The ICB confirmed it will not progress the cardiology case for change as a standalone programme, following a Joint Committee decision on 26 March 2026. The language is time-limited throughout ("at this time", "right now"), with no long-term assurance for Torbay. Also covers FOINHSD25/1493.

Requested waiting times for cardiac procedures at RDE from 1 July 2025. NHS Devon does not hold the information and referred the request to RDE.

The cath-lab funding saga and the weekend both labs failed. The Trust confirmed a £5.7m replacement to September 2027, with manufacturer support ending June 2026. A documented patient case contradicts the Trust's account that RDE "offered support".

Sought documented timelines for the Case for Change and details of the SRO's unplanned absence. The ICB admitted holding "part" of the information; the internal review was never answered on its merits before the programme was absorbed into the five-year plan.

RDE's own data shows its cath labs are "fully utilised during weekdays" and running weekend sessions, while already transferring 284 inpatients to Torbay. Raises the question of how RDE could absorb Torbay's workload.

NHS England confirmed it does not hold the Edge Health commissioning information and directed the request to NHS Devon ICB as the body "responsible for the majority of NHS budget and services in Devon", making the ICB's later "not held" claims implausible.

SWASFT confirmed there is no prehospital thrombolysis in South Devon and no paramedic training for over 10 years. Moving cardiac services to Exeter would extend diagnostic uncertainty well beyond NICE thresholds for STEMI patients.

Requested the raw divert log and operational records for the cath-lab outage. The Trust refused in full under Section 40(2), applying a blanket personal-data exemption even to timestamps and operational records that contain no personal data. A candidate for internal review.

Asked for a comparison between the Trust's frailty virtual ward and any cardiac virtual ward provision, to test parity of investment between specialties. Substantive response received; full content to be added when available.

Asked all four bodies for the documented record of the transfer that RDE allegedly declined. The Trust refused in full under Section 40(2), including questions about decision-maker roles and which Trusts were contacted, neither of which is personal data. The second blanket s40(2) refusal that day.

The Trust corrected its headline weekend figures downward (from 648 nurses, 7,037 hours and £225,140 to 64 workers, 2,414.50 hours and £83,610.80) and issued its substantive TSD10613 response on 26 August 2026. On 7 October the campaign requested a formal internal review: several limbs of the request, including recruitment freezes, the MD2 policy that was named but not supplied, and the Workforce Programme Group papers, remain unanswered, and several of the corrected figures still need clarifying. The Trust has been asked to complete the review within 20 working days and to issue a Section 17 refusal notice for anything it withholds.

The Trust's answer confirmed that the decision to relocate cellular pathology to Gadeon House was taken on 26 March 2026 under urgent decision-making by the Chief Executive and Chair, to meet an NHS England capital funding deadline of 31 March, and was only retrospectively endorsed by the Board on 7 May. By the Trust's own account the clinical model for time-critical work, including frozen sections and urgent cancer, was still in development, and the full clinical impact assessment and business case are withheld under Section 22. On 7 October the campaign requested an internal review on five grounds, including the lack of any modelling of post-relocation turnaround times and the refusal to identify the Board papers relied upon. The questions about the £7.5m Torbay Council loan and the Edginswell land were deflected to the Council and to Royal Devon.

Asked whether it had modelled the cost of moving acute services out of Torbay, the ICB answered "does not hold this information" — the same answer it gave on business cases, impact assessments and any cost comparison. The spending breakdowns and payment-level records were refused under Section 12. On its own account, the commissioner holds no financial modelling for the reconfiguration.