Dr. Scott Condie

Revdex.com Complaint ID #: [redacted] Marie,I will respond one last time to this issue dealing with [redacted] In terms of her initial claim, let me repeat my previous response .“This is in response to complaint ID# [redacted] involving [redacted] [redacted] was a patient that was diagnosed with Malocclusion previously by anther dentist and the recommended treatment made was for the fabrication of a Neuromuscular orthotic to help position the upper teeth to the lower teeth where the muscles are in a physiological rest position This diagnosis and treatment recommendations were confirmed by myself Both the previous treating dentist and I made the same treatment recommendations A balanced and relaxed rest position can be an effective treatment modality in the treatment of malocclusion and the myriad of symptoms that this can cause the patient This rest position is found using industry standard TENS unit that relaxes the muscles in the same way that physical therapist sometimes do on their patients as well as a Myomonitor Kcomputer that can measure the EMG’s (electric activity of a muscle) and allow a clinician to record a muscularly relaxed position where the orthotic can be fabricated to replicate this balanced and relaxed position As to the fee for treatment, the fee is something that is consistent with the skill, time and equipment required to provide this service I have multiple patients who have commented that my fee was not anywhere near what the results that they have received had in value in their livesThe patient agreed to this treatment and its subsequent fee and began treatment on 8/4/2015.On 9/15/the patient came for an adjustment of her orthotic and was not able to seat it which is a clear indication that the patient was not following her treatment directions of wearing the appliance hours a day Patients that are following directions are very comfortable placing and removing their orthotics and get to this point within a few days of initial delivery Compliance with directions and that the patient needed to wear her orthotic hours a day was stressed to the patient at this appointment.On 10/6/the patient came to the office for an adjustment She stated that she was doing “pretty well” The patient also stated that the orthotic felt “fine” Reconfirmed that the recommendation of orthotic wear is hours a day The patient had no other questions at this appointment.On 11/10/the patient came to the office for another adjustment appointment At this time, the patient reported that the only pain that she now had was due to her biting her cheek on the left side but that was the only pain that she was reporting The patient still had a very difficult time placing and removing her orthotic, which as stated before is a clear indication that the patient is not wearing it We advised the patient that her treatment required minutes of TENS therapy in addition to adjusting her orthotic but the patient refused this as she was too busy to follow our treatment recommendations Again stressed to the patient that her treatment success is dependent upon her compliance with treatment recommendations because if she does not follow the recommendations of treatment, she is compromising her care and result.At this point the patient did not return for any more additional treatment visits Compliance is a must for results with these cases and with all recommended treatment While it is true that additional medical factors can also play a role in the patient’s symptoms, arthritis as this patient states was diagnosed after her treatment was begun, the treatment will still provide relief of symptoms for the compliant patient[redacted] was not a compliant patient She did not follow recommended treatment guidelines and recommendations She is still welcome to continue to be seen for her treatment with the neuromuscular orthotic at our office However, unless she is willing to follow the directions of the treatment, she will not get the results she desires Compliance is a must for treatment that works As a provider of health care services, I cannot force a patient to follow the directions no matter how much I might want to do so The patient always has a choice whether or not to do this but as to the request to refund the patient her case fee, it is not something that I will do as I kept my part of the bargain with the patient and provided all services that I said that I would, for the fee that I said that I would provide them.” I provided the services that I said that I would at the fee that I said that I would I maintain that I will still work with the patient to adjust her orthotic as needed I again restate my belief that the patient was not compliant with the wearing of her orthotic hours a day as she was instructed to wear it After literally thousands of patients removing and placing dentures and orthotics, it is obvious very quickly who is wearing their appliance and who is not wearing them After a day or two or wear, placing and removing a denture or orthotic (they are extremely similar in this characteristic) becomes second nature and can be done rapidly [redacted] was not able to place or remove her orthotic without difficulty on 11/10/which indicates that she was not wearing it to me Compliance is not only in wearing the appliance though Compliance is in coming in to the office and allowing us to use TENS therapy for an hour and then having the orthotic adjusted [redacted] repeated told us that she was too “busy” to stay for tensing and that she did not have the time for the full needed TENS and adjustment I appreciate being busy with work and family obligations We deal with this all the time An orthotic timeframe for treatment is related to the length the symptoms have been present, the longer the symptoms have been present, the longer treatment time takes Two months with only visits is hardly enough time to get to the end of treatment with an orthotic If [redacted] had stated that treatment had to be successful in two months or she wouldn’t have done it, I would have respectfully declined treated her and her condition It is not near enough time, especially in a patient that does not wear the appliance as directed and come in for the needed TENs therapy and adjustments Let me remind [redacted] that this very point is made in the consent form which she signed prior to treatment where estimated treatment time is given to be “up to twelve (12) months.” As to her new claim about advertising, at no time does any advertising that Dr [redacted] or myself make claims about “cures” We state that we can help with neck and shoulder pain as it is sometimes related to a pathologic bite or occlusion We have helped many patients in this regard There are other inconsistencies with her statements in her response but the facts of this are very simple and it appears that she is just trying to find whatever reason so can come up with not to live up to her end of our agreement [redacted] was given a treatment plan for a neuromuscular orthotic This treatment had a fee that included follow up care She was free to accept this treatment or not It was entirely her choice She chose to accept care and accepted the fee for the treatment Now, after the fact, she wants money back The service she asked me to provide were provided as best as I could, given the limitations from the patient noncompliance The service was provided at the cost that I stated it would be provided at, exactly as it was promised it would be Any other statements or claims on her part are just trying to get past these simple facts Facts are not subjective Facts do no change The fact is that the patient agreed to a treatment and the treatment was provided until such a point as the patient discontinued treatment with her decision It really is very simple, with all the all other words, claims or whatever, these simple facts do not change and cannot change.Thank you,

