GMC Legal Team

Saturday

GMC Legal Team

Numerous doctors have complained about the GMC's legal team. I am sure they believe they are simply trying to do their job but life gets a bit difficult for them when so many doctors keep referring them to the Solicitors Regulatory Body.

Following R v GMC Ex Parte Pal, there were a number of casualties. One GMC solicitor argued two diametrically opposite versions of "misconduct" in two different cases in court. The result was R v GMC Ex Parte Pal and R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK. This shows us that the GMC can and do mislead the court as and when its suits them.

GMC Legal were also responsible for "inventing" my resignation from Worcestershire Mental Health Trust. They felt that "inventing" my resignation would lessen the duty of care upon the GMC. By saying that I had resigned, the courts could say "Ah its her fault" not the GMCs. In that way, the GMC could appear squeaky clean and be blameless. The truth though is that they investigated me needlessly and it resulted in a complete assassination of my livelihood by forcing me to declare the investigation on my application forms and leaving a question mark upon the resignation/fired issue. There was no question mark according to the paperwork. It was one invented by the GMC. They harnessed their own witnesses to create their fictional case.

Overall, I believe the GMC Legal Team fails more doctors and patients while wasting funds.

2 comments:

Unknown6 January 2014 at 04:59
The reports issue by such a Doctor who is working in private hospital or private clinics, are not for legal purpose. Doctors who appointed in Govt. hospitals give reports are used for legal purpose. GMC Legal means something which has both medical and legal aspects. A certificate stating non medico legal purpose means that the person who has signed it does not want it to be used for such (legal) purpose
ReplyDelete
Replies
Anonymous19 October 2014 at 22:53
Your articles and blogs are inspirational. Medical Negligence Claims
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

About this website

This website is about the General Medical Council's actions against a NHS whistleblower. They conducted a series of revolving door complaints against me between the years 2000-2009.

I am an evidence based NHS whistleblower who raised justified concerns on Ward 87 North Staffordshire NHS Trust in 1999. Many years later, the Care Quality Commission documents showed that the Trust had a increased mortality rate and higher litigation costs than Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust.

Instead of conducting an investigation into the deaths on Ward 87, in the year 2000, the GMC conducted a unlawful "discreet inquiry" into my fitness to practise. On discovery of this in the year 2004, I sued the General Medical Council successfully. During the litigation, the GMC instigated a complaint on defamation. They later admitted their procedures do not deal with defamation despite subjecting me to a six month investigation before clearing me.

The General Medical Council subsequently instigated a spurious complaint on a "link" on the internet and my use of the term "psychiatrist".Having subjected me to a six month investigation whilerecklessly spreading dishonesties to the Trust I was working for, the GMC cleared me. The Trust in question fired me on the GMC's word and the General Medical Council subsequently went on to term it a "resignation" in court. To date, the General Medical Council have not been able to establish a resignation of any kind. Effective as of 2007, my references were stigmatised with a termination of employment and all my future application forms required a declaration of the GMC's spurious investigation. This prejudice to future employment is well understood by all doctors.

To prevent vexatious complaints against doctors, I challenged the General Medical Council in court in 2009. Unfortunately, due to judicial errors, the case did not have the result we expected. Permission to hear the case was won. Sadly, the actual case did not succeed at final hearing. It was heard by Justice Collins who was effectively persuaded by the GMC's blatant dishonesties.

The case though continues following the conflict between R v GMC Ex Parte Pal and R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK. The assessment to ensure there is a balance between doctors' and the complainants interests is yet to be analysed by higher courts. The story has not ended.

In the meantime, I have sought to write my thoughts on being a whistleblower, the character assassinations conducted by the GMC and its associates. The GMC networks fairly well and their vested interests have always been clear to all in the medical profession. In 2011, the General Medical Council issued an apology for their behaviour against me.

This is the reality of whistleblowing in the National Health Service. In addition, the domino effect of the entrenched defamation caused by the GMC is often never ending. This website is designed to raise these important issues because there is no media support for whistleblowers who face this kind of establishment assassination. We have attempted to detail this in our paper that can be downloaded through this petition - Whistleblowing and Patient Safety.

Members of the public and journalists may find this summary of the General Medical Council written by me useful.

I hope that this website goes some way to show how difficult life is for a NHS Whistleblower. I raised concerns in 1998, the repercussions are still ongoing in 2012. In 2004, Judge Harris compared the GMC to a totalitarian regime. Its failures in public safety and its inability to regulate doctors fairly is detailed very well by the media.

Pages

Pal v General Medical Council

Saturday

GMC Legal Team

2 comments:

About this website

Translate

Related Links