<SNIP> in Galway - AVOID!!! (Dental)

permangulator

''Yes we would guarantee your bonding. I would normally offer a 5 year guarantee for this bonding and if they were chipped off for any reason we would replace them free of charge.
If you have any issues with the result please do be assured we will attend to them as best we can - again without further charge.''

This is the message I was sent from <SNIP> in Galway - a message which was clearly sent to keep a customer temporarily satisfied. I returned to <SNIP> Clinic 3 days ago after undergoing a dental bonding procedure in 2013 to fill in a gap between my two front teeth and to fix a few other underlying issues. This procedure cost a ridiculously steep 600euro (150 for EACH SIDE of a tooth!!). Unfortunately, since then fairly significant chips have begun to show on these teeth and I felt a need to get it attended to under my supposed '5 year guarantee'. I booked in for a consultation with <SNIP> expecting him to abide by this and to voluntarily step up and offer that he replace the bonding as he stated in the email which he sent to me. Instead, he talked about how he would recommend veneers for 1100euro, a stint because I grind my teeth for 1200euro and clearly stated that because I supposedly grind my teeth I’d have to get the bonding done every two years - costing me 600euro each time! Not once did he offer to ‘’replace them free of charge’’ as stated above. Instead he told me how it would be a nuisance and hard to do because he would have to take the previous bonding off to rebound the teeth - that isn’t my problem. All I wanted is to get them temporarily fixed up again before I can look at more long term solutions.

There is no way I would opted to get this done at the <Snip> Clinic if I had known that
I would be extremely unhappy with the results from day 1 (I had to move abroad so I couldn’t go back to tell them).
Absolutely NO aftercare advise would be given to me. In the door, got the procedure done and then paid my money - that was it. There was barely a shake of a hand!
I would be, in my opinion, lied to.

As aforementioned, I was and still am on a tight budget due to financial restrictions, so bonding is the perfect temporary solution for me before I can actually afford to pay for something more expensive and long-term such as veneers. To be given absolutely no choice with regard to getting it done again and to hear extreme contradictions about this supposed 5 year warranty has certainly solidified the fact that I will never return to the <SNIP> Clinic again, even if I was to be offered it for free now. It was, all in all, a very bad experience. I will now be looking elsewhere to get <SNIP> work redone.

I wanted to start this thread to see if anyone else has had experiences/bad experiences with them. My genuine advice is to avoid them at all costs. They need to be exposed!

dudara

Names removed and moved to Dental Issues

dudara

permangulator

Removing the name kind of defeats the purpose of my post though. Is that against the terms? Thanks.

Boskowski

Not having a go at boards and defny not at the moderators but thats the times man. Freedom of speech doesn't stretch as far as telling people about a local shoddy business apparently (not saying this one is). I wonder where it will stop. The power of civil lawsuits. I think the situation in Ireland is particularly bad. The legal profession here has everybody sh1ttin their pants if you're only so much as mouthing 'lawsuit'.

permangulator

But I don't understand how anybody could possibly be limited in what they say with regards to warning people about a shoddy business and potentially saving people from getting ripped off. There are hundreds of Review websites (Google also gives you the option to review businesses as they appear now) that allow people to openly slate/recommend a local business. How is boards any different, being an 'open forum for the people' and all?

Boskowski

I'm sure there is information here on this on stickys and FAQs. I don't know but observing whats happening here every day is that it doesn't matter how correct your statement is or not. Boards avoids named entities, primarily businesses, being portrayed negatively in any way at all costs and will SNIP everything. I think they got stung (libel lawsuit or such) at some stage, can't quite remember it, but may have been related to negative reports on some MCD event.

Those review websites you're referring to may be hosted in other jurisdictions. I'd say the likes of trip advisor wouldn't last a day if hosted in Ireland.

permangulator

I completely understand that. But surely they could/should alter their terms to include the fact that they are not liable for other people's opinions (Which they most certainly are not). After all, this is only a platform for people to express opinions, converse and connect with other people. There should be no reason that a person can't post their honest opinion and not have Boards held liable for their comments and whatnot. I think it's ridiculously flawed and suppressive!

kevinroche3333

Boskowski wrote: »

Boards avoids named entities, primarily businesses, being portrayed negatively in any way at all costs and will SNIP everything. I think they got stung (libel lawsuit or such) at some stage, can't quite remember it, but may have been related to negative reports on some MCD event.