To Who it May Concern, This response is in regards to ID# [redacted] I have included with this email the response that we sent directly to Mr*** I think it appropriate to note that the person in question, Alexander ***, is an adult of the age of Mr [redacted] is not the patient in question and consequently not the party that needs to be heard from in this matterRegardless, the facts of this are clear Ms [redacted] was offered an appointment to treat her dental emergency on January 18, She choose not to be seen until January 30, When she was seen, a full exam was completed with a diagnosis made that a tooth on the UL was in need of Root canal therapy She was also diagnosed need additional treatment But as to her tooth on the upper left, due to its root anatomy, it was not a tooth that would generally be treated by Dr [redacted] After the need of this tooth was recognized during the exam, phone calls were made to [redacted] , a root canal specialist center, to attempt to obtain an appointment immediately for this treatment for [redacted] Unfortunately, no appointments were available until the following Monday which was February 2nd, At this time, Dr [redacted] asked the patient if she would like to have the offending tooth anesthetized to help alleviate her discomfort She agreed and after Dr [redacted] performed this service, (this service was done free of charge), the patient thanked him and stated that she felt much better At this time, [redacted] was informed of her treatment needs which included several fillings as well as periodontal therapy to address her gum disease which shows a chronic infection in her gum tissues An opening was available in the hygienist’s schedule if she wanted to have the gum therapy completed She accepted the invitation for this after all applicable costs were explained to her and she agreed to these costs and signed the treatment estimate Due to the hygiene schedule, treatment would not be able to begin for about an hour Alexander was informed of this fact and choose to stay and wait until the gum therapy could be completedDuring the gum therapy, the tissues are numbed to help the cleaning be more comfortable Once this is done, an additional therapy which was previously discussed in terms of cost was started This laser therapy is in addition to the gum therapy cleaning and was also explained and agreed to by the patient as she signed the treatment plan with its associated explanation of costs PRIOR to her having any treatment At this time, [redacted] inflamed tooth became sore and she asked to stop the laser treatment as she wanted to go She was acknowledged and her wishes were honored immediately in terms of she wanted to stop and treatment was stopped At this point, the patient was advised to contact the root canal specialist office ASAP to schedule for her treatment of the tooth that needed the root canal as they would be expecting her call The patient was dismissed without anything out of the ordinarySeveral days later, Mr [redacted] began sending multiple faxes to our office He also began posting multiple reviews online His reviews were incorrect and libelous in nature His faxes to the office were personal and threatening in nature On Friday January 13th, 2015, his tone and message were elevated to the point that the [redacted] were called They looked at all the documents, treatment estimates etc that were signed by [redacted] as well as the plethora of faxes of a threating nature from Mr*** At this point, they contacted him and advised him that he was engaging in cyber bullying and that if he continued that our office could pursue charges He was also advised to remove all online posting as these postings did not represent facts and reality as well as the fact that he was not the actual patient to begin with At this point, several of the reviews have been removed onlineIt is unfortunate that [redacted] had a toothache It is unfortunate that she chose to ignore this toothache for over a week before seeking treatment It is unfortunate that she had some discomfort arise prior to finishing her treatment that she agreed to and even waited for However, at no time and in no way was [redacted] treated poorly At no time did she not receive standard of care treatment for her gum disease issues All efforts went into helping her from numbing her tooth to help her feel better, to honoring her complimentary exam and x-ray coupon ( $value) that clearly stated on the coupon was only for new patients and she was not a new patient as she had been to the office multiple times previously The patient was diagnosed with multiple items that needed treatment She was given a treatment plan and estimate and signed this document The patient is an adult and was given all opportunities to ask and had all of her questions answered The only treatment that was accepted for by the patient for completion this day was the therapy for the gum treatment, no other treatment was scheduled All efforts were made to help the patient out with whatever costs we could as an office It should be noted that the patient had ZERO out of pocket expense All treatment was billed to her insurance which is the policy for her insurance plan Treatment was rendered at the request of the patient and only treatment that was completely completed was billed to her insurance It is our belief that by filing this complaint with the Revdex.com that Mr [redacted] is continuing on with his campaign of bullying an honest business that went above and beyond to help and keep costs as low as possible for his daughter The desired settlement is not a reasonable request Libel and slanderous claims of an individual are unfortunately the price of doing business Dr [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Well this response from Dr.*** was even better than expected as it contains flat out liesLies that will be used against him when he must present himself to the *** *** ** *** in the very near futureI will respond to what the good doctor has writtenFirst of all, yes *** is of legal ageHowever, it is the health trust fund of the company that I work for that Dr.*** is charging and in fact defraudingFurthermore, during the entire process of allowing the periodontal cleaning, the office manager *** had not only talked to *** but also myselfShe was trying to convince us to have the cleaning performed that day That in my view makes me a party to this The appointment was not made until January 26thShe was not offered an appointment on January 18th since it would be another eight days before I even called and made the appointment in the first placeDr.*** states that the laser therapy was agreed upon by *** and that is not a true statementThe only treatment agreed upon or even discussed to be performed that day was the periodontal cleaningAccording to the paper work we have received, the laser therapy was another $*** supposedly was going to keep the cost for that days visit at $because *** only had $to work with for the cleaning AND the root canal (which was performed on 2-2-at another dentist office)*** mentioned to both of us multiple times that between the periodontal cleaning and the root canal *** would be at her $This did not allow for a laser therapy at an additional cost of $ It is true that *** did sign a consent form, however this form has a total of $Let me be clear here and assure you that *** was not going to allow $worth of work done on her that dayEspecially not after *** knew full well the budget we had to stay within ( and she reiterated on several occasions) Very suspect that *** NEVER mentioned the total cost of $to *** or myselfDr.*** is himself confused in his replyHe states the laser therapy was in addition to the gum therapy ( I assume he means the periodontal cleaning)He states that it was stopped by ***This is not trueThe hygienist had just completed the periodontal cleaning and told *** she was about to begin the laser therapyThis is when *** had enough and leftDr.*** also states that ***'s inflamed tooth became soreShould'nt he have known her already inflamed tooth was going to sore? The shot he gave her was not going to last foreverThe cleaning which Dr.*** and his staff said was needed that day caused her even more painThat is exactly what this entire issues has been aboutDr.*** suggested a treatment that he KNOWS was going to cause her more painDr.*** also states that they honored the complimentary exam and x-raysYet he charged for both in the claim he sent to the insurance companyFurther, we did not know when I made the appointment that *** had been to this dentist office beforeIn fact Dr.*** has taken over the practice from Dr.***, who we stopped using as our regular dentist because of the shady business practices he and his staff engaged inI did not know it was the same office until a day or two later when *** called with some follow up questionsNow regarding the ***Let me be extremely clear hereThis is the first time I have heard that Dr.*** and his staff called the *** ***It is also not true that the *** have talked to me regarding this incidentThey have never left notes on my door or messages on my phoneMy next call today is to the *** *** Department to confirm they were never called to Dr.***'s office and that I was never contacted by the *** I received a letter from Dr.***'s office stating they felt threatened by meThey also suggested I remove any internet complaints I may have postedOf course they threatened with legal action to libel and slander Since I filed my first complaint Dr.*** has submitted another claim to my insurance carrier for the same work he already submitted a claim forIn this second claim ($900) he did not charge for the exam or x-rays but did charge for the periodontal cleaning AGAINIn closing, in our first letter we gave Dr.*** the chance to avoid what is now happening to him nowWe contended the services only put *** in more pain and should never have been performed or suggested to be performed that dayWe asked him not to file his claim with the insurance carrierWe made it clear we would exhaust every single avenue at our disposal to make sure he did not get paid for the unnecessary procedure he allowed to be performed on herOur complaint with the Revdex.com was one of thoseIt is clear the good doctor is not going to retract his claim and at this point we hope he does not file a third claim for the same jobWe have all documents to verify what we are statingThis reply by Dr.*** to the Revdex.com will be sent in addition to the pile sent to the *** *** ** *** to help prove our claimsWe thank the Revdex.com for their time on helping to resolve this dispute
Regards,
*** *** ll

