• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Who Is Liable????????

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?FLORIDA

:confused: My old dentist sold his practice. I was the last patient he saw then he vanished for parts unknown. Less than a month after he split one of the crowns he did fell off and had to be redone. I disputed the charges on my credit card and they are awaiting a reponse. This crown was part of a series of treatments that lasted from April through June 2nd. Some of the charges on my card statements appear with my old dentist name but some of the last work he did the charges appear under the name of the new organization that took over his practice and claim they have no clue where he is or where he went. The impression I got from the new organization is they are cagey about this whole matter and do not feel responsible for this problem. My question is, when they bought my old dentist's practice did they also buy any liabilities such as mine that went along with it?. I spoke to the new dentist who took over and said they had an an agreement with my old dentist that should a problem arise where someone came back with defective dental work that they could contact him and he would either return and redo it himself or pay them to redo it. I spent weeks with him trying to get a hold of my old dentist and the new dentist says he has no clue how to contact my old one and he even had his old mail and does not know where to forward it.
 


janedoe23

Member
If the crown just fell off then you have no case. Crowns do fall off and you can almost bet it won't be the last time that your crown does fall off. If the procedure was not done accurately then you do have every right to persue the DR who did it to fix the problem. A new practice will not deny you, they will only deny you if you are not willing to pay them because of the screw up with another DR. You can't go to any new dentist and say that the last DR screwed up so now I need it fixed and I don't think I should pay you for your services.
 
30 Days

The Crown fell off after 30 days because according to the new Dentist said the tooth was not built up enough and a stronger post should have been placed. I paid the new Dentist. What I am seeking is either the old charges removed from my card the orignal bad crown. :eek: Yes crowns can break or fall off for a variety of reasons but not after 30 days !!.










janedoe23 said:
If the crown just fell off then you have no case. Crowns do fall off and you can almost bet it won't be the last time that your crown does fall off. If the procedure was not done accurately then you do have every right to persue the DR who did it to fix the problem. A new practice will not deny you, they will only deny you if you are not willing to pay them because of the screw up with another DR. You can't go to any new dentist and say that the last DR screwed up so now I need it fixed and I don't think I should pay you for your services.
 

janedoe23

Member
Clipper965 said:
Yes crowns can break or fall off for a variety of reasons but not after 30 days !!.
Since when do crowns have an obligation to fall off only after 30 days? Heck I have seen plenty come in the very next day to get the crown recemented because they chose to go and eat something they were advised to stay away from. So is that the DR's fault? No, but you can almost bet the DR will be getting a licking if he didn't recement it back in for FREE.

For your post to have to be rebuilt, yes it should be your old DR's problem to fix it but I don't think the new DR has any obligation to fix it for free. Since you got the work done and have filled a cc dispute, why not just wait to hear the results from the investigation and then go from there. I don't know how they did it in that office but the crown was in a 3 step process which the post was done in an appointment by itself and charged by itself. The post should be the only thing you have to dispute and nothing else that was charged. I hope you made that clear when filling a chargeback.
 
YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND>

janedoe23 said:
Since when do crowns have an obligation to fall off only after 30 days? Heck I have seen plenty come in the very next day to get the crown recemented because they chose to go and eat something they were advised to stay away from. So is that the DR's fault? No, but you can almost bet the DR will be getting a licking if he didn't recement it back in for FREE.


:rolleyes: The crown fell off because my orginal dentist did not build it up enough. This is the diagnosis of the new dentist who redid the tooth/crown







For your post to have to be rebuilt, yes it should be your old DR's problem to fix it but I don't think the new DR has any obligation to fix it for free.



Of course the new dentist is not responsible. I never said he was. The new dental organization that bought my old one's practice is another matter. I have bought and sold 8 businesses in my lifetime. When you buy a business you buy it's physical assets as well as GOODWILL or BADWILL that business has. My question on this thread was does this apply to medical/dental practices.





Since you got the work done and have filled a cc dispute, why not just wait to hear the results from the investigation and then go from there?.


That is what I am doing. I am trying to think ahead and see what my options are should this go to war.



I don't know how they did it in that office but the crown was in a 3 step process which the post was done in an appointment by itself and charged by itself.


My dentist sent me to another one to have the 4 posts. He did 4 teeth. A treatment that spanned many weeks.