Internet Defamation Cases in Ireland
The Defamation Act 2009 mainly focused on traditional media and largely ignored the online world. This means that for example, Internet providers can still be held liable for content they did not produce. This high risk of liability, means that website owners often take down content or quickly close off discussions because they fear being held responsible for the comments of their users. One such example of a defamation case in Ireland:

1) Boards.ie felt compelled to ban all discussion of MCD concerts because MCD took a liable action against them after negative comments about their Oxygen festival were posted on the Boards.ie website.

permangulator

Thanks for posting and for shining some light on the matter. Does that not mean, however, that review websites can somehow be held liable for extremely negative reviews then? I don't see how it differs.

Boskowski

Actually its not quite that clear. Only a few days some European court awarded some person damages over an online insult and the hoster (a forum like boards) not the person who threw the insult has to pay the damages cos they didn't remove the insult quickly enough. Its a very worrying trend alright when legally you can say anything you like but in reality you cannot cos someone can just throw an army of lawyers at you.

enfant terrible

kevinroche3333 wrote: »

Internet Defamation Cases in Ireland
The Defamation Act 2009 mainly focused on traditional media and largely ignored the online world. This means that for example, Internet providers can still be held liable for content they did not produce. This high risk of liability, means that website owners often take down content or quickly close off discussions because they fear being held responsible for the comments of their users. One such example of a defamation case in Ireland:

1) Boards.ie felt compelled to ban all discussion of MCD concerts because MCD took a liable action against them after negative comments about their Oxygen festival were posted on the Boards.ie website.

Thread will be closed soon so

Boskowski

permangulator wrote: »

Thanks for posting and for shining some light on the matter. Does that not mean, however, that review websites can somehow be held liable for extremely negative reviews then? I don't see how it differs.

It depends on the jurisdiction. I think Ireland is a particularly bad case in terms of civil law money power perverting the actual law. You can tell from my layman lingo I'm not exactly a legal expert, I'm merely politically interested and this is how I see it.

permangulator

Maybe we should overthrow the rulers here and start an open forum called Tables.ie

We'll just have to hire some good ass solicitors.

Big_G

Ok, guys, I think we'll wrap this up here. I understand that this thread was moved from another forum and so you may not have had an opportunity to read the rules, please do so. They are around the top of the Dental Issues thread listing in a sticky.

The purpose of this forum is not to bash people with whom you've had a professional relationship. If you've had a problem with a dentist, I suggest you contact the dentist and let it be known that you are not happy. Every dentist is recommended to have a complaints procedure in place. Its not helpful to anyone to come on here and lambast someone (even though it might help you blow off steam).

permangulator

The purpose of my post wasn't to 'bash' anyone. I wanted to warn people of a crowd of people that would more than likely rip them off. The ultimate goal was to ensure that nothing like that happened to others. It was also to see if people had any positive/negative experiences with this dentist or others. Anyway, I appreciate the fact that you have rules in place and I'll try to respect them a bit more in the future. Thanks.

davo10

"Adhesive " or "bonded" dentistry of the type you describe, as the name suggests, uses and adhesive or bonding agent to hold the filling on your tooth/teeth. Thus the filling has only chemical retention and no mechanical retention (the benefit of being held in place mechanically by the fact that it is in a cavity/hole which can be modified to provide undercuts which improve resistance to movement or fracture of the filling)

The benefit of this type of filling is that it is conservative of tooth structure (not necessary to drill any of tooth away) the downside is that without mechanical retention and because they have to be so thin (again because there has been no tooth reduction so if filling is thick it will be too bulky) they tend to be fragile and prone to debonding. I always advise people of the risks of fracture and under no circumstances would i provide a five year guarantee, I would however provide a five year guarantee on a filling placed in a cavity provided I hadn't advised the patient that a different course of treatment eg a crown or veneer was necessary rather that a filling.

Bruxism/grinding puts incredible loads/force on teeth, we regularly see patients who have cracked perfect, healthy teeth when grinding, never mind fragile thin bonded fillings.

I think perhaps this is a breakdown in communication, you should go back and talk to the dentist, one debonded filling does not deserve a rant like your OP particularly as you grind your teeth.

coylemj

permangulator wrote: »

The purpose of my post wasn't to 'bash' anyone. I wanted to warn people of a crowd of people that would more than likely rip them off.

And you can't see any difference between the two?

Why should you be allowed to pop up out of the woodwork, hide behind an anonymous internet userid and attempt to destroy someone's reputation with no fear of financial or other retribution?

permangulator

coylemj wrote: »

And you can't see any difference between the two?

Why should you be allowed to pop up out of the woodwork, hide behind an anonymous internet userid and attempt to destroy someone's reputation with no fear of financial or other retribution?