Hi Marie,Dr*** is being totally dishonest in many ways: In I had responded to an advertisement regarding neck pain that Dr*** said could be successfully addressed I made an appointment for a free consultationAfter Dr*** explained the orthotic, I decided not to opt for this treatmentA year later my pain had increasedI heard another dentist advertise regarding a cure for neck pain and made an appointmentWhen I arrived at the address, I realized it was the same office of Dr*** On my arrival I let them know that I was confused and thought this was another doctor They informed me that Dr*** had purchased the business from Dr*** but that he was willing to see me if I wanted to go through with this procedure I was in great pain and was assured by this office that this was the solution for me The response below seems to imply that Dr*** and Dr*** both arrived at the same diagnosis after xrays/testing Actually Dr*** provided a free consultation telling me I was a good candidate Dr*** followed up with tests that he claims confirmed this I have not seen the results of these tests and had no reason to doubt them until later When I started asking questions, I was perceived as problematicI was given an appointment for 9/at which time I reported it was difficult to seat and remove the orthodic The dental assistant indicated it should be easier and not harder to do thisWhen I removed it they were able to see how I had to forcefully pry it out of my mouth They adjusted it a couple of times and it was still difficult to put in and take outThe response below indicates that this problem was a clear indication that I was not wearing it for hours daily This is not true I was the one motivated by extreme pain to do everything in my power to get reliefThere is no logical reason that I would pay $to get relief and then not follow directions I can prove that I wore the orthotic hours, removing it only to eat and brush teethNot sure why they assumed I was not wearing the orthoticDid it not occur to them that maybe something was wrong with the appliance? I am years old, responsible and follow directions very carefully especially when it has to do with my healthI have been retired from work since 2/27/ Before this and during the entire time I was treated, I was employed and all my peers including my director can vouch that I wore the orthotic while at work ( to hours daily) I conducted various meetings and I had to explain that my sudden lisp was due to the applianceMy family can vouch and sign a notarized statement that I wore the orthotic the remainder of the timeOctober appointment: A standard greeting when anyone asks, how are you doing is "good, thank you" or something similarWhich would have been my response to the assistant My return to the office in October was for another adjustment so I am not sure where they got the idea that I said the orthotic felt "fine" The orthotic was now causing my back teeth to hurtIt was still difficult to insert the orthotic in my mouth and remove to cleanNot sure if that is why my back teeth were starting to hurtThere were more adjustments to the orthoticEven after this adjustment, when I put it back on, they were able to see and hear it was not a good fitIt was at this point that I began to suspect that something was terribly wrongNovember appointment: I made another appointment to adjust the applianceIn addition to my back teeth hurting, the appliance was catching my check causing me to bite it especially when I was sleeping at nightAnother adjustment was made to the applianceAt this time I was told that I required a minute TANS treatment I had already completed a couple of TANS treatments with no benefitsI had to take time off of work to schedule these appointments so an additional unplanned minutes was not possibleIt was becoming more clear to me that now the TANS treatments would be used for the appliance not fitting and no relief There were no more excuses for "adjusting" the applianceThe accusation that is being repeated in the below response is the I was a non-compliant patientThat is only an accusation with no meritDr*** is only assumming this I am prepared to obtain notarized proof of my compliance in wearing the appliance hours every dayI am also prepared to provide proof from two separate doctors that I was misdiagnosed I need to take responsibility for being naive and not doing more research for my condition My opinion is that Dr*** should also take responsibility in the realization that sometimes he may be wrong tooI am not willing to return to Dr*** for any more adjustments/treatmentsI do think it is fair to pay a reasonable amount for his invested time/costs and for him to reimburse the remainder to me.Thank you, *** ***

BB Complaint ID#: [redacted]April14,2015To Whom It May Concern:This letter is in regards to the letter from the patient [redacted] was notified that she had received a gift certificate through a drawing at a local expo. The drawing was held in Oct I Nov of 2014. The patient was...

contacted and her certificate was mailed out to her. When she scheduled, she was informed that the certificate could be used for a Comprehensive exam, a complete set of intra-oral radiographs as well as a panoramic x-ray. Any unused portion after the exam and various x-rays could be applied to any treatment needs that she had as a patient once she had been examined and a diagnosis made of any conditions requiring treatment. The patient elected to be seen on March 6th 2015 and at that time she chose to have the exam and all x­-rays. The cost of this was explained to her that these items totaled cost $320. She agreed and proceeded to have an examination.  At this time it was determined the comprehensive examination that the patient had many dental treatment needs and the cost to address these needs was given to the patient. The patient left satisfied with the exam and x-rays but did not schedule to do any treatment at that time as she told us that she needed to discuss funding treatment with her family. The patient did ask for a filling to be done on a top front tooth but Dr.Condie explained to the patient that this was not a tooth that could be restored with a simple filling, but due to the breakdown and amount of fracture and decay that it would need to be extracted unfortunately. As this was a top front tooth, the patient was disappointed and pursued requesting a filling. Dr. Condie advised the patient that he was sorry but he was unable to fill this broken tooth with a "simple filling".  The time of day had absolutely nothing to do with not being able to do this filling, rather the fact that decay that had been left unaddressed for some time had played the main role in this tooth breaking in the first place and subsequently,standard or care treatment did not allow for a simple filling to fix this broken tooth.As to the patient finding a dentist that is closer to her home,that is great and I commend her for making the commitment  to following up in improving her dental health. However, as to the patient's claim that the x-rays are her property, this is false and not true.  X-rays taken are the property of Scott Condie Dentistry and retained on the same theory as the patient's medical history record. Under legal  test ,the court ruled: "the x-ray becomes the veritable foundation stone of the doctor's diagnosis and report and it is essential that he retain it as a permanent record in support of diagnosis, for should it be destroyed by unskilled handling of loss, the doctor would have no means to justify the correctness of his diagnosis or findings in the event of challenge to his professional opinions."  Paraphrased from "Law of the Hospital, Etc.,Hayt and Goreschell"The Arizona Dental Board (ARS 32-1264} stipulates that the dentist has every right to charge for duplication and transfer of the patient's dental record. The patient made written request of her desire to have copies of her records,but when informed what the normal fee to transfer her record was $160 at that time she became angry. The cost to duplicate and transfer the record is significantly LESS than to have them taken again.Unfortunately, the patient had wants and desires something for nothing which is contradictory to office policy that is based on the STATE OF ARIZONA DENTAL STATUTE. We are more than willing to transfer the copies of the dental record once the patient covers the fee for this service but the fee will stand as it fair and as set forth as acceptable by the AZ state dental statute and upheld by the Arizona Dental Board.  Thank you, Dr. Scott Condie

This is in response from the wife of a patient [redacted], [redacted]. She states several statements that are not accurate. First and foremost, her husband had considerable dental treatment performed by Dr.[redacted], the dentist that formerly owned this practice. When I met her husband, I was not Dr....

[redacted]'s assistant nor was I introduced to or referenced as such. Dr. [redacted] is a general dentist, as am I and I was never his assistant. Secondly, when Dr. [redacted] completed considerable work on [redacted], his insurance was [redacted]. Dr. [redacted] was not a contracted dentist with [redacted] nor am I. As of the end of November of 2013, Dr. [redacted]'s association with [redacted] Dental ended. I am not a contract provider for either [redacted] Dental Insurance nor have I ever been at this location. Prior to [redacted] having dental treatment done on July 21, 2014, he was giving a treatment plan for the dental treatment with treatment fees explained for this dental treatment when the treatment was diagnosed on July 10, 2014. As far as to [redacted] purchasing [redacted] Dental Insurance based on some belief that I was a [redacted] Dental provider, I have no idea where she gets this idea. I have never been listed as a provider in any [redacted] Dental provider reference in any form for this location. And as of the end of November 2013 / December 2013 Dr. [redacted] was removed from their provider lists by [redacted], so any search based on his information would have also revealed that he was no longer a provider for [redacted] either. I have no idea why she purchased [redacted] Dental Insurance to cover dental treatment based on her assumption that I was a [redacted] Provider. Had she done a simple search for [redacted] Dental Providers or asked myself or anyone at my office she clearly would be have been told that we can work and do work with [redacted] Dental but we are not contracted with [redacted] Dental. She claims to have spoken to Dr. [redacted] about insurance. Dr. [redacted] was not contracted with [redacted] Dental since end of November / first of December 2013. Dr. [redacted] knew that I was not a [redacted] provider as did all of the office staff and would not have said otherwise even if he was asked. In fact when I purchased the practice in October of 2013, Dr. [redacted] SPECIFICALLY recommended that I NOT become a [redacted] Dental PPO provider. Given this as well as the fact that he has not been in the practice since mid-December 2013, it is hard to imagine a scenario where he would state anything to the contrary about [redacted] Dental and myself to a patient. The patient claims that she talked to the company on specific dates, but no record has been found within our practice management software where all communications with patients and insurance is located. I have talked with all of my employees and no one has any knowledge of discussing anything with [redacted]. It is interesting that the in all the dates that she claims to have talked to the someone at our office but one, they pre-date the treatment that [redacted] had that she is disputing the fee for. If she had such a problem with us or our treatment plan and our fee structure, why didn't she communicated these things after the new treatment was diagnosed on July 10,2014 and prior to it being started on July 21,2014? As to her claim of false advertising, I have not EVER presented myself as a [redacted] Dental Provider in any such or form in ANY marketing pieces that I have done or will do. The reason, I am not a [redacted] Dental Provider, period, end of discussion. I truly feel sorry for [redacted] as I think that she made a purchase based on some assumption that she was given at work by her HR department because if she would have just asked myself or a member of my team or better yet [redacted] DENTAL in any of their various publications and web listings as to who was a provider and who was not, she would have discovered that I was not a [redacted] Dental Provider. I think that her anger at me is misplaced as embarrassment for not doing this simple check before she purchased the insurance. I find the timing of her complaint interesting at best. As my business continually looks at our accounts receivable report to get paid by the patients that owe us money, we came across the account of [redacted]. We have sent statements and have contacted her to make arrangements for her to take care of her bill. She got irate and sent a $5.00 check stating it was going to take her some time to pay her balance. When we indicated that she was responsible for her bill and that failure to pay this bill could have other consequences, all of a sudden a complaint to the Revdex.com is filed. I am sorry that she purchased dental insurance that did not give her the dental coverage that she hoped for, I truly am. I wish that she understood that dental insurance is best described as a coupon that helps to cover some of the cost of dental treatment rather than the entire amount. I wish that her husband was not in need of the dental treatment he needed but he was in need. All these wishes still don't change the facts. I gave this patient a treatment plan, the patient made the choice to have these services performed. I performed the treatment for the agreed upon fee. The treatment was completed but I am still without and waiting for payment for my services. Perhaps I should be the one filing the complaint for the customer not paying for services as they received. I would much rather to spend my time treating patients than writing replies to things such as this. Here are the facts ...... Dental treatment was diagnosed to address pathology present in [redacted]'s teeth. A treatment plan with a fee for the services to be rendered was given to the patient prior to the treatment being started or completed. The treatment was accepted and then the treatment was completed. Only after [redacted] and [redacted] are approached to pay their bill and meet their responsibilities is a complaint filed with the Revdex.com. This is a simple matter and frustrating that it turns to this in my mind. It is a sad state of commentary when all kinds a reasons and excuses are attempted to cloud this simple issue with these simple facts that are not in dispute.

To whom it may concern, This is in response to complaint ID# [redacted] involving [redacted].  [redacted] was a patient that was diagnosed with Malocclusion previously by anther dentist and the recommended treatment made was for the fabrication of a Neuromuscular orthotic to help position the...

