Immensa: Month delay before incorrect Covid tests halted

Testing at the Immensa Health Clinic in Wolverhampton was suspended after the errors were discovered

Discrepancies in Covid test results were spotted a month before testing was halted at one lab, court papers show.

More than 43,000 people received incorrect results after errors at the Immensa laboratory in Wolverhampton.

Many of those affected live in the south west of England.

Documents show the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) was alerted to the unusual figures on 14 September. Tests at the lab were suspended on 12 October and an investigation is ongoing.

The UKHSA said it "cannot comment on any information that could form part of these investigations before they are complete".

It said: "We suspended testing at the Immensa Wolverhampton laboratory following an ongoing investigation into positive LFD (lateral flow) results subsequently testing negative on PCR.

"Those affected were contacted as soon as possible."

Immensa said it was fully cooperating with the investigation.

Analysis: Matthew Hill, BBC West health correspondent

It's hard to realise what the Immensa problems mean without putting a human face on it.

Although thousands of people affected had been contacted by the UKHSA, there are also many families who have not.

People like Amber Marshall from Stonehouse in Gloucestershire, whose 84-year-old grandmother Pam Bembenek died in October after being infected by a care home worker who had wrongly been given the all clear.

So ripples of this serious incident may extend far beyond what we already have been told.

Concerns were raised when people with positive lateral flow test results received negative follow-up PCR results between 8 September and 12 October.

It is estimated that about 43,000 people may have been given incorrect results.

The errors led to people infected with Covid being mistakenly advised to stop isolating, increasing the risk of potentially infecting others.

The court documents showed Immensa was only required to routinely report tests that had produced no result, along with information about how fast the laboratory was turning tests around.

There were no checks to see how results compared with other laboratories - something that has since changed.

Judicial review

Andrew Preston, a microbiologist from the University of Bath, said: "This is an issue that should have been flagged very soon after it started to arise, and then there should be procedures in place to at least know what's going on - and say 'hold on a minute' and say 'we need to go in'.

"And then in that case, if you have doubts over the veracity of your testing programme you cannot continue to test live samples if you are not convinced by the results."

Campaign group The Good Law Project, which has launched a judicial review over the government's handling of the issue, said many of the laboratory's discrepancies had been discovered through social media.

It said: "When did we become reliant upon citizens to check that box fresh companies, unaccredited with £120m of public contracts, are delivering?"

Follow BBC West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Send your story ideas to: [e-mail]