I have posted the exact same review publicly under my name on several review websites actually. I've no concern with anonymity. The clinic ripped me off, were extremely disrespectful towards me and I wanted to voice my opinion on the matter....as you just did with regards to my attempt to supposedly 'destroy' their reputation. Destroying their reputation is self-inflicted, unfortunately.

percy212

If a person cannot voice their opinion on the service they received in exchange for payment, then how are service providers to be held accountable. Why do hotels not sue reviewers on tripadvisor.com, or the website itself. It just doesn't make sense.

However two can play the solicitor game if that's how one must ensure service as promised in Ireland.

OP, the best thing you can do it seems is to take that email which guaranteed the work to a solicitor and have them get your monies worth for you.

That will work. Believe me.

coylemj

permangulator wrote: »

Destroying their reputation is self-inflicted, unfortunately.

Wishful thinking, why did you go to them them in the first place?

permangulator

coylemj wrote: »

Wishful thinking, why did you go to them them in the first place?

I went to them because they were apparently reliable and reputable according to some review websites. Since then, however, they have removed their account from the most reputable review websites so people can no longer leave them reviews....something which is obviously very sketchy.

If I had someone to have pre-warned me about the fact that they would over charge me, treat me like a fool when I went in there and then promise me a 5 year warranty, go back on their word as if this warranty never existed and then suggest charging me a couple of thousand euro for pointless procedures, I would never have gone there. I had no such person to advise me against it, hence my post above!

permangulator

davo10 wrote: »

"Adhesive " or "bonded" dentistry of the type you describe, as the name suggests, uses and adhesive or bonding agent to hold the filling on your tooth/teeth. Thus the filling has only chemical retention and no mechanical retention (the benefit of being held in place mechanically by the fact that it is in a cavity/hole which can be modified to provide undercuts which improve resistance to movement or fracture of the filling)

The benefit of this type of filling is that it is conservative of tooth structure (not necessary to drill any of tooth away) the downside is that without mechanical retention and because they have to be so thin (again because there has been no tooth reduction so if filling is thick it will be too bulky) they tend to be fragile and prone to debonding. I always advise people of the risks of fracture and under no circumstances would i provide a five year guarantee, I would however provide a five year guarantee on a filling placed in a cavity provided I hadn't advised the patient that a different course of treatment eg a crown or veneer was necessary rather that a filling.

Bruxism/grinding puts incredible loads/force on teeth, we regularly see patients who have cracked perfect, healthy teeth when grinding, never mind fragile thin bonded fillings.

I think perhaps this is a breakdown in communication, you should go back and talk to the dentist, one debonded filling does not deserve a rant like your OP particularly as you grind your teeth.

I went back to them 3 times. The first time I was extremely unhappy with the results from the first procedure. The dentist actually made it worse at this stage. I then attempted to book another appointment but they could not book me in before I moved abroad. One year after coming back (presently) I made another appointment. He looked at my teeth, said that they'd have to charge me 600 euro every time I wanted to get the teeth fixed up, started ****ting on about getting 'top class veneers' for 1100 each and then told me he'd book me in for 2 dental hygiene appointments. There is no breakdown in communication. He did a shoddy job of my teeth and I made that clear to him each time yet he described it as being a nuisance to fix it. The only solution, according to him, was to opt in for a procedure which will cost me a couple of thousand euro.

Big_G

permangulator wrote: »

The purpose of my post wasn't to 'bash' anyone. I wanted to warn people of a crowd of people that would more than likely rip them off. The ultimate goal was to ensure that nothing like that happened to others. It was also to see if people had any positive/negative experiences with this dentist or others. Anyway, I appreciate the fact that you have rules in place and I'll try to respect them a bit more in the future. Thanks.

Likelihood of being ripped off based on your one personal experience? Altruism is rarely the motive when somebody goes on to the internet shouting about how they were ripped off.
I still think you should sit down and write a letter to the dentist outlining your concerns and see what comes of it. If no joy, then you have other avenues available to you. The only satisfaction you will get here is maybe to get a few others harrumphing with you and you will still have the teeth in the same condition and you will be minus the fees you paid.
I don't think it at all sketchy to remove onesself from review websites as the potential for abuse is high. People (particularly in Ireland) will go out of their way to write a bad review when they've had a subjectively bad experience but will rarely go out of their way to compliment a good experience. Review websites are by their nature unbalanced because of this. As the saying goes if people have a good experience they might tell one person, if they have a bad experience they might tell 10 people. Where are the reputable review websites for dentists in Ireland? I'd like to know. I've yet to see one.
Just go on tripadvisor and have a look at some of the ridiculous reviews. The owners of businesses have a right of reply but cannot have ridiculous reviews removed. There are often 10 excellent reviews and one disgruntled customer who simply didn't get their way on some outlandish demand and decided to have an anonymous online rant. I am not suggesting that this is what you are doing here, but I am suggesting a reason why someone might not want their business smeared online.

