accessible call bells either through a mobile system or via a longer lead from the wall unit. Fire records are up to date; an external company have checked equipment and staff training records signed by staff members show they have received fire training at appropriate intervals. One is internal training and the other via an external trainer. The insurance certificate was dated 17th December 2005. Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 x 3 x 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 3 x x x x x 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 x 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 x x x 3 x x 2 Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 22 1. OP7 Clear guidance to staff should be provided after auditing the needs of residents about their approach to residents’ regular behaviour patterns i.e. tearfulness, which can then be reviewed. This would help ensure a continuity of approach, help staff consider the purpose or reason of the person’s actions. Records should be kept of the fluid and food intake for frail residents to evidence how their dietary needs are being met. Monthly reviews should encompass all aspects of the residents’ lives i.e. social needs. As recommended in guidance from the Medical Devices Agency (July 2001) bed rails should be checked to ensure they are safely positioned with clear records as to when they are checked. You should ensure safe storage systems by securely affixing the controlled drugs storage box within the cupboard. This is a repeated recommendation. You should promote systems for control of infection & ensure practices within the home are sufficient to control the spread of infection. Therefore, 1) the practice of hand-rinsing soiled items, should cease; 2) the washing machines that do not have recommended programmes should be replaced. This recommendation is carried forward from two inspections. It has been agreed with the owner that he will send confirmation to CSCI when he has hired/bought a washing machine with appropriate hot wash programmes and a sluicing facility. New employees references should include last care position. All employment gaps should be discussed and the reason given recorded. The applicant should sign the section for criminal offences on the application form. The owner, who is the registered provider, should have a qualification in care by 2006. The home‘s manager should be registered.. 2. 3. OP9 OP26 4. OP29 5. OP31 Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Exeter Suites 1 & 7 Renslade House Bonhay Road Exeter EX4 3AY National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Aaron Court DS0000062304.V259896.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 24 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!