General Chat

No, I haven’t won the lottery - but Optical Express are hoping to

Twenty one and a half million pounds is the amount Optical Express Ltd and Optical Express (Gyle) Ltd are claiming in damages from Associated Newspapers!

"What about our damages" I hear you shout!!

In my opinion Optical Express have enough money to compensate what I believe to be many thousands of damaged patients, because if they were to distribute £21.5 million amongst just 2,000 of their damaged patients they would each receive just £10,750.

Better than nothing of course, but nowhere near enough to compenstae anyone left with damaged vision for the rest of your life!

I thoroughly enjoyed being back in the Central London Courts...

Not only have I been there a few times as a litigant myself - v Russell Ambrose/Optimax, but I also have fond memories of the two weeks I spent there in September 2014 for Stephanie Holloway's trial v Optical Express & Joanna McGraw, when Judge Edward Bailey awarded her more than £569,000 - and set a legal precedent because Stephanie won her claim on lack of informed consent alone!

Today's hearing was for 'specific disclosure’ of documents that OE had refused to provide to the Defendant. These included the Patient Advisor Flow (PAF) from 2008 and financial records from 2010.

OE claimed that many of their records had [conveniently] been deleted as part of an IT upgrade in 2015, but the Judge wasn’t having any of that rubbish, as I’ll explain in my next post!

Lasting just over 2 hrs, the hearing also became a case management conference, with dates agreed for disclosure, witness statements, etc...

Due to the delay with disclosure, the three weeks trial, due to commence on 31 January 2017, will be relisted for five weeks, date tbc during the ‘Trinity term’ - 6 June to 31 July.

I was almost bouncing up and down in my seat imagining the press and media feeding frenzy that OE’s leal team Schillings won’t be able to stop!

Lots more to tell… but you'll have to wait until I have time to post a more detailed account over the weekend!

10.30am, Court 14, Central London County Court, Strand, WC2A 2LL




If anyone wants to join me, I'll be across the road in Pret A Manger for coffee at 9.45am...

Look out for the OERML T shirt

Hi there Sasha,

I am debating whether to have lasek surgery and was fully decided to go ahead at OE before I saw your website and your videos. I am very sorry for your bad experience, but would be grateful if you could answer some questions:

I am trying to ascertain to what extent your complaint is, with Optical Express themselves or the refractive laser surgery process in general? You acknowledge that many people have successful surgery with them and, indeed, there are overwhelming numbers of positive reviews to support this view. I acknowledge that Optical Express do appear to have poor customer service based on other reviews and my own experience with them (even before I've handed over any cash), but putting this aside, do you think their surgeons/procedures put people at higher risk than other companies? Would you have no qualms (other than the standard accepted risks) about somebody going to get lasek at a different, more expensive provider, or do you share the same concerns about all operators? Finally, looking at your website, many of the complaints seem to be historical. Do you have any reason to believe that OE and/or the process has become safer since your bad experience?

Many thanks for your help in advance.
__________________
admin: Hi Jonathan…

My lasek surgery was with Optimax (who also own Ultralase), and it’s definitely not any safer now than it was then, and nor will it be in another twenty years! The process is the same no matter what the machinery.

Perhaps you’ve only read the True Stories on OERML (which I stopped publishing years ago as they were too time consuming to edit) because I deal with new complaints every single day, from patients damaged by small independent providers as well as OE!

Read details of BBC radio presenter Anneka Rice’s debilitating surgery with Dan Reinstein, who spuriously calls himself ‘Professor’! She's not alone, I've been contacted by other people left with problems following surgery at LVC, and at Moorfields Private, and elsewhere. I know of few refractive surgeons who have not damaged patients.

Unfortunately damaged patients mostly hang on, believing the provider’s lies, that they can fix the problems with another op... the results are taking a bit longer... that everyone is different - even though when paying their money they were promised they’d have great vision almost immediately!

Providers do their utmost to keep problem patients in-house for 3 years until the time for litigation has expired.

Who do you think is responsible for the ‘overwhelming numbers of positive views’, on Trustpilot etc?! Ask yourself why the majority of negative reviews can only be found here on OERML.

In 2015 the Royal College of Ophthalmologists appointed me to the Refractive Surgery Standards Working Group as lay advisor, to write new guidelines/standards, but then removed me after complaints from David Moulsdale, CEO of OE.

The College kowtow to the corrupt businessmen who control this industry, and they actually admitted this to Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell at a meeting we attended in December 2015 to fight for my reinstatement to the RSSWG, which now has NO patient representation.

It’s estimated that the problems are as high as 40%, if not more. Studies in Japan support this figure, while the RSSWG members fight to claim 95% success rate, because it’s their cash cow!

Find a surgeon who will sign a guarantee that you won’t end up with worse vision post op, suffering chronic dry eyes, glare, MGD, etc… that you definitely won’t need specs again as soon as 2 years post surgery, that you won’t have problems driving at night, and then I might say take the risk!

After almost 6 years research and experience, knowing as much as I do about this industry - every corner of it - I do not recommend anyone have refractive eye surgery unless it’s the only option to blindness.

