This article raises more questions than it answers The hospital say there was no deliberate attempt to withhold this information, yet they withheld it from patients and their own member’s council for eight months. The hospital deliberately tried to conceal this information from a Freedom of Information request, using an exemption provided under Section 43 of the Act. This was a deliberate misuse of the exemption, even with the widest interpretation, this exemption could not be applied to the loss of these records. The hospital say no active records are missing, so why then are they admitting that patients visiting the hospital for further treatment are being told that their records have been destroyed in the fire. Does this mean that they do not know who's records have been destroyed, and if this is the case have more than 240,000 records been destroyed? Tess's B12 records disappeared without trace as did all of the B12 Unit's records, during two court cases and a three year investigation by the Ombudsman, the Chief Executive never disclosed that they used an offsite facility to store medical records. I have no doubt that the local health population is disadvantaged by the way the hospital is run, and despite the trust's foundation status giving patients more say, executives have embarked on a less transparent and a more secretive approach. It seems that neither the members council or the Non Executive Directors are holding the executive to account.