The post should be the only thing you have to dispute and nothing else that was charged. I hope you made that clear when filling a chargeback.


According to my new dentist he had to remove the old post to redo and build up my tooth. Beyond that it was unbroken and such. I am not a dentist but the question is, if the post was orginally done by the specialist correctly but had to be destroyed to redo the tooth, was this the fault of the specialist?[/I]................. :( I am dizzy over this whole mess. From 1996-2000 I paid a dental clinic $38000 + to save all my teeth. At the time they swore with proper care they would last a lifetime. Within 2 years my upper mouth was falling apart. My old dentist had to pull thousands of dollars in crowns in addition to the teeth he did including the one that was not done right. :mad: My father once called dentists the Gypsies of the medical profession and I must concur.
 

barry1817

Senior Member
dental gypsies

Clipper965 said:
According to my new dentist he had to remove the old post to redo and build up my tooth. Beyond that it was unbroken and such. I am not a dentist but the question is, if the post was orginally done by the specialist correctly but had to be destroyed to redo the tooth, was this the fault of the specialist?[/I]................. :( I am dizzy over this whole mess. From 1996-2000 I paid a dental clinic $38000 + to save all my teeth. At the time they swore with proper care they would last a lifetime. Within 2 years my upper mouth was falling apart. My old dentist had to pull thousands of dollars in crowns in addition to the teeth he did including the one that was not done right. :mad: My father once called dentists the Gypsies of the medical profession and I must concur.



There are unethical practitioners in all fields.

What you seem to have indicated is that a dentist has stated that another dentist's work was not clinically acceptible. That makes the dentist treating you, treating with negligence which is unacceptable.

I find it very disturbing that the new dentist is giving the comment that the old dentist is going to either refund, or redo the treatment and then can't be found. Personally I would love to read what the purchase agreement might have said about this circumstance, but I doubt that you will ever get a copy.

As to having treatment done, and being told it would last, and didn't indicates that the dentist has a problem with practicing the profession in a manner that he would expect for somebody to treat him, or his family.

Makes it very interesting that when USA does an article about patients seeking care outside of the US, the dental community is up in arms about the risks of having treatment done outside the states, but seems to have little concern about poor quality done here by their colleagues.

If I can be any additional help, I have no problem with being contacted directly.

[email protected]
 
Thanks

Thanks Barry, I wish you could have helped me 3 years ago when my upper mouth was falling apart. If I recall you told me it was not worth pursuing for reasons I cannot recall. Hopefully this will all work out. I get so angry when things like this happen. It seems many dentist like to collect large fees for work but won't warranty it for any length of time. :( I wish I had followed my Father's advice in 1994 when I was told I would either have to cap all my teeth or lose them to fly to Buenos Aires Argentna to have them done. He was in business and travelled there twice a year. He had all his teeth fixed there along with my step mothers in a swank area of Buenos Aires for a fraction of what dentists wanted here and it was all first class work. Because the AIDS scare was in it's infancy I was scared so I paid what amounted to a new Corvette to have it here, placed on several credit cards. I struggled to keep up with the payments, :( :( then when the last recession hit the debt & interest finally broke me. I had to file chapter 7 Bankruptcy.
 

ellencee

Senior Member
Clipper965
According to your posts in July 2005, during 1996-1999 you had all of your teeth "root canal-ed and crowned". In this thread you mention spending $38,000 during 1996-2000 to save your teeth and that with proper care "they" should last a lifetime and after two years the upper teeth were "falling apart".

You do not have and did not have teeth/dental health that is within the scope of healthy/normal; therefore, you can not compare the expectations of treatment in healthy/normal dental health with your results. You must compare your treatment results with those of persons with the same dental status (in 1994).

Dentists can not change heridity. You inherited teeth that do not last a lifetime, regardless of the amount of time and money spent in efforts to save them.

Any claim of negligence/malpractice or any attempt to receive an award for damages will be defended by dental experts who will use your own dental health and family history to prove that your results are no different than the results of the majority of persons with the same "poor" dental health and "weak" dental structures.

It seems to me you have spent more than enough money trying to beat the odds in saving what tooth structure you have left. If your bone density is sufficient, perhaps you can find satisfaction with a few posts and "bridges"; if not, it is time to accept the inevitable and get dentures. Otherwise, you will continue to waste your money chasing after impossible results.

