Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC:

Dr Muhammad Kazmi 09 Mar 2021 18:48 #1

  • admin
  • admin's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Posts: 1051
  • Karma: 6
  • Thank you received: 153
More lies from this industry :kiss:

Dr Muhammad Kazmi has an inordinately high number of complaints and legal claims against him, and this therefore is fraudulent advertising by Optical Express, provided to patients when they've been booked in for surgery with Kazmi.

This attachment is hidden for guests.
Please log in or register to see it.


This is also blatant misrepresentation by MuhammaKazmi himself, who has knowingly allowed OE to make the claim that 100% of his patients are satisfied with the care he provides.*


www.opticalexpress.co.uk/about/surgeons/muhammad-kazmi

I don't think I've ever shared this story before, but a few years ago I was amazed when one of my MBEF clients told me that Muhammad Kazmi had bizarrely told them to contact me for help and advice about taking legal action against OE, even though he’d damaged their eyes!

Perhaps this is why Dr Kazmi wasn’t trusted alone with a complaining patient recently, the store manager sitting in and replying to questions that Kazmi should have answered. Inappropriately in my opinion as it was a patient consultation.

The patient recorded the meeting, and I sent a copy to the General Optical Council (GOC) and General Medical Council (GMC).

But as they generally do, the GMC came back with a dismissive response, their reasons based on 'the advice of a medically qualified colleague’.

I forwarded this to a refractive ophthalmologist for his comments, who advised that I draw their attention to the RCOphth guidelines.

I have also asked the GMC for the qualifications of the 'medically qualified colleague’, who is definitely not a refractive surgeon, having contradicted the RCOphth guidelines - that were ratified by the GMC!

It’s like asking a dermatologist to give expert comment on the performance of a heart surgeon. (And the CV for one of the GMC medical experts responsible for countless claims against refractive surgeons being closed without action isn't far off that!)

It's disturbing that too often I have more knowledge about refractive surgery procedures than the ‘experts’, who get paid no matter what they say, their word taken at face value, because GMC staff are not medically qualified.

The subject of the qualifications of entirely unsuitable experts being instructed by the GMC is an ongoing dispute I have with the organisation, and I intend to publish more about this.

*I have to say I'm somewhat puzzled by OE's claim that 98.1% of >53,000 Kazmi patients achieved 20|20 vision, but >1,007 who didn't were also satisfied! Though of course the 98.1% is as honest as the 100% lie.

Dr Muhammad Shabbar Kazmi's GMC registration details: www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/4137830
Attachments: