dentist, do I have a case

kes123

Hi everyone who is reading this thread, including Nicola from the dental practice I have a problem with.
May I start by saying that everything I write is without predudice. all opinions expressed are my own.
After many many emails, most of which got ignored, or not answered, and now the dental practice has asked me to get treatment elsewhere because i wrote on this forum.
I received my dental records, all of course are quite unreadable, spider crawling on paper routine. i do have to question if some bits were missing, though not easy to prove. Although I have done a subject access request to the NHS data centre to try and cross reference all my treatment.
I also received my dental xrays, but again just a little strange is that my xrays go to about 6 months before i had my bridge fitted and then all end. even though i know there were other xrays that have gone missing, but I think that i can prove that one. Also i have now got the GDC involved, but I can't give to much away on that one.
I also received emails which I have kept asking me if I would like Dr Arjang Khams to contact me with regard to going through my records with me. I said yes i would love this, and asked time and time again until I got an email saying that this had been offered to me. Yet the email clearly from the head office offered this. then suddenly after this thread got spotted suddenly i got an email saying that Dr Arjang Khams had now left the practice. He didn't work for the surgery anymore. MMMM I thought. did a bit of research that basically told me that actually he was one of the directors of the dental practice. i emailed asking them to confirm or deny this but it got ignored. Will keep you posted on that one. So in theory the verbal and written agreement to replace my bridge was with the director of the dental practice. So forget the dentist who cocked up in the first place, because the director gave the second opinion and agreed to the replacement.
Like i have said all along i will not let this go. Without doubt in my opinion this dental practice have lied to me now in writing on several occassions all of which I can prove.
Strange thing is though Dr khams may not even know of all the emails and the problems. Could it just be that the person he employs to deal with complaints actually causes half of the complaints in the first place. Who knows?
all I know is that someone who is the director of at least 16 dental practices that i know of, must be a very rich man. To actually be true to his word and sort the bridge would have been nothing to him. If when i sue i win, it will be nothing to him. He probably makes that much in a day. But what kind of world are we living in when we can't even trust our own Dentists.
appreciate any comments

brook2jack

The GDC cannot make financial reparations, they can only discipline dentists, you will get no money from this and as the treatment was done by the associate dentist and the practice is not legally liable for it ,it is interesting that this avenue is being persued.

It doesn't matter how much the dentist does or doesn't earn. He is not,in law, liable for someone elses work, someone else who is completely clinically independent, as per previous postings about the legal position of associates. If anyone is liable it is the dentist who decided treatment,prescribed,fitted the bridge, wrote up the notes,took the x rays etc. All of your copies of notes and claims sent etc are the sole responsibility of the dentist who provided the treatment.

As a good will gesture you were not offered replacement but different more expensive treatment not generally available on the NHS. There was no legal obligation for the practice to do anything and no obligation on subsequent dentists to carry out this treatment.You chose to leave it years just pushing the bridge back in possibly leading to a deteriorating situation where a big bridge would no longer be clinically suitable and the clinician who was going to provide the treatment left. The treatment may no longer be appropriate, right or ethical. There is no legal basis to make the practice responsible for providing whatever treatment is in your best interests. You chose not to have treatment when it was first offered, you cannot hold that goodwill gesture over their heads forever no matter how much time elapsed and staff changed.

As we've said before the only person legally,morally,ethically responsible may be the dentist who solely provided treatment planned and carried out your treatment.

kes123

I do agree, but disagree on the basis that the person who owns the practice gave the second opinion that the bridge should never have been fitted. He then made the verbal and written agreement to replace it anytime I so wished. no one forced him to take responsibility. infact if he had not it actually would have worked out better. because i could then have gone after the dentist who made the mistake. there is little point in anykind of agreement if you are not going to honour it. then there is also the matter of blatent lies told to me. that is not professional. i have learned though that dentists do seem to close ranks.
As i have said before i will see it through win or loose. its just taking longer to get the evidence than i thought.

brook2jack

I am not trying to close ranks, I am explaining the law as it stands with regards to practice owners and associates as far as clinical liability is concerned.

I am also trying to explain the mouth is a continually changing environment. The NHS only guarantees clinical work for a year and yet you are trying to get someone to carry out treatment that was treatment planned by someone else almost five years ago. No dentist would do that. A treatment plan is based on the clinical situation at the time. As you have previously lost teeth before(you mentioned trying a denture) in that time the teeth the bridge should have been attached to could have quite serious gum disease or decay in them making them unsuitable for a bridge or you may have developed other dental conditions that are not under the dentists control but would make it ill advised to fit a bridge. If the dentist went ahead anyway and fitted a bridge and then you developed problems then you would have a case against him.

If there is a fault in how the dentist dealt with you it was in assuming that you wouldn't leave a bridge on a split root for years pushing it back into place continually, assuming that you would only use that as a very short term strategy and not leaving it years. No reasonable dentist would leave an open ended offer like that because of how quickly conditions in the mouth change.

ASTONDB9

Hello,
I am interested to see the 'written contract'

hethmar

Has this not gone to court yet? What stage are you at? Id have thought the surgery may be prepared to make an out of court settlement as it would cost them a lot of money to send expert witnesses to the court for a day. Surely that would be better for you - I dont think Id want someone fiddling about with my teeth when Ive just sat opposite them in court :eek:

And as someone who has been to small claims - not for dentistry mind you - I can assure you what seems cut and dried in your mind doesnt actually mean its cut and dried in law or the opinion of the judge. You can never predict court outcomes.

welshdent

Hethmar we have indemnity so we do not pay legal costs when action is taken against us. I am with dental protection and would just instruct them to work on my behalf. They have in house dentists who provide all the clinical back up. Same goes for the other main player. It will be costing the op far more than the praxtice involved. Because IMHO the op is going for the wrong target i should imagine they will very much fight it. I will continue to maintain they should be going aftet the original dentist if the work was inappropriate. They are extremly experienced in dental law. You would still need to find someone to do the work and if the treatment is now inappropriate no dentist will agree to take it on.

hethmar

Welsh, it may well be that the judge says there isnt a case - depending on how the OP words their claim.

jvalj321

I appreciate your words. And i doubt things would ever have got where they are now if it hadn't of been for all the blatent lies told to me in the form of emails from the so called complaints person who works for the company.
the reason it has not been to court yet is because it takes so long to gain the evidence required. I also feel if there was no case to answer then there would have been no reason for anykind of lies.

i have written evidence, where they are offering for the Dr who gave the second opinion to sit down with me and review my dental notes. Then they deny this. Also the dr in question who I now know is a director, suddenly he has left. There are many other things I cannot divulge at this moment.

But I will keep everyone informed.

suki1964

And you have suddenly changed Id because ????