permangulator

Big_G wrote: »

Likelihood of being ripped off based on your one personal experience? Altruism is rarely the motive when somebody goes on to the internet shouting about how they were ripped off.
I still think you should sit down and write a letter to the dentist outlining your concerns and see what comes of it. If no joy, then you have other avenues available to you. The only satisfaction you will get here is maybe to get a few others harrumphing with you and you will still have the teeth in the same condition and you will be minus the fees you paid.
I don't think it at all sketchy to remove onesself from review websites as the potential for abuse is high. People (particularly in Ireland) will go out of their way to write a bad review when they've had a subjectively bad experience but will rarely go out of their way to compliment a good experience. Review websites are by their nature unbalanced because of this. As the saying goes if people have a good experience they might tell one person, if they have a bad experience they might tell 10 people. Where are the reputable review websites for dentists in Ireland? I'd like to know. I've yet to see one.
Just go on tripadvisor and have a look at some of the ridiculous reviews. The owners of businesses have a right of reply but cannot have ridiculous reviews removed. There are often 10 excellent reviews and one disgruntled customer who simply didn't get their way on some outlandish demand and decided to have an anonymous online rant. I am not suggesting that this is what you are doing here, but I am suggesting a reason why someone might not want their business smeared online.

''I wanted to start this thread to see if anyone else has had experiences/bad experiences with them. My genuine advice is to avoid them at all costs.''....if you had read those sentences you would have understood the motive behind me posting this.

I've also explained, in a further post, that I have been back to the clinic 3 times and that each and every time I went back I was made a fool of.

Big_G

Ok. You were made a fool of and now you want a groundswell of support to ruin this practice's name. Does that sound altruistic to you? The pathway for resolution of complaints is:

1. Speak to the dentist.
2. Write to the dentist.
3. Contact the Dental Complaints Resolution Service.
4. Contact the Dental Council

If you skip a step, the next guys along the line are likely to advise you to go back a step.


Online smear campaigns get you absolutely nowhere, but they can cause significant damage to a practice's reputation.

percy212

Councils won't do anything and will take forever to respond. Get a LAWYER.

davo10

percy212 wrote: »

Councils won't do anything and will take forever to respond. Get a LAWYER.

And sue because a filling chipped after two years? Good luck with that.

permangulator

davo10 wrote: »

And sue because a filling chipped after two years? Good luck with that.

It's not the fact that they chipped, it's to do with the fact that the dentist broke my '5 year warranty' and stated that he was going to charge me 600 euro every time I needed work redone.

permangulator

Big_G wrote: »

Ok. You were made a fool of and now you want a groundswell of support to ruin this practice's name. Does that sound altruistic to you? The pathway for resolution of complaints is:

1. Speak to the dentist.
2. Write to the dentist.
3. Contact the Dental Complaints Resolution Service.
4. Contact the Dental Council

If you skip a step, the next guys along the line are likely to advise you to go back a step.


Online smear campaigns get you absolutely nowhere, but they can cause significant damage to a practice's reputation.

I agree, and that's obviously why this particular clinic decided to take themselves down as being listed on any dental clinic review website (They were on them before - before I ever wrote any review). There is obviously an abundance of people out there that wrote negative reviews.

The dentist has been spoken to several times, they have been written to...now I guess I'll have to go to some sort of council, as you said.

Big_G

permangulator wrote: »

I agree, and that's obviously why this particular clinic decided to take themselves down as being listed on any dental clinic review website (They were on them before - before I ever wrote any review). There is obviously an abundance of people out there that wrote negative reviews.

The dentist has been spoken to several times, they have been written to...now I guess I'll have to go to some sort of council, as you said.

I still think that effective communication might not have happened between you and this dentist. But I wasn't there.
It's a pretty huge leap to assume that somebody removed themselves from review websites because they got too many bad reviews. It's even a leap to assume that they removed themselves. I know that I wouldn't even put myself on one. I expect my patients to bring issues to me so that I may fix them, not give out about me on the internet. And I don't offer 5 year guarantees they are meaningless. There are always too many conditions attached to make them worthwhile for people. And mainly the reason I don't offer them is I have absolutely no control over what the patient does when they walk out the door of the surgery.
You are obviously angry and upset and feel that you've been hard done by. These are the things that need to be clearly communicated to the dentist. And then you can maybe work out a solution with the dentist, or with another dentist.

My suggestion is to seek a second opinion. If you really want to see what can be done about your teeth, that is.

brandnewaward

<SNIP>Try not to circumvent the rules about naming clinics please.