upper teeth to the lower teeth where the muscles are in a physiological rest position.  This diagnosis and treatment recommendations were confirmed by myself.  Both the previous treating dentist and I made the same treatment recommendations.  A balanced and relaxed rest position can be an effective treatment modality in the treatment of malocclusion and the myriad of symptoms that this can cause the patient.   This rest position is found using industry standard TENS unit that relaxes the muscles in the same way that physical therapist sometimes do on their patients as well as a Myomonitor K7 computer that can measure the EMG’s (electric activity of a muscle) and allow a clinician to record a muscularly relaxed position where the orthotic can be fabricated to replicate this balanced and relaxed position.  As to the fee for treatment, the fee is something that is consistent with the skill, time and equipment required to provide this service.  I have multiple patients who have commented that my fee was not anywhere near what the results that they have received had in value in their lives. The patient agreed to this treatment and its subsequent fee and began treatment on 8/4/2014. On 9/15/2014 the patient came for an adjustment of her orthotic and was not able to seat it which is a clear indication that the patient was not following her treatment directions of wearing the appliance 23 hours a day.  Patients that are following directions are very comfortable placing and removing their orthotics and get to this point within a few days of initial delivery.  Compliance with directions and that the patient needed to wear her orthotic 23 hours a day was stressed to the patient at this appointment. On 10/6/2014 the patient came to the office for an adjustment.  She stated that she was doing “pretty well”.  The patient also stated that the orthotic felt “fine”.  Reconfirmed that the recommendation of orthotic wear is 23 hours a day.  The patient had no other questions at this appointment. On 11/10/2014 the patient came to the office for another adjustment appointment.  At this time, the patient reported that the only pain that she now had was due to her biting her cheek on the left side but that was the only pain that she was reporting.  The patient still had a very difficult time placing and removing her orthotic, which as stated before is a clear indication that the patient is not wearing it.  We advised the patient that her treatment required 45 minutes of TENS therapy in addition to adjusting her orthotic but the patient refused this as she was too busy to follow our treatment recommendations.  Again stressed to the patient that her treatment success is dependent upon her compliance with treatment recommendations because if she does not follow the recommendations of treatment, she is compromising her care and result. At this point the patient did not return for any more additional treatment visits.  Compliance is a must for results with these cases and with all recommended treatment.  While it is true that additional medical factors can also play a role in the patient’s symptoms, arthritis as this patient states was diagnosed after her treatment was begun, the treatment will still provide relief of symptoms for the compliant patient. [redacted] was NOT a compliant patient.  She did not follow recommended treatment guidelines and recommendations.  She is still welcome to continue to be seen for her treatment with the neuromuscular orthotic at our office.  However, unless she is willing to follow the directions of the treatment, she will not get the results she desires.  Compliance is a must for treatment that works.  As a provider of health care services, I cannot force a patient to follow the directions no matter how much I might want to do so.  The patient always has a choice whether or not to do this but as to the request to refund the patient her case fee, it is not something that I will do as I kept my part of the bargain with the patient and provided all services that I said that I would, for the fee that I said that I would provide them. I am willing to continue to work with [redacted] to help her with her treatment but I simply cannot provide a refund for a non-compliant patient that has had second thoughts after spending the money after I provided everything that I said that I would for her as a patient. Thank you, Dr. [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Re: Complaint ID #[redacted]Dear Sirs: Just one last word on my complaint, in response to Dr. Condie's erroneous response: When I “Won”   the gift certificate I had to request it be mailed FOUR TIMES before I finally received it.  On the certificate it said x-rays and a consultation  had to be conducted  first. No mention that they  would cost $320 of the $500 gift  certificate. I told the doctor's assistant there was no way we could afford $14,000 for dental work - I'll be dead before it's paid for!! The simple filling was NOT the baby tooth which needed to be reconstructed from the back - it was on the  OTHER side of my two front teeth. As to my letter- the  “Wonderful staff” applied to the  dentist's assistants and that was all- I didn't clarify  that. Thank you for looking into this matter for me. Sincerely, [redacted]

To Who it May Concern, This response is in regards to ID# [redacted].  I have included with this email the response that we sent directly to Mr. [redacted].  I think it appropriate to note that the person in question, Alexander [redacted], is an adult of the age of 22.  Mr. [redacted] is not the...

patient in question and consequently not the party that needs to be heard from in this matter. Regardless, the facts of this are clear.  Ms. [redacted] was offered an appointment to treat her dental emergency on January 18, 2015.  She choose not to be seen until January 30, 2015.  When she was seen, a full exam was completed with a diagnosis made that a tooth on the UL was in need of Root canal therapy.  She was also diagnosed need additional treatment.  But as to her tooth on the upper left, due to its root anatomy, it was not a tooth that would generally be treated by Dr. [redacted].  After the need of this tooth was recognized during the exam, phone calls were made to [redacted], a root canal specialist center, to attempt to obtain an appointment immediately for this treatment for [redacted].  Unfortunately, no appointments were available until the following Monday which was February 2nd, 2015.  At this time, Dr [redacted] asked the patient if she would like to have the offending tooth anesthetized to help alleviate her discomfort.  She agreed and after Dr. [redacted] performed this service, (this service was done free of charge), the patient thanked him and stated that she felt much better.  At this time, [redacted] was informed of her treatment needs which included several fillings as well as periodontal therapy to address her gum disease which shows a chronic infection in her gum tissues.  An opening was available in the hygienist’s schedule if she wanted to have the gum therapy completed.  She accepted the invitation for this after all applicable costs were explained to her and she agreed to these costs and signed the treatment estimate.  Due to the hygiene schedule, treatment would not be able to begin for about an hour.  Alexander was informed of this fact and choose to stay and wait until the gum therapy could be completed. During the gum therapy, the tissues are numbed to help the cleaning be more comfortable.  Once this is done, an additional therapy which was previously discussed in terms of cost was started.  This laser therapy is in addition to the gum therapy cleaning and was also explained and agreed to by the patient as she signed the treatment plan with its associated explanation of costs PRIOR to her having any treatment.  At this time, [redacted] inflamed tooth became sore and she asked to stop the laser treatment as she wanted to go.  She was acknowledged and her wishes were honored immediately in terms of she wanted to stop and treatment was stopped.  At this point, the patient was advised to contact the root canal specialist office ASAP to schedule for her treatment of the tooth that needed the root canal as they would be expecting her call.  The patient was dismissed without anything out of the ordinary. Several days later, Mr. [redacted] began sending multiple faxes to our office.  He also began posting multiple reviews online.  His reviews were incorrect and libelous in nature.  His faxes to the office were personal and threatening in nature.  On Friday January 13th, 2015, his tone and message were elevated to the point that the [redacted] were called.  They looked at all the documents, treatment estimates etc that were signed by [redacted] as well as the plethora of faxes of a threating nature from Mr. [redacted].  At this point, they contacted him and advised him that he was engaging in cyber bullying and that if he continued that our office could pursue charges.  He was also advised to remove all online posting as these postings did not represent facts and reality as well as the fact that he was not the actual patient to begin with.  At this point, several of the reviews have been removed online. It is unfortunate that [redacted] had a toothache.  It is unfortunate that she chose to ignore this toothache for over a week before seeking treatment.  It is unfortunate that she had some discomfort arise prior to finishing her treatment that she agreed to and even waited for.   However, at no time and in no way was [redacted] treated poorly.  At no time did she not receive standard of care treatment for her gum disease issues.  All efforts went into helping her from numbing her tooth to help her feel better, to honoring her complimentary exam and x-ray coupon ( $320 value) that clearly stated on the coupon was only for new patients and she was not a new patient as she had been to the office multiple times previously.  The patient was diagnosed with multiple items that needed treatment.  She was given a treatment plan and estimate and signed this document.  The patient is an adult and was given all opportunities to ask and had all of her questions answered.  The only treatment that was accepted for by the patient for completion this day was the therapy for the gum treatment,  no other treatment was scheduled.  All efforts were made to help the patient out with whatever costs we could as an office.  It should be noted that the patient had ZERO out of pocket expense.  All treatment was billed to her insurance which is the policy for her insurance plan.  Treatment was rendered at the request of the patient and only treatment that was completely completed was billed to her insurance.  It is our belief that by filing this complaint with the Revdex.com that Mr. [redacted] is continuing on with his campaign of bullying an honest business that went above and beyond to help and keep costs as low as possible for his daughter.  The desired settlement is not a reasonable request.  Libel and slanderous claims of an individual are unfortunately the price of doing business.  Dr. [redacted]

