Reply: GMC General Medical Council 3/3

Posted 10 March, re my Subject Access Request (SAR) to the General Medical Council (GMC): 'Over THREE MONTHS and still struggling, for what I have no doubt has involved quite a crowd, to decide how little of my personal data should be disclosed to me! And while I can't wait to see the black pages - that's if they take the trouble to redact instead of simply withholding...'

Seven days later I received a password to access the disclosure bundle - and guess what 😆

 

While there is a huge amount of my data missing, that I can prove quite easily, do they seriously expect me to believe that only FIVE internal emails exist mentioning my name?

In relation to Dr Prashant Jindal's FtP 2022 hearing alone, there has been extensive deliberation concerning me within the organization, and never mind my ears burning, they should have caught fire!*

And given that the GMC monitor my social media sites, surely they take screenshots, as do Optimax and Optical Express 👀

Meanwhile, still waiting for lo-ooong overdue SAR disclosure from the Medical Practioners Tribunal Service.

To be continued...

*Update soon!
#blindedonthehighstreet #stormsasha

While there is a huge amount of my data missing, that I can prove quite easily, do they seriously expect me to believe that only FIVE internal emails exist mentioning my name?

In relation to Dr Prashant Jindal's FtP 2022 hearing alone, there has been extensive deliberation concerning me within the organization, and never mind my ears burning, they should have caught fire!*

And given that the GMC monitor my social media sites, surely they take screenshots, as do Optimax and Optical Express 👀

Meanwhile, still waiting for lo-ooong overdue SAR disclosure from the Medical Practioners Tribunal Service.

To be continued...

*Update soon!
 

3/3
29 February 2023, these emails coincidentally arrived within minutes of each other, four minutes to be exact; and as you can see, the MPTS more open about the fact that they obviously have every intention of heavily redacting my personal data - if even disclosing 👀

No matter what they'd have you believe, the GMC and MPTS are unarguably self regulating, answering to no one, the lack of transparency astounding, while interpreting the ‘balance of interest test’ to suit themselves: ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-gui...interest-conditions/

See my FOI re public interest test and form your own conclusions:

 
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/public_interest_test_7

 

Over THREE MONTHS and still struggling, for what I have no doubt has involved quite a crowd, to decide how little of my personal data should be disclosed to me! And while I can't wait to see the black pages - that's if they take the trouble to redact instead of simply withholding, my complaints went to the Information Commisioner's Office (ICO) last week.

Meanwhile, I question whether complaints to the Professional Standards Authority are swept under the carpet (another FOI methinks!), but if you’ve had issues with the GMC or mpts, it's worth a try: concerns@professionalstandards.org.uk 
 

As do others I've spoken with (lawyers & doctors), I struggle to accept that the MPTS operates independently from the GMC 👀

'Requests to this body [mpts] are sent to the GMC Freedom of Information team.’
www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/mpts .

30 November 2023, I sent SARs to both GMC and MPTS, receiving this response on 14 December 2023, advising that they were allowed to extend the usual one month to three months, disclosure due by 29 February 2024.

And so I patiently waited…

 

This 3 part thread is in the interests of transparency, a value advertised by the GMC, but unfortunately one that I have yet to witness 👀 www.gmc-uk.org/about/how-we-work/our-values
 

After reading the General Medical Council's latest 'closed without action' letter regarding Dr David Teenan’s fitness to practise, surely no one will disagree that the organisation (registered as a charity!) is #notfitforpurpose 👀

I've highlighted a few notable paragraphs in the scanned pages, and redacted Ms X's name at her request.

Page 9: 'The GMC has opened nine investigations into Mr Teenan’s fitness to practise since 2013. None of those cases resulted in action being taken on Mr Teenan’s registration, although some were closed with advice being provided to the doctor. All nine cases involved concerns that touch on clinical matters like those investigated by the GMC in this case.’

ONLY nine, all involving the same issues, so please tell how many patients eyes and lives must Dr David Teenan damage before these anonymous and incompetent case examiners decide that he should, at the very least, be referred to a FtP tribunal?

He has been (and is currently being) sued by dozens of patients he’s damaged, some actually blinded!*

Claims successfully settled, but always out of court, and I dream of the day OE will actually let another one go to trial, as to their regret they did with Stephanie Holloway’s £569,000 landmark case in 2104, because then the press and media can jump on it without fear of OE’s regular legal threats.

'As his only employer, Optical Express has confirmed that it holds no concerns about Mr Teenan’s fitness to practise.’

No sh*t Sherlock! Otherwise they’d be corroborating the ever increasing number of legal claims against the company and Teenan!

*Unfortunately the majority of people don’t bother to complain to the GMC, not least because they read stories like this and think what's the point!

But it is VERY important that complaints are made to the GMC - and to the General Optical Council, about all negligent surgeons and optoms, whether closed without action or not, because sooner or later this is going to backfire on all not fit for purpose UK regulators!

Please note that as patient advocate, I'm always willing to do this on the victim’s behalf, as I did with Ms X and others. Possibly the reason for the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service & GMC's villification of me re Dr Prashant Jindal’s FtP hearing, because of course these cases cost a lot money to run - as seen in the answers to my FOI Qs 9-12: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/info_re_d...p_h#incoming-2454822

PS: I'm not sure that Dr David Teenan's employment with OE entitles him to be addressed as 'Mr', but happy to be corrected if mistaken.

This topic concerns the GMC - strongly recommended reading
www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk/ind...actise-hearing#21822