LloydsDirect / Shutterstock.com
An appeals committee appointed by NHS Resolution has turned down an appeal from Pharmacy2U to take over a LloydsDirect distance-selling premises in Greenford, west London.
In a document published on 22 August 2024, the Pharmacy Appeals Committee refused the appeal by Pharmacy2U against NHS North East London Integrated Care Board (ICB)’s decision to turn down its original application to take over the premises.
Pharmacy2U bought LloydsDirect in October 2023 for an undisclosed sum, with the merger bringing together the two companies with the highest number of patient nominations under the electronic prescription service.
However, the merger was put on hold in December 2023 while the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigated the acquisition to consider whether it would lead to “substantial lessening of competition” in the market. The CMA later approved the takeover in March 2024.
In its original application, dated 25 January 2024, Pharmacy2U applied to the North East London ICB for a change of ownership of the premises from Metabolic Healthcare Ltd (trading as LloydsDirect) to Pharmacy2U Ltd.
The application stated that Pharmacy2U would provide the same services as LloydsDirect, with no interruption to service provision.
As part of the application, Pharmacy2U stated: “A responsible pharmacist will continue to be present during all core opening hours, so that the uninterrupted provision of essential services during the opening hours of the premises will continue to be secured to anyone in England who requests those services.
“All essential services will continue to be provided without face to face contact between any person receiving the services.”
North East London ICB refused the initial application on the grounds that Pharmacy2U had provided “very little additional information” to demonstrate to the ICB “that all the essential services can be provided without face to face contact to anyone in England that requests them”.
In May 2024, Pharmacy2U’s solicitor Brabners LLP launched an appeal to “respectfully request” that the ICB’s decision was overturned and the application granted.
Brabners said the application had been “incorrectly and wrongly refused” in relation to Regulation 26(1) of the NHS (Pharmaceutical and Local Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 2013 dealing with change of ownership, because the original application showed that Pharmacy2U was undertaking to provide pharmaceutical services at premises “that are already listed chemist premises” and “providing pharmaceutical services”, which satisfied the requirements of the regulation.
However, in the latest ruling, the Pharmacy Appeals Committee said that although it quashed the decision of the ICB and re-determined the application, the application for a change of ownership was still refused.
A spokesperson for NHS Resolution told The Pharmaceutical Journal that the application was refused on the basis that the committee “could not be satisfied that there are procedures likely to secure safe and effective provision of essential services”.
A spokesperson for Pharmacy2U told The Pharmaceutical Journal that it “would like to respect the ongoing market entry process” and “remains confident of a positive outcome” but would “not make any further comment until the process has concluded”.