OE are unarguably the worst, but the risks remain no matter who's operating

Hi Ben
I don't understand what you mean by 'literature'? My advice is to have a look through posts on this forum for relevant evidence and advice. It is my experience that Optical Express are economical with the truth regarding risk and use skilled sales people to sell the product - aftercare is very poor and when things go wrong you need support that OE do not provide. All I can tell you is if I'd found this site before my procedure with Luca Antico I would have cancelled. Sadly it's too late for me. You are in a very lucky position.

I have read that Luca Antico is currently being sued, please can you divulge what for and where I can find literature on this? I am currently booked in to have surgery with him and this has worried me somewhat.

Thanks

Steven Schallhorn is the latest Optical Express deserter, and presumably a great loss to David Moulsdale!

'Carl Zeiss Meditec appoints Steven C. Schallhorn, MD as Chief Medical Officer'
www.zeiss.com/meditec/int/media-news/pre...medical-officer.html

Industry incest at play!

Jim Mazzo was Stevie's best buddy at AMO (in which Stevie holds shares and a consultancy position) and is now Zeiss’ Global President of Ophthalmology
www.zeiss.com/meditec/int/media-news/pre...gy-organization.html

Curious that Zeiss refer to Stevie as ‘Dr’ while Optical Express list him as ‘Professor’, who also claim he’s a consultant to the FBI - I wonder if the FBI know?


www.opticalexpress.co.uk/the-optical-exp...-experience/surgeons

Stevie follows in the footsteps of Optical Express Patient Care Manager David Mungall, who quit a few months ago, and in-house solicitor Tariq Ashkanani - who only lasted 9 months before quitting in June!

I was interested to read Tariq’s LinkedIn page detailing his work experience at OE - 'large caseload of personal injury...'!



www.linkedin.com/in/tariq-ashkanani-78a5999b

BBC Radio 4 'You and Yours' broadcast on the 19 October discussed the cosmetic surgery industry which exhibited parallels with the refractive eye surgery industry scandal, such as clinics having multiple subsidiaries that can be put into receivership to avoid liabilities, just as Optical Express did with Optical Express Southern Ltd and 123 Leeds Ltd, and leaving the NHS (tax payers) to pick up the tab treating damaged patients to try and fix the problems.

Listen from 1m in to 9m 22s.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07z3cgq

Earlier today someone asked me who is Tweedles McOptom!

A few years ago, before Optical Express banned me from their London Harley Street premises, I used to accompany damaged patients to consults with Jan Venter, head of OE's Complex Cases Management team.

David Moulsdale used to send both Stephen Hannan and his playmate David Mungall (Patient Care Manager - a definite misnomer!) to sit in on these consults.

They were like a double act, so I affectionately referred to them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee… (read True Stories: David)

Tweedledee quit his job a few months ago because, as I was reliably informed, he couldn’t take the pressure any more (and of course he wasn’t paid as much as Tweedledum - who would probably personally laser his family pet if it kept him on Moulsdale’s xmas card list!)

Aka McOptom because that's what Tweedles calls himself

Herald Scotland story: www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk/ind...-bbc-news-press.html

Interesting that OE told the Herald newspaper that they blame the Daily Mail for their losses (see link above), because they generally blame me, as noted in a 4 page letter Stephen Hannan sent to MP Richard Harrington on 22 July 2015 in a desperate attempt to discredit me.


He also emailed a copy to John McDonnell on 23 July...



What we found most laughable was that first thing the next morning McOptom frantically emailed John asking to recall his email (how do you do that I wonder?)



He then resent the same, but this time marked ‘Without Prejudice and Subject to Legal Privilege’...



Not that it would have stopped John sharing this with me, Tweedles doesn’t appear to understand that an optometrist is not entitled to claim ‘legal privilege’!

And, although signed by Stephen Hannan, the letter was written by OE's lawyer, because I can assure you that Tweedles definitely does not have the intellect for such a task!

John replied to Tweedles...



Be aware that at no time since July 2015 has OE made any attempt to litigate against Mr Ahmed, who is himself litigating against both OE and surgeon Dimitris Kazakos, and whose medicolegal expert does not agree that any of his claims were 'false and misleading’.

And nor did the Moorfields NHS surgeons agree with Tweedles when they explanted Mr Ahmed's M Plus X lens earlier this year!

As for my own claims being 'obscure and fantastical', if that were true, then why has no-one ever attempted to sue me for libel and/or slander?

Which is what I wrote to Stephen Hannan...



I stand by all I publish/speak about this industry + GMC + RCO + CQC - supported by hard evidence!

And why none will challenge me legally

Hi Sasha, I hope your day went well today. [ www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk/ind...phthalmologists.html ]
I wanted to let you know that I received a phone call from OE today. I was told they would email me an invoice for £10 for SAR and someone would phone me back in the afternoon to get the payment. That has now been done. I will recieve my files by recorded delivery post within 21 working days, the advisor told me the file is much too large to send electronically. I will keep you posted.
Thank you again for all your hard work.
Anne
_____________________
admin: Anne sent a Subject Access Request (SAR) to OE who purposely misinterpreted this request and repeatedly insisted that she must pay £50 for her records.



I contacted the ICO who assured me that ALL electronic data held by the company must be sent in response to an SAR.

Unfortunately for Optical Express, Stephen Hannan repeated the following sentence eleven times in his nine page letter to Anne...



Anne pointed this out to Tweedles who then reluctantly accepted defeat