Revdex.com Complaint ID#[redacted]To Whom It May Concern,This is a second response to Ms. [redacted]. It is unfortunate that the condition of her mouth requires the extensive dental treatment that it does.  It is unfortunate that the cost to fix the severe problems of dental caries and periodontal disease present with Ms. [redacted] is extensive. Diagnosis was made of these treatment needs and the cost to fix these needs was also made and presented to the patient.  Ms. [redacted] stated she wanted a filling different than the one she asked about during her visit.  I have checked my notes and cannot find any other reference from our examination that indicated she wanted any other tooth filled that day.  I am not sure what to make of her description of the tooth on the other side of her front teeth.  It doesn’t correspond to any other teeth and treatment that I am aware of at this time. Ultimately, the patient has elected to have her treatment completed elsewhere for whatever reason.  That is her choice and we strongly support her decision to receive the care she wants at a price that she agrees too.  This is where this matter should end. With these things said, this does not change anything about the situation and the initial reason that the Revdex.com was involved in this situation.  The Revdex.com was contacted as Ms.[redacted] wanted to get copies of her x-rays. I refer the Revdex.com back to my initial response as it states all that is needed and necessary to understand the frivolous nature of Ms. [redacted]’s request and ultimately this complaint. This is a well-established principle set forth in the Arizona DentalPractice Act and upheld by the Arizona Board of Dental Examiners.  Practices are allowed and morally justified to charge to make copies of x-rays.  Thisis a fact and it is not in question.  Any other statements in this matter are not needed. All the extra misstatements,charges and emotional pleas made would require one to ignore the state law of Arizona(Arizona Dental Practice Act) and that this law as it has been upheld over and overby the Arizona Dental Board.   I wish Ms. [redacted] well in her future endeavors and hope that she finds a dentist that is willing to work with her treating her myriad of dental conditions. Sincerely, Dr. Scott Condie  P.S.  I have inserted my initial response the complaint from Ms. [redacted] for your records

Revdex.com Complaint ID #: [redacted]Marie,I will respond one last time to this issue dealing with [redacted].  In terms of her initial claim, let me repeat my previous response….“This is in response to complaint ID# [redacted] involving [redacted].  [redacted] was a patient that was diagnosed with Malocclusion previously by anther dentist and the recommended treatment made was for the fabrication of a Neuromuscular orthotic to help position the upper teeth to the lower teeth where the muscles are in a physiological rest position.  This diagnosis and treatment recommendations were confirmed by myself.  Both the previous treating dentist and I made the same treatment recommendations.  A balanced and relaxed rest position can be an effective treatment modality in the treatment of malocclusion and the myriad of symptoms that this can cause the patient.   This rest position is found using industry standard TENS unit that relaxes the muscles in the same way that physical therapist sometimes do on their patients as well as a Myomonitor K7 computer that can measure the EMG’s (electric activity of a muscle) and allow a clinician to record a muscularly relaxed position where the orthotic can be fabricated to replicate this balanced and relaxed position.  As to the fee for treatment, the fee is something that is consistent with the skill, time and equipment required to provide this service.  I have multiple patients who have commented that my fee was not anywhere near what the results that they have received had in value in their lives. The patient agreed to this treatment and its subsequent fee and began treatment on 8/4/2015.On 9/15/2014 the patient came for an adjustment of her orthotic and was not able to seat it which is a clear indication that the patient was not following her treatment directions of wearing the appliance 23 hours a day.  Patients that are following directions are very comfortable placing and removing their orthotics and get to this point within a few days of initial delivery.  Compliance with directions and that the patient needed to wear her orthotic 23 hours a day was stressed to the patient at this appointment.On 10/6/2014 the patient came to the office for an adjustment.  She stated that she was doing “pretty well”.  The patient also stated that the orthotic felt “fine”.  Reconfirmed that the recommendation of orthotic wear is 23 hours a day.  The patient had no other questions at this appointment.On 11/10/2014 the patient came to the office for another adjustment appointment.  At this time, the patient reported that the only pain that she now had was due to her biting her cheek on the left side but that was the only pain that she was reporting.  The patient still had a very difficult time placing and removing her orthotic, which as stated before is a clear indication that the patient is not wearing it.  We advised the patient that her treatment required 45 minutes of TENS therapy in addition to adjusting her orthotic but the patient refused this as she was too busy to follow our treatment recommendations.  Again stressed to the patient that her treatment success is dependent upon her compliance with treatment recommendations because if she does not follow the recommendations of treatment, she is compromising her care and result.At this point the patient did not return for any more additional treatment visits.  Compliance is a must for results with these cases and with all recommended treatment.  While it is true that additional medical factors can also play a role in the patient’s symptoms, arthritis as this patient states was diagnosed after her treatment was begun, the treatment will still provide relief of symptoms for the compliant patient.[redacted] was not a compliant patient.  She did not follow recommended treatment guidelines and recommendations.  She is still welcome to continue to be seen for her treatment with the neuromuscular orthotic at our office.  However, unless she is willing to follow the directions of the treatment, she will not get the results she desires.  Compliance is a must for treatment that works.  As a provider of health care services, I cannot force a patient to follow the directions no matter how much I might want to do so.  The patient always has a choice whether or not to do this but as to the request to refund the patient her case fee, it is not something that I will do as I kept my part of the bargain with the patient and provided all services that I said that I would, for the fee that I said that I would provide them.”            I provided the services that I said that I would at the fee that I said that I would.  I maintain that I will still work with the patient to adjust her orthotic as needed.  I again restate my belief that the patient was not compliant with the wearing of her orthotic 23 hours a day as she was instructed to wear it.  After literally thousands of patients removing and placing dentures and orthotics, it is obvious very quickly who is wearing their appliance and who is not wearing them.  After a day or two or wear, placing and removing a denture or orthotic (they are extremely similar in this characteristic) becomes second nature and can be done rapidly.  [redacted] was not able to place or remove her orthotic without difficulty on 11/10/2014 which indicates that she was not wearing it to me.  Compliance is not only in wearing the appliance though.  Compliance is in coming in to the office and allowing us to use TENS therapy for an hour and then having the orthotic adjusted.  [redacted] repeated told us that she was too “busy” to stay for tensing and that she did not have the time for the full needed TENS and adjustment.  I appreciate being busy with work and family obligations.  We deal with this all the time.  An orthotic timeframe for treatment is related to the length the symptoms have been present, the longer the symptoms have been present, the longer treatment time takes.  Two months with only 3 visits is hardly enough time to get to the end of treatment with an orthotic.  If [redacted] had stated that treatment had to be successful in two months or she wouldn’t have done it, I would have respectfully declined treated her and her condition.  It is not near enough time, especially in a patient that does not wear the appliance as directed and come in for the needed TENs therapy and adjustments.  Let me remind [redacted] that this very point is made in the consent form which she signed prior to treatment where estimated treatment time is given to be “up to twelve (12) months.” As to her new claim about advertising, at no time does any advertising that Dr. [redacted] or myself make claims about “cures”.  We state that we can help with neck and shoulder pain as it is sometimes related to a pathologic bite or occlusion.  We have helped many patients in this regard.  There are other inconsistencies with her statements in her response but the facts of this are very simple and it appears that she is just trying to find whatever reason so can come up with not to live up to her end of our agreement. [redacted] was given a treatment plan for a neuromuscular orthotic.  This treatment had a fee that included follow up care.  She was free to accept this treatment or not.  It was entirely her choice.  She chose to accept care and accepted the fee for the treatment.  Now, after the fact, she wants money back.  The service she asked me to provide were provided as best as I could, given the limitations from the patient noncompliance.  The service was provided at the cost that I stated it would be provided at, exactly as it was promised it would be.   Any other statements or claims on her part are just trying to get past these simple facts.  Facts are not subjective.  Facts do no change.  The fact is that the patient agreed to a treatment and the treatment was provided until such a point as the patient discontinued treatment with her decision.  It really is very simple, with all the all other words, claims or whatever, these simple facts do not change and cannot change.Thank you,

