Overview
The complainant (Mr C) raised a number of concerns about the care and treatment which he and his wife (Mrs C) received from their dentist (Dentist 1). He also complained that Mrs C had been unfairly removed from Dentist 1's dental list and that she was not advised of the reasons for the decision.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are that:
- (a) Mr C's waiting time for each appointment with Dentist 1 was unreasonable (no findings);
- (b) Dentist 1's examination of Mr C's teeth was inadequate (not upheld);
- (c) Dentist 1 incorrectly advised Mr C that he had a restricted mouth opening (no findings);
- (d) Dentist 1 should not have advised Mr and Mrs C that they had 'very serious' or 'serious' gum disease or to avoid drinking tea, coffee and red wine (no findings);
- (e) Dentist 1 was not entitled to discuss with or offer advice to Mr C on his medical history or medication (not upheld);
- (f) Dentist 1 unfairly removed Mrs C from his dental list (partially upheld);
- (g) Dentist 1 did not advise Mrs C of the reasons for his decision (not upheld); and
- (h) Dentist 1 failed to address all points of complaint raised by Mr C (upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that Dentist 1:
- (i) apologises to Mrs C for failing to follow the correct notification process for de-registration and takes steps to ensure that he and his staff become conversant with the legal provisions in this area; and
- (ii) apologises to Mr C for failing to address the points of complaint raised by Mr C and takes steps to ensure that, in future, he responds appropriately to all points of complaint made by patients in letters of complaint.