Anybody making a claim?

Ahhhhhh, I see.

Yes I meant the after care provided with your surgery at the time of signing for your surgery.

Hmmmmm, I'd ask for them to show me exactly where it was stated that they could change the terms in regard to the 6 years period they offered to cover PIPs.

They must have some kind of documentation 'at the time' of writing the letter you have that confirms what they say in order for them to be able to do this, do they have that Lorna?

cookie wrote:Ahhhhhh, I see.

Yes I meant the after care provided with your surgery at the time of signing for your surgery.

Hmmmmm, I'd ask for them to show me exactly where it was stated that they could change the terms in regard to the 6 years period they offered to cover PIPs.

They must have some kind of documentation 'at the time' of writing the letter you have that confirms what they say in order for them to be able to do this, do they have that Lorna?

If you search google for 'Harley Medical Group PIP' and click on the first link, it takes you to their page on PIPs. I did put the link in here but I'm not allowed to post links yet.

If you scroll about halfway down to this bit:

For any patient of The Harley Medical Group with PIP implants who has a confirmed rupture accompanied by a scan within 6 years of implantation, we will replace the implants free of charge.

It's the same text that's in the letter. However, on their website, they also have the following:

Please note that this aftercare is effective from 17 January 2012 and may be subject to future modifications.

The last bit about being 'subject to future modifications', is not in the letter. There is no mention of any future changes in the letter they sent me.
x

The thing is Lorna, it states 'subject to future modifications' nowhere does it state what these modifications are as they have not yet been put in place, so that statement doesn't delete their promise of surgery within the specified period.

Do you understand what I'm saying sweetheart?

They talk of 'future modifications' but the modifications have not 'yet' been put in place. If they have. they would have been put in writing. xx

cookie wrote:The thing is Lorna, it states 'subject to future modifications' nowhere does it state what these modifications are as they have not yet been put in place, so that statement doesn't delete their promise of surgery within the specified period.

Do you understand what I'm saying sweetheart?

They talk of 'future modifications' but the modifications have not 'yet' been put in place. If they have. they would have been put in writing. xx

I'm not sure I understand,, sorry.

They have put in writing to me that I now have to pay, which is what I guess the modifications are. Or am i missing something?

They seem adamant on the phone that they are entitled to do this. But I didn't think they could write a letter offering you something, then decide to change their minds.
xx

This is were a solicitor comes into play Lorna, I'm sure they can't just 'say' you now have to pay, based on a statement saying it 'may be subject to future modifications'

I'm sure these 'future modifications' which are now in place as claimed by the staff at the clinic would need to have been put in writing so it is clear to ALL what these new modifications are.

If you now have to pay for your surgery, where in the clinics 'new modifications' does it state this?

I know what I'm trying to say but it's difficult to get across, sorry. xx

cookie wrote:This is were a solicitor comes into play Lorna, I'm sure they can't just 'say' you now have to pay, based on a statement saying it 'may be subject to future modifications'

I'm sure these 'future modifications' which are now in place as claimed by the staff at the clinic would need to have been put in writing so it is clear to ALL what these new modifications are.

If you now have to pay for your surgery, where in the clinics 'new modifications' does it state this?

I know what I'm trying to say but it's difficult to get across, sorry. xx

I think I know what you're saying. I left a message for the solicitor you mentioned to call me back. Hopefully, they will be able to see exactly what the situation is.

I'm surprised more people haven't been online or in the news regarding this though. Unless they didn't realise exactly what the letter was saying. I must admit, I thought they might just be changing the policy to help more people. However, it's clear they are now trying to charge £2500 (based on the letter they sent) for an operation they initially put in writing as being free.

Thanks for all your help.
x

I'm sure the solicitor will be in contact soon and hopefully they'll be able to shed a bit more light on this for you.

The fact that you have a letter detailing clearly that you are entitled to a free re-op I'm sure would stand up, but having said that, having dealt with a large commercial company myself and have them pull some small print out of a bag you can never be 100% sure so a solicitor would be your best way forward now Lorna, along with your letter of complaint.

Please do keep us updated Lorna and in the meantime we're always here to support you in any way we can, even if you just for a good rant... lean on us, we've got broad shoulders and great ears and are willing to listen anytime. OK?

Thank you. I will keep you updated. It's so frustrating, I wish I had the money to pay for them to be replaced. Although I wouldn't go back to Harley Medical Group.

I totally understand your frustration lovely I'm still going through revision which will be to the cost of my clinic, but once all that's done and I can wash my hands of them, I don't think I'd never look at another large commercial clinic again. but that's just how 'I' feel, there are many women who have great experiences with these clinics and for those women I'm very happy. They're just no longer for 'me'.

Really hoping you get a resolve to this Lorna and please don't stay away in the meantime, I know from experience that talking with other women who 'understand' can make such a difference to how you feel babe, so don't be a stranger, if you need us, we're here. xx

A bit of an update...

I spoke with a solicitor on Monday afternoon who asked for copies of the letters from HMG. My husband scanned and emailed me the letters, and I emailed them to the solicitor. An hour later I get an email from them saying this is a definite breach of contract law, simple. They made me an offer in January, I accepted this offer when I signed for surgery on the 4th July. They changed their terms 9 days after I signed.

I have written another letter to HMG stating exactly what the solicitor said regarding contract law. However, I wont hold my breath for a satisfactory reply. In any case, I dont know if I trust them now.......

I have contacted another private clinic (The Hospital Group), who have been great. They have given me a price to have my PIPs replaced with Naturelles with a lifetime guarantee. This made me look a bit more into HMG aftercare for the replacements. Having read the form I signed with the HMG on the 4th, it seems there is absolutely no aftercare. If anything goes wrong with the implants, I have to pay for corrective surgery.

I saw my GP this morning, who was shocked about HMGs attitude. In his opinion, not only should they replace the PIPs, but they should remove the silicone from my armpit. (something HMG refuse to do). I am going for a consultation with a Surgeon on the NHS on the 2nd August. He also does private work at the Nuffield, so I might have it done with him privately, on the NHS or at THG. I am going to claim this cost back from HMG in court.

Cookie: May I ask, if you were to avoid a large commercial clinic, where would you go to? I only ask, as you're also in the North West, so I would be interested to know other options in this area. I know it wont be a recommendation, but I am just interested to know where else to go.
xx

Can you only claim if they have ruptured then?

Danie wrote:Can you only claim if they have ruptured then?

I'm not sure. In think it depends on whether they are deemed a faulty product. My understanding is that there is a group trying to prove that the implants were faulty, but the medical board are saying otherwise. It's probably a bit more detailed than that, but it's my (basic) understanding of it.
x