Complaint ID # [redacted]The facts of this complaint are very simple.  [redacted] was examined and a diagnosis was made that she needed periodontal therapy to address her periodontal disease.  A treatment plan for the recommended treatment was given to the patient with her costs explained to her.  At this time the patient could have had chosen to have the treatment or not have the treatment.  The patient chose to have the treatment.  This treatment had costs associated with it, costs which were explained to the patient before she had the treatment and yet she still chose to have the treatment completed.  The patient’s insurance company was ONLY billed for the services for which the patient agreed to and which were completed.  Any other statement by Mr. [redacted] are not true.It is true that information was submitted twice to the patient’s insurance company.  The reason being is that the insurance company requested additional documentation that was not initially submitted for the claim to be evaluated completely.  With the additional information submitted, a second claim is created by the insurance company.  No additional treatment was submitted. Mr. [redacted] states that I called the [redacted].  This is not correct. As I stated before, due to the threatening nature of the correspondence from Mr. [redacted], my team member, on HER OWN, contacted the [redacted].  I witnessed the [redacted] in my office for over an hour discussing the abusive nature of Mr. [redacted] with my employee.  To what extent the [redacted] have contacted Mr. [redacted] makes no difference to me.  If Mr. [redacted] wishes to get into this, he can do so with the employee that felt threatened enough to call the [redacted] as that is between Mr. [redacted] and her. I only care about my integrity being called into question.  I examined a patient.  I made treatment recommendations.  The patient was free to choose whether they wanted to receive these services at the costs required to receive this treatment.  The patient choose of their own free will to have these services completed.  Insurance was billed in the manner that it was told to the patient.  Insurance has paid on this claim as they should pay on any claim that is legitimate for necessary treatment.  I know that I did everything that I could to make this patient as comfortable as possible.  I only billed the insurance company for services that were agreed to by the patient and were completed.  I have reviewed all clinical records and treatment performed and they are well within the standard of care and will easily pass any review by any independent dental review.  No matter the number of groundless complaints Mr. [redacted] files, it cannot change these simple facts.  Any other discussion about this matter is a complete and utter waste of time and can never change these simple facts.Thank you,Dr. [redacted]

This is in response from the wife of a patient [redacted]. She states several statements that are not accurate. First and foremost, her husband had considerable dental treatment performed by Dr.[redacted], the dentist that formerly owned this practice. When I met her husband, I was not Dr....

