Medical Protection Society Ltd

FAQ

Reviews

• 

  Anna C

  This organization is insuring dentist Dr. Antunes and they got on my case without me making a formal claim for compensation in 2016 and in 2017. I did not settle any claims with them because I did not make any claims, but only compensation! The MPS came on my case when they got activated by Regent Dental Practice in response to my complaints that my tooth got botched by Dr. Antunes. The MPS solicitors used the opportunity to mislead me and use third-party identity to scam people of compensation. They do not come forward with their MPS indemnity company name and their solicitors' names. They use the name of the medical practice and their doctors to try to trick people into signing some documents that are not suitable because the claim needs to be properly investigated to justify singing such documents. They call it a ' GOODWILL', when they are botching treatments and do not feel liable to pay for butchered work. As per law, the MPS doctor has liability and it is pathological to call it ' GOODWILL'. The Regent Dental Practice's name and Dr. Antunes's name were used to scam me out of my compensation. The MPS organization did not pay me the correct compensation as promised to me by Regent Dental Practice. The MPS comes in the context of the situation and uses this tactic to manoeuvre their way out of paying compensation.  Yes, they want the patient to pay for damages their doctors caused. Dishonest organization. After my tooth got damaged by Dr. Antunes, the Regent Dental Practice offered to fix the damages. This is when they activated their 'insurance' and MPS got their dishonest hands on my case. MPS solicitors used the name of the Regent Practice signed with Dr. Antunes signature to mislead me of my legal rights to compensation. MPS did not disclose their indemnity name and their solicitor did not come forward when communicating with me. They used third-party identity to mislead me about my rights. Only a small portion of the compensation was paid. I reported them to my MP and the Department of Health. I made complaints to them including contacting their Directors who are themselves Doctors and should put the interest of patients first. I am supposed that an organization run by Doctors is using the third-party tactic to scam people out of compensation and leaves vulnerable people without money to fix the damages their doctors are causing. MPS willingly causes harm to others by trying to avoid liability. Dr. Antunes damaged my tooth and they wrote in the letter with Regent Practice logos and Dr. Antunes names that they do me 'goodwill' by paying a tiny fraction of the money they were liable to pay. It is sad to see that medical professionals leading this indemnity company allow for such conduct to take place which just destroys the reputation of the medical profession. All people sitting on the panel are doctors themselves. I checked the company registration and all people listed as Directors are Doctors. I would expect that they refrain from using third-party identity to try to settle medical injury claims. They should be banned by law from doing this and forced to pay for their damages. It was Regent Dental practice owners and their manager that said that I will be paid full and correct compensation for damages and it was them activating MPS. I did not make any preaction letters to start a claim. A Complaint is not a claim and it should not be used by MPS to manoeuvre their way to settle a potential claim. A claim is only activated using preaction protocols and not via complaints by patients not represented by solicitors. Honest people do not need to use third party identity to scam people and avoid liability.

  27-04-2023
• 

  Grey Patch

  As a long-standing member they tried to charge me triple the quote I received from another organisation and then told me I was not allowed to leave the contract. Eventually I was allowed to leave the contract. The level of incompetence I had to deal with leaving the organisation and receiving a Letter of Good Standing with the correct date on it was mind-boggling... next time I will just hit my head against a brick wall instead- will be less painful.

  27-11-2022
• 

  nav s

  very poor service to doctors when you need their help - avoid.

  27-09-2022
• 

  jake collins

  I had insured myself for many years with this firm. When I had reason to ask about a vexatious fake claim about my clinical competence, they could not wriggle away fast enough. Then had the gall to ask me for ancient income earnings , when challenged,I declined as they made no effort to give any justification for this, and was not information I had.They then lied and tried to claim it was a requirement, that I had some personal medical indemnity. I suspect they are struggling financially and are just after trying to harrang more money out of people.

  27-09-2022
• 

  Ruhul Amin

  27-05-2022
• 

  Ro

  Really poor service that bombards you with emails under the wrong name. Clearly they aren't the most familiar with non-white names. I was kept on hold for ages when asked to close an account under the wrong spelling. When I asked why, they didn't even clarify why and kept me on hold for even longer. UPDATE: now told they cant discuss the membership eventhough its clearly under my name spelt incorrectly and when i questioned who else the membership would be under, they simply went "errr dont know"... absolutely tragic customer service and common sense. 2nd UPDATE: while on hold, i was disconnected by them. Honestly there are big issues

  27-05-2022
• 

  Laura Belchior

  Advisors helped me to get the best indemnity for my specific situation

  27-05-2021
• 

  Alethia Anderson

  I am an orthodontist with 7 years of dental surgery experience and 25 years experience in orthodontics. I recently had a patient make a claim against me, it was a complex case spanning 6 years with at least 3 practitioners being involved in the care given to the patient. The patient in question was referred to me: my treatment spanned 4 years. An expert report was sought by MPS which established that I was not negligent; it highlighted areas where other practitioners involved in the case had possibly failed the patient in question. Approximately 6 months after the obtaining the experts report, MPS asked the expert to expand his opinion on minor areas where I could possibly have improved on, referred to as my ‘vulnerabilities’. MPS then asked if I was happy to make an offer to settle part of the claim based on the ‘vulnerabilities’. Instead of settling the case based on the expert’s advice, MPS then went ‘opinion shopping’ and sought an additional opinion of a general dentist, not on any GDP specialist list, without any formal training or qualifications in orthodontics, who also qualified from the same hospital where the patient’s clinicians worked - and who was therefore conflicted. Relying on this new opinion MPS decided that I was in fact negligent in my treatment of the patient. There was no discussion with the expert or myself to ensure the offer reflected my actual liability on a worse case scenario. The level of the settlement offer meant I was made liable for the negligence of other practitioners involved in the case. When I voiced my objections MPS refused to answer my questions in writing regarding the liabilities of the other clinicians involved in the patient’s care and erroneously told me that they did not have a complaints procedure. When I insisted that my questions be answered, MPS organised a conference call with their barrister present. She clearly had not understood the expert’s report and could not counter any of my arguments. MPS have completely failed to represent my interests. The misinformation given to me after 32 years of membership, with no previous claims having been made against me, is beyond disappointing.

  27-05-2021
• 

  Alex B

  27-05-2020
• 

  Federico Campos

  Couldn't recommend more. I only needed them once but the service I received was outstanding: I was straight away allocated a personal medico-legal advisor who read 50 pages of documents in a day and got back to me with very constructive suggestions. When it was needed they got one of their lawyers to get in touch with me to discuss my case. Communication always smooth: if my medico-legal advisor wasn't available it was always possible to leave a message and she would call back in no time. Yes, unless you are a trainee it is expensive (though no more than other medical protection companies) but well worth the money.

  27-05-2020