EC
 
Perhaps

All you have said may or not be true. But none of the dentist I have seen since 1994 ever considerd any of these "facts", they simply did costly dental work with out regard whether it was in the long term best interest of the patient (me) to do so. My 1994 Dentist was a retired dentist who was a friend of our family and he said at my age at the time (29) I would either lose all my teeth or have to have crowns before age 40. All the dentists I saw since him exhorted the wonders of crowns, how with proper care they would last a lifetime. It is only AFTER you have spent a fortune for treatment then problems arise is when you get the dentisty is not an exact science speech. :( At least it was in my case. FYI. my Cuban grandmother died at the age of 92 with all her original teeth. She told me as a child she was told to rinse her mouth with Baking Soda. She followed this regimen till she died. I recall the last dentist who saw her 6 months before she died was in shock she still had her teeth.

















ellencee said:
Clipper965
According to your posts in July 2005, during 1996-1999 you had all of your teeth "root canal-ed and crowned". In this thread you mention spending $38,000 during 1996-2000 to save your teeth and that with proper care "they" should last a lifetime and after two years the upper teeth were "falling apart".

You do not have and did not have teeth/dental health that is within the scope of healthy/normal; therefore, you can not compare the expectations of treatment in healthy/normal dental health with your results. You must compare your treatment results with those of persons with the same dental status (in 1994).

Dentists can not change heridity. You inherited teeth that do not last a lifetime, regardless of the amount of time and money spent in efforts to save them.

Any claim of negligence/malpractice or any attempt to receive an award for damages will be defended by dental experts who will use your own dental health and family history to prove that your results are no different than the results of the majority of persons with the same "poor" dental health and "weak" dental structures.

It seems to me you have spent more than enough money trying to beat the odds in saving what tooth structure you have left. If your bone density is sufficient, perhaps you can find satisfaction with a few posts and "bridges"; if not, it is time to accept the inevitable and get dentures. Otherwise, you will continue to waste your money chasing after impossible results.

EC
 

barry1817

Senior Member
dentist obligation

ellencee said:
Clipper965
According to your posts in July 2005, during 1996-1999 you had all of your teeth "root canal-ed and crowned". In this thread you mention spending $38,000 during 1996-2000 to save your teeth and that with proper care "they" should last a lifetime and after two years the upper teeth were "falling apart".

You do not have and did not have teeth/dental health that is within the scope of healthy/normal; therefore, you can not compare the expectations of treatment in healthy/normal dental health with your results. You must compare your treatment results with those of persons with the same dental status (in 1994).

Dentists can not change heridity. You inherited teeth that do not last a lifetime, regardless of the amount of time and money spent in efforts to save them.

Any claim of negligence/malpractice or any attempt to receive an award for damages will be defended by dental experts who will use your own dental health and family history to prove that your results are no different than the results of the majority of persons with the same "poor" dental health and "weak" dental structures.

It seems to me you have spent more than enough money trying to beat the odds in saving what tooth structure you have left. If your bone density is sufficient, perhaps you can find satisfaction with a few posts and "bridges"; if not, it is time to accept the inevitable and get dentures. Otherwise, you will continue to waste your money chasing after impossible results.

EC

If a dentist tells a patient that he can treat, and that following his treatment the patient's teeth will last a specified time, and the patient does all the necessary follow up care, this is in the realm of normal care. A dentist should make such assurances if he can't expect that to be the case, and if the dentist then does shoddy treatment, in this situation, knowing the problems it is even more negligent on his part.

[email protected]
 
I think though

They know they can get away with shoddy work because it won't be discovered until the statue of limitations for a malpractice suit has lapsed. Even if it has not, most attorneys will not look at a dental malpractice suit because after money is so small.
 

barry1817

Senior Member
getting away with it

Clipper965 said:
They know they can get away with shoddy work because it won't be discovered until the statue of limitations for a malpractice suit has lapsed. Even if it has not, most attorneys will not look at a dental malpractice suit because after money is so small.
Statute of limitation is usually started from time of incident or when one would have normally discovered the problem. In several cases thta I have worked on the statute of limitation didn't start until the problem was discovered, which was years after the treatment was done.

As to getting away with it because the damages are too little for lawyers, and small claims can't get enough that is a different problem to address.

But this problem will be addressed as more and more patient will opt to take vacations for their treatment and have the same if not better results, and get far more for their money.

[email protected]
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top