TOPIC:

All I want for Christmas is my eyes back as they were before Lasik .... not just a refund.
Sadly it's never going to be that way.

Optimax have Ruined My Life.

I believe that anyone who performs laser eye surgery on healthy eyes is unethical, because the truth about the severity of complications and their frequency is always played down.
If people knew the truth when making their decision to have surgery they would surely run a mile, which is why most ophthalmologists choose to wear glasses. If surgeons don't want laser treatment they should not inflict it on others!
Optimax performed laser surgery on my lovely healthy, only moderately short sighted eyes, and now they are completely F*CKED. Sorry for using such language, but the level of constant pain and terrible eyesight is best described that way.
This was the biggest mistake of my life, but I trusted a surgeon and company who betrayed me in return for money.
These people make me sick!

Right now I'm at indoor football with my 5 year old son. The pitch is a blur to me.
I can't enjoy these moments with my kids like I used to and this is what hurts the most.
20/20 vision yeah right thanks Optimax

Jane wrote: Dear Mr Ambrose

What about my lifetime aftercare?

Your damaged patient,
Jane Armstrong (Mrs)

An NHS hospital told me not to worry (as a patient), because they got a lot of patients with complications from the high street clinics. I do indeed find this worrying. A Moorfields doctor also told me they too treat a lot of patients damaged by laser eye surgery.
As for misleading people about the risks of treatments offered, Optimax compared the surgery to a trip to the dentist, and led me to think that if you were extremely unlucky, you might have one complication, which could be treated or would cure itself with time. In fact complications often come in a horrible bundle, and many cannot be treated and don't improve with time, some get even worse. They also play down the severity of complications.
Their life time aftercare guarantee is a joke, and Optimax are a disgrace.

Nine months ago I registered my complaint with the General Optical Council (GOC) against Swati Malkan, the specs wearing optometrist who recommended I had Lasek surgery in 2011 - not only unfortunate for me, but for the high street industry too!

In response to my allegations Swati finally submitted her ‘representations’ to the GOC last week, four pages long, and very obviously written by a solicitor, presumably Optimax’s inexpensive in-house solicitor.

I claimed that I was not fully informed, and the paragraph below is Ms Malkan’s excuse for the reason she didn’t discuss monovision with me (Patient A).



Please note that I most definitely did not indicate that I had no objection to wearing reading spectacles, because it was NEVER discussed with me!

After my consult was over, on my way out of the clinic I stuck my head round Ms Malkan’s door and said that, btw, I needed +2 readers to read a menu when wearing contact lenses, which I rarely wore.

Ms Malkan's reply was brief - one sentence in fact, and she most definitely did not explain that I would need reading glasses for ALL close up tasks, such as peeling an apple, washing dishes, programming the washing machine… and did not explain “in detail” that I wouldn’t be able to see my watch, my nails, text messages, labels on bottles, etc…

“Critical of their vision"? Surely every person is critical of their vision if they're unable to see clearly - aaaaargh!!

I would not have considered monovision any more than I would have lens exchange, and had either been suggested I wouldn’t be sitting here now, and none of you would know my name, and the industry would be carrying on business as usual!

I had lasek and have ALL of the side-effects listed by Swati as being more likely with monovision! Confirmed recently by three surgeons in reports for my forthcoming trial v Russell Ambrose t/a Optimax.

Swati Malkan has lied through her specs, and I have yet to write my comments to her representations.

But now I’ve finished writing my witness statement for my claim against her employer I will make sure I leave no stone unturned and hope that the GOC’s case examiners are more stringent with Swati than the GMC are with negligent surgeons!

Ms Malkan goes on to say, “I’m sorry that Px A (me) was dissatisfied with the outcome of her surgery and it is unfortunate that that Px A went from being shortsighted to longsighted.”

Unfortunate? I call it tragic - but then I suppose I am a teeny weeny bit biased!

Swati goes on to pour salt into my wounded eyes by claiming that every effort was made to clearly explain the side-effects of laser eye surgery!

Of course it was Swati - that's why this intelligent woman ignored all your efforts to dissuade me and decided to play Russian roulette with her precious, priceless, healthy eyes!

It should be noted that I actually liked wearing glasses, and spent a lot on money on designer frames. I had surgery to save money, not for vanity - not realising that my stable prescription was unlikely to change any time soon, therefore less expenditure without new lenses!

