Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
    • cause like you said in post one, 99% of people think these are FINES (it now reads charge). and wet themselves and cough up. they are not, they are speculative invoices because the driver supposedly broke some imaginary contract by driving onto privately owned land which said owner may or may not have signed some 99% fake contract with a private parking co years ago, thats already expired or has not been renewed or annually paid to employ them dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

HELP!!!! Dental charges for under 16?????


susie58
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3951 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi, I have no idea what section this would come under.

I'm really hoping someone can give me some advice with this.

My husband and myself are registered with a private dentist - that also sees our children (both under 16 and in full time education) On our last check up the dentist said my daughter needed specialist treatment and there were absesses forming along the top of her front teeth and she needed to see a endodontist (? think that's the name he said). He said this work was not carried out by NHS and the only way we could have it was private - and pay!

We were presented with a written £400 bill. This was increased to £500 on the first appointment

I have since looked up the treatment he said she needed and it is basic root canal work- which is done routinely on the NHS.

My question is should he have referred us to the NHS dentist for this work to be carried out due to her age?

Any help or advice on this would be really welcome

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

I think the NHS forum is the place to find people who may know the answers. I'll move your thread there and leave you a short term redirect to follow from the forum.

 

My best, HB

Thank you! Was not sure as it relates more to the practice of a private dentist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your dental practice is private then even children under 16 and in full time education have to pay. Is the dentist part private/part NHS? If she/he sees your children as NHS patients, that would be different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is should he have referred us to the NHS dentist for this work to be carried out due to her age?

 

No, it is up to you to seek out NHS treatment, not for a private dentist to refer you to one. Saying that it is very rare to find a specialist endodontist on the NHS, so even an NHS dentist would probably have to refer you to a private specialist if it was beyond their expertise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm…

 

Susie58 reports her dentist said root canal work:-

 

"…was not carried out by NHS and the only way we could have it was private… !"

 

That was what the dentist said in a disciplinary case heard by the General Dental Council last November where the allegations set out below were all found proved:-

 

 

"(ii) in the event that you did not accept Patient A as an NHS patient, fully explain the options for NHS treatment that were available to him when he queried whether the treatment you proposed could be provided under the NHS

 

(b) misled Patient A by incorrectly informing him that:

 

(i) the root canal treatment could not be carried out under the NHS (or words to that effect);

 

(ii) the only type of crown that was available under the NHS was a gold crown (or words to that effect);

 

© failed to inform Patient A that both root canal treatment and a crown at LL6 could be provided as a single course of NHS treatment (Band 3) at a cost to him of £198."

 

 

Mind you, it could scarcely fail to find these facts proved since the relevant appointment was being secretly recorded for a TV documentary, and, in my personal view, the dentist should have been struck off without ceremony.

 

Only by some – again, in my personal view – contorted and irrelevant 'reasoning' did the Profesional conduct Committee, quite unreasonably, let the dentist escape 'by the skin of his teeth.'

 

Full case report, here:-

 

http://www.gdc-uk.org/Membersofpublic/Hearings/Determinations%202012/ADEBIYI%20PCC%20Determination%20-%20Nov%202012.pdf

 

I think you could do everyone a service by dropping the GDC a line, Susie58.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Susie58 reports her dentist said root canal work:-

 

"…was not carried out by NHS and the only way we could have it was private… !"

 

Wrong!!

 

Suzie58 reports her dentist said "daughter needed specialist treatment and there were absesses forming along the top of her front teeth and she needed to see a endodontist. He said this work was not carried out by NHS and the only way we could have it was private - and pay!"

 

It's all in the wording. There is a big difference between a dentist saying I can't do this treatment on the NHS but I can do it privately and a dentist saying I can't do this treatment at all, but I know someone who can however it will be private.

Edited by Goldenleaf
Link to post
Share on other sites

Goldenleaf. Are you suggesting that a person who has the symptoms Susie58 reports (child or adult) cannot have the work required (root canal, or otherwise) carried out by an NHS dentist?

 

The legal case I have brought here, directly and centrally, and as excerpted, refers to improperly failing to advise a patient that required treatment can be performed on the NHS. From the report of our OP here, such advice was clearly not given.

 

Your statement:

 

"There is a big difference between a dentist saying I can't do this treatment on the NHS but I can do it privately and a dentist saying I can't do this treatment at all, but I know someone who can however it will be private."

 

would appear to be relevant to the principle concerned only in so far as it refers to two examples in which the proper advice is NOT being given.

 

It's all in the wording.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nolegion, what I am suggesting is that the dentist the OP is referring to has said that the work should be carried out by a specialist which is not available on the NHS. The OP has NOT said that the dentist told her that root canal treatment was not available on the NHS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately It might be difficult to find an NHS dentist with the expertise, equipment and skill to deal with some types of endodontic treatment. Some root treatments can be complicated especially if needed by a young person and the abscesses are down to previous trauma to the teeth. Often they get referred to dental hospitals for treatment or salaried dental services. However waiting lists may be long and access to speedy treatment can be the difference between saving and losing the teeth. £400-£500 is a lot of money but if the teeth have been saved and the the treatment has been done by a specialist endodontist and it is for treating several teeth it does not sound like an unreasonable amount.

Out of interest how many teeth were involved, how many appointments were needed and did the dentist use any special magnifying equipment such as telescope glasses and use rubber dam when doing the treatment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nolegion I don't know what case you have made.

 

As I keep saying there is a big difference between an NHS dentist saying I can't do this on the NHS but can do it privately and an NHS or private dentist saying I can't do this proceedure, it is beyond my expertise but I can refer you to a specialist who can. Just because treatments are available on the NHS does not mean all cases can be treated by non-specialists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP was seeing a completely private dentist so would not have had the option necessarily to refer to an NHS endodontist. There is a real post code lottery as to what services are available depending on what dentists are in the area and what their interests and expertise are. I am not sure many root fillings can be described as "simple" they need time, skill and experience to be done well.

 

The current NHS contract really provides a disincentive to dentists doing complex treatments and especially root treatment even more so if multiple as the dentist gets paid a set fee for providing whatever treatment is needed - so a dentist could spend 30 minutes removing say 4 front teeth and get £x or spend 1-2 hours over several visits, use a lot more materials and equipment and still get paid the same £x to root fill the same 4 teeth. At the end - there is still a risk the treatment might not work and the teeth need to be removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...