Smile Direct Club Leaves a Toxic Legacy
- Details
- Published: Tuesday, 12 December 2023 08:58
- Written by Peter Ingle
- Hits: 1828
Their website may be down, the ‘smile shops’ shuttered, and the barrage of marketing emails has finally stopped, but the SmileDirectClub (SDC) story may just be starting. None of this comes as a surprise to many in the profession. There had been repeated warnings, and concerns had been raised with the regulators. How then, affected members of the public may ask, did things get to this stage? In a post on GDPUK, BDA Chair Eddie Crouch sheds some light on how SDC were able to keep their flawed business going.
SDC have left the market not as a result of regulation, but only because of their complete financial failure. Patients abandoned part way through treatment and jobless employees are just the start of their legacy. At the time of year when dentist registrants must confirm their indemnity cover, SDC customers wishing to complain or seek compensation look set to find that they have nowhere to go.
Commenting on the GDPUK forum, Eddie Crouch revealed that some time ago a BBC Watchdog programme dealing with complaints about remote orthodontic providers had been made, but was never broadcast, following the involvement of SDC’s legal representatives.
When the BBC returned to the subject last year Eddie was interviewed on BBC rolling TV news. As a result the BDA received a letter from solicitors acting for SDC demanding retraction of some of his comments and that he then ‘correct’ the content of the interview. This type of legal threat, is often referred to as a SLAPP Factsheet: strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) and used by large organisations to shut down criticism. According to the GOV.UK website this is a recognised way to “undermine freedom of speech and the rule of law.” On this occasion the BDA and its legal team was able to rebuff the demands.
At a subsequent meeting requested by SDC, they set out to explain their business model. They said that they only acted as agents for the five clinicians who provided treatment in the UK. If this is the case those five registrants will have a duty of care to the SDC aligner customers, which remains even after the company’s closure.
Eagle eyed GDPUK readers have established the identity of one of these clinicians. They have not, as yet renewed their registration and appear to live in the USA. If this is correct, unless they cross the Atlantic and ‘hand themselves in’ to the GDC, they need not fear any comeback.
GDPUK has been on the receiving end of SDC’s approach to reputation management, when it published a story about the BBC feature. A letter from a PR company acting for SDC asserted that there were multiple errors and provided its own replacement text which it asked to have substituted in the story. The publisher made a small change that he considered reasonable and firmly declined the majority of their requests. Nothing more was heard from them. The same PR company, may now be one of SDC’s creditors, and left wondering if they will ever receive payment for their work.
SDC’s heavy handed legal approach was no secret. Questions will be asked regarding how much of the CQC and GDC’s remarkable lack of concern about their activities was as a result of this, and how much from a lack of understanding.
GDPUK will be providing a follow up commentary on this failure of regulation, normally extremely heavy handed from GDC and CQC, that has failed to protect patients, the public, from these charlatans of Smiles Made Here UK Ltd.
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report