We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Private sector wants public to foot the bill (again)
lemonjelly
Posts: 8,014 Forumite
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16510507
The Harley Group fitted more PIP implants than any other private medical group. They now refuse to remove these unsafe implants & want the NHS to do their dirty work for them. They allege that
Amazing to think that the company did have the resources, the surgeons, & the operating facilities needed to do the surgery when they had people queueing up to pay for the operations.
If this is a consumer agreement, then surely the Harley group also had the responsibility to ensure that the implants were suitable for the purpose, & therefore they still bear the responsibility.
Wonder which way this will go....
The Harley Group fitted more PIP implants than any other private medical group. They now refuse to remove these unsafe implants & want the NHS to do their dirty work for them. They allege that
the company had neither the resources, the surgeons, nor the operating facilities needed to do the surgery.
Amazing to think that the company did have the resources, the surgeons, & the operating facilities needed to do the surgery when they had people queueing up to pay for the operations.
If this is a consumer agreement, then surely the Harley group also had the responsibility to ensure that the implants were suitable for the purpose, & therefore they still bear the responsibility.
Wonder which way this will go....
It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
0
Comments
-
The is no defintive proof that the implants are unsafe.
The NHS should tell any daft bint that comes to them for removal that she has to pay, or sue the private clinic that took her money in the first place.0 -
Slightly off topic but I haven't heard much to recommend the Harley Group. Obviously i am trim and buff, but if i weren't I don't think I would use them for anything.0
-
isn't this situation exactly what public indemnity insurance is for?0
-
So did PIP. They were sued and went bankrupt. This helps nobody. That's why we have regulators.lemonjelly wrote: »If this is a consumer agreement, then surely the Harley group also had the responsibility to ensure that the implants were suitable for the purpose, & therefore they still bear the responsibility.
Ever since the invention of the limited company, which allows shareholders to walk away from their legal obligations to their customers, the private sector has been useless without the backing of the state, because it's generally quite unable to carry the legal risks that it incurs. So, whatever the law says about the rights and wrongs, the loss ends up being borne by the customer.
The French government should pay for this one. But the French government is very very touchy."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
The government has announced three separate investigations of the cosmetic surgery industry today. One into the Pip scandal, plus two others. Can't get a link at the moment but saw on the lunchtime news. Fwiw I don't think that refusing to put things right is a good thing, women will vote with their feet (and chests) if they don't see the firms as ethical. It's a marketing disaster.Please stay safe in the sun and learn the A-E of melanoma: A = asymmetry, B = irregular borders, C= different colours, D= diameter, larger than 6mm, E = evolving, is your mole changing? Most moles are not cancerous, any doubts, please check next time you visit your GP.
0 -
The is no defintive proof that the implants are unsafe.
The NHS should tell any daft bint that comes to them for removal that she has to pay, or sue the private clinic that took her money in the first place.
Some of those "daft bint's" will have had augmentation after removal of breast tissue due to cancer.0 -
vivatifosi wrote: ». Fwiw I don't think that refusing to put things right is a good thing, women will vote with their chests
I have dreams that involve this...;)It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
The insurance would be unaffordable. There is only one way the private sector can operate (sorry) in this kind of business. The state has to set up a regulatory system to licence the products. Then the private sector can say it's discharged its legal obligations in full by complying, and if the product is duff anyway, the risk lies with the regulator, i.e. the state.chewmylegoff wrote: »isn't this situation exactly what public indemnity insurance is for?
This is the kind of support the state has to provide before the private sector can function.
Then the private sector will complain about the cost of compliance with regulations. But the alternative wouldn't be cheaper - not unless they think the alternative is for the clinic to be absolved of all responsibility for its work, so that all the risk is borne by the customer."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Is it not a legal requirement to carry public laibility insurance?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards