In all fairness, parts of this story could have happened here in the 'States; so for once, we're not picking on the NHS:
"A man who spent his life savings after being told he had months to live is seeking compensation after doctors in Britain conceded they had got the diagnosis wrong."
So the good news is that he doesn't have cancer, but the bad news is that he thought he did. Having seen what happens to those unfortunate enough to suffer pancreatic cancer (not to mention those loved ones left behind), this is no laughing matter. But it's also a warning that, when faced with a "fatal diagnosis" (okay, no diagnosis ever killed anyone, but it's a great turn of phrase, no?), a second opinion would seem to be in order, wouldn't it?
The story doesn't elucidate on this point, but it seems to me that, had a second opinion been sought, a whole lotta trouble could have been avoided:
"John Brandrick, 62...decided to spend his remaining time in style, quitting his job and spending his savings on hotels, restaurants and holidays."
Now he's seeking restitution from the medical providers who "done him wrong." Given that this is a government-run operation, however, one has to wonder about his odds:
"I do not want to pay solicitors, I do not want the hospital to pay solicitors because there are people that need that money. But if they have made the wrong decision they should pay me something back."
For its part, the hospital (The Royal Cornwall Hospital's NHS Trust) declaims any negligence. Since I'm neither a Barrister nor a Solicitor, I have no idea whether or not that will prove to be an insurmountable defense. Guess we'll have to wait and see.