I didn’t ask my opticians opinion as I thought they wouldn’t encourage me as they would lose sales. In fact they make far more money off me than ever before!

Ms Malkan should pray that she never meets me, just as Dr Hoe should run very fast in the opposite direction if he ever sees me! Because, although I’m not a physically violent person, I am simmering with so much anger that I don’t know how I would react if I met either of these people complicit in damaging my eyes and ruining my life.

I told Stephanie Holloway that I admired her restraint in keeping her hands from Joanna McGraw’s throat in court last year, because I’m not sure I would be able to exercise the same self control.

Though if I were to do something extreme the court would probably excuse me on grounds of diminished responsibility due to unreasonable provocation by way of physical assault and abuse on my person.

During one of our meetings, talking about OE, Russell Ambrose said to me, “Why would (David Moulsdale) want to make you angry…” (recorded). The fact that Russell would think for one second that I wasn’t angry with him, or had forgiven him, is an indicator of how these businessmen regard damaged patients - we are simply an inconvenience.

I’ve never heard a sincere apology from any of them - on the rare occasion one is even offered. Their only concern is how cheaply the patient can be paid off!

This often comes up on my Facebook news feed. Browsing through the comments I notice a number from Linda Ambrose.
Any relation Russell!?

Russell Ambrose is clearly receiving my emails, however he has chosen not to reply to my latest email, so I'd like to share this email trail with everyone!


________________
From: Jane
Sent: 21 August 2015 13:11
To: Russell Ambrose
Cc: Pushpa Patel
Subject: RE: Free laser eye surgery consultation & info pack Plus £500 off!

Dear Mr Ambrose,

I have never 'opted into' receive marketing spam emails from any 'third party provider' of any description, and definitely not this one!

Why should I have to unsubscribe from something I didn’t subscribe to?

I suggest that YOU contact the company and unsubscribe me as you are the one paying them to harass and upset me!

I will be complaining to the ICO.

Your damaged patient,
Jane Armstrong
________________
From: "Russell Ambrose" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Sent: 21 August 2015 14:47
To: "Jane"
Cc: "Pushpa Patel" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: RE: Free laser eye surgery consultation & info pack Plus £500 off!

Dear Ms Armstrong,

Please see the unsubscribe message at the bottom of the email. Only you can unsubscribe from it. I cannot do this on your behalf.

I have contacted all companies we deal with and have asked them not to email you again. This may not be as effective as a direct request from you to unsubscribe.

I am sorry about this.

Regards
Russell Ambrose
________________
From: Jane
Sent: 21 August 2015 15:03
To: Russell Ambrose
Subject: RE: Free laser eye surgery consultation & info pack Plus £500 off!

Dear Mr Ambrose,

But not sorry about ruining my eyes and life? Or willing to provide me with the medication I desperately need to help the pain and cannot afford to pay for myself with two young children to care for who are my priority.

I will be in court to support Sasha Rodoy in November and I look forward to meeting you in person.

Your damaged patient,
Jane Armstrong
_________________
From: "Russell Ambrose" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Sent: 21 August 2015 15:19
To: "Jane"
Cc: "Pushpa Patel" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Subject: RE: Free laser eye surgery consultation & info pack Plus £500 off!

Dear Jane,

I am very sorry for what has happened and how you feel. However once you place matters in solicitors hands all requests have to go through them.

Regards
Russell Ambrose
________________
Dear Mr Ambrose

What about my lifetime aftercare?

Your damaged patient,
Jane Armstrong (Mrs)

I for one will be going to Parliament on the 14th October, as it will be well worth the journey from Yorkshire to support MBE. I will tell my story to the media if invited to, and there are aspects of my case that should make Russell Ambrose, Malcolm Samuel, Pushpa Patel and Lesely Hudson cringe when I do so.

Ambrose and his vanity. Overheard the marketing department trying to persuade Ambrose to do a 2015 picture to put on the Floptimax website rather than the 1806 photo he gave. He does not want to take a recent picture as he says it will put the patients off.

I saw him last week and trust me, William Shakespeare looks better and more alive......

Russell Ambrose should know that the way in which an injured person is supported and treated will make a difference to how much they are able to cope with what has happened to them. They need to be treated with honesty and empathy to enable them to make the best recovery possible.
If they are constantly lied to, lied about, and bullied, then they won't cope well at all because their injuries have already left them vulnerable, and unethical behaviour from the very people in whom they invested so much trust will have a devastating effect.
Optimax surely know this but they just don't care.