[redacted]'s assistant nor was I introduced to or referenced as such. Dr. [redacted] is a general dentist, as am I and I was never his assistant. Secondly, when Dr. [redacted] completed considerable work on [redacted], his insurance was [redacted]. Dr. [redacted] was not a contracted dentist with [redacted] nor am I. As of the end of November of 2013, Dr. [redacted]'s association with [redacted] Dental ended. I am not a contract provider for either [redacted] Dental Insurance nor have I ever been at this location. Prior to [redacted] having dental treatment done on July 21, 2014, he was giving a treatment plan for the dental treatment with treatment fees explained for this dental treatment when the treatment was diagnosed on July 10, 2014. As far as to [redacted] purchasing [redacted] Dental Insurance based on some belief that I was a [redacted] Dental provider, I have no idea where she gets this idea. I have never been listed as a provider in any [redacted] Dental provider reference in any form for this location. And as of the end of November 2013 / December 2013 Dr. [redacted] was removed from their provider lists by [redacted], so any search based on his information would have also revealed that he was no longer a provider for [redacted] either. I have no idea why she purchased [redacted] Dental Insurance to cover dental treatment based on her assumption that I was a [redacted] Provider. Had she done a simple search for [redacted] Dental Providers or asked myself or anyone at my office she clearly would be have been told that we can work and do work with [redacted] Dental but we are not contracted with [redacted] Dental. She claims to have spoken to Dr. [redacted] about insurance. Dr. [redacted] was not contracted with [redacted] Dental since end of November / first of December 2013. Dr. [redacted] knew that I was not a [redacted] provider as did all of the office staff and would not have said otherwise even if he was asked. In fact when I purchased the practice in October of 2013, Dr. [redacted] SPECIFICALLY recommended that I NOT become a [redacted] Dental PPO provider. Given this as well as the fact that he has not been in the practice since mid-December 2013, it is hard to imagine a scenario where he would state anything to the contrary about [redacted] Dental and myself to a patient. The patient claims that she talked to the company on specific dates, but no record has been found within our practice management software where all communications with patients and insurance is located. I have talked with all of my employees and no one has any knowledge of discussing anything with [redacted]. It is interesting that the in all the dates that she claims to have talked to the someone at our office but one, they pre-date the treatment that [redacted] had that she is disputing the fee for. If she had such a problem with us or our treatment plan and our fee structure, why didn't she communicated these things after the new treatment was diagnosed on July 10,2014 and prior to it being started on July 21,2014? As to her claim of false advertising, I have not EVER presented myself as a [redacted] Dental Provider in any such or form in ANY marketing pieces that I have done or will do. The reason, I am not a [redacted] Dental Provider, period, end of discussion. I truly feel sorry for [redacted] as I think that she made a purchase based on some assumption that she was given at work by her HR department because if she would have just asked myself or a member of my team or better yet [redacted] DENTAL in any of their various publications and web listings as to who was a provider and who was not, she would have discovered that I was not a [redacted] Dental Provider. I think that her anger at me is misplaced as embarrassment for not doing this simple check before she purchased the insurance. I find the timing of her complaint interesting at best. As my business continually looks at our accounts receivable report to get paid by the patients that owe us money, we came across the account of [redacted]. We have sent statements and have contacted her to make arrangements for her to take care of her bill. She got irate and sent a $5.00 check stating it was going to take her some time to pay her balance. When we indicated that she was responsible for her bill and that failure to pay this bill could have other consequences, all of a sudden a complaint to the Revdex.com is filed. I am sorry that she purchased dental insurance that did not give her the dental coverage that she hoped for, I truly am. I wish that she understood that dental insurance is best described as a coupon that helps to cover some of the cost of dental treatment rather than the entire amount. I wish that her husband was not in need of the dental treatment he needed but he was in need. All these wishes still don't change the facts. I gave this patient a treatment plan, the patient made the choice to have these services performed. I performed the treatment for the agreed upon fee. The treatment was completed but I am still without and waiting for payment for my services. Perhaps I should be the one filing the complaint for the customer not paying for services as they received. I would much rather to spend my time treating patients than writing replies to things such as this. Here are the facts ...... Dental treatment was diagnosed to address pathology present in [redacted]'s teeth. A treatment plan with a fee for the services to be rendered was given to the patient prior to the treatment being started or completed. The treatment was accepted and then the treatment was completed. Only after [redacted] and [redacted] are approached to pay their bill and meet their responsibilities is a complaint filed with the Revdex.com. This is a simple matter and frustrating that it turns to this in my mind. It is a sad state of commentary when all kinds a reasons and excuses are attempted to cloud this simple issue with these simple facts that are not in dispute.

To Who it May Concern, This response is in regards to ID# [redacted].  I have included with this email the response that we sent directly to Mr. [redacted].  I think it appropriate to note that the person in question, Alexander [redacted], is an adult of the age of 22.  Mr. [redacted] is...

not the patient in question and consequently not the party that needs to be heard from in this matter. Regardless, the facts of this are clear.  Ms. [redacted] was offered an appointment to treat her dental emergency on January 18, 2015.  She choose not to be seen until January 30, 2015.  When she was seen, a full exam was completed with a diagnosis made that a tooth on the UL was in need of Root canal therapy.  She was also diagnosed need additional treatment.  But as to her tooth on the upper left, due to its root anatomy, it was not a tooth that would generally be treated by Dr. [redacted].  After the need of this tooth was recognized during the exam, phone calls were made to [redacted], a root canal specialist center, to attempt to obtain an appointment immediately for this treatment for [redacted].  Unfortunately, no appointments were available until the following Monday which was February 2nd, 2015.  At this time, Dr [redacted] asked the patient if she would like to have the offending tooth anesthetized to help alleviate her discomfort.  She agreed and after Dr. [redacted] performed this service, (this service was done free of charge), the patient thanked him and stated that she felt much better.  At this time, [redacted] was informed of her treatment needs which included several fillings as well as periodontal therapy to address her gum disease which shows a chronic infection in her gum tissues.  An opening was available in the hygienist’s schedule if she wanted to have the gum therapy completed.  She accepted the invitation for this after all applicable costs were explained to her and she agreed to these costs and signed the treatment estimate.  Due to the hygiene schedule, treatment would not be able to begin for about an hour.  Alexander was informed of this fact and choose to stay and wait until the gum therapy could be completed. During the gum therapy, the tissues are numbed to help the cleaning be more comfortable.  Once this is done, an additional therapy which was previously discussed in terms of cost was started.  This laser therapy is in addition to the gum therapy cleaning and was also explained and agreed to by the patient as she signed the treatment plan with its associated explanation of costs PRIOR to her having any treatment.  At this time, [redacted] inflamed tooth became sore and she asked to stop the laser treatment as she wanted to go.  She was acknowledged and her wishes were honored immediately in terms of she wanted to stop and treatment was stopped.  At this point, the patient was advised to contact the root canal specialist office ASAP to schedule for her treatment of the tooth that needed the root canal as they would be expecting her call.  The patient was dismissed without anything out of the ordinary. Several days later, Mr. [redacted] began sending multiple faxes to our office.  He also began posting multiple reviews online.  His reviews were incorrect and libelous in nature.  His faxes to the office were personal and threatening in nature.  On Friday January 13th, 2015, his tone and message were elevated to the point that the [redacted] were called.  They looked at all the documents, treatment estimates etc that were signed by [redacted] as well as the plethora of faxes of a threating nature from Mr. [redacted].  At this point, they contacted him and advised him that he was engaging in cyber bullying and that if he continued that our office could pursue charges.  He was also advised to remove all online posting as these postings did not represent facts and reality as well as the fact that he was not the actual patient to begin with.  At this point, several of the reviews have been removed online. It is unfortunate that [redacted] had a toothache.  It is unfortunate that she chose to ignore this toothache for over a week before seeking treatment.  It is unfortunate that she had some discomfort arise prior to finishing her treatment that she agreed to and even waited for.   However, at no time and in no way was [redacted] treated poorly.  At no time did she not receive standard of care treatment for her gum disease issues.  All efforts went into helping her from numbing her tooth to help her feel better, to honoring her complimentary exam and x-ray coupon ( $320 value) that clearly stated on the coupon was only for new patients and she was not a new patient as she had been to the office multiple times previously.  The patient was diagnosed with multiple items that needed treatment.  She was given a treatment plan and estimate and signed this document.  The patient is an adult and was given all opportunities to ask and had all of her questions answered.  The only treatment that was accepted for by the patient for completion this day was the therapy for the gum treatment,  no other treatment was scheduled.  All efforts were made to help the patient out with whatever costs we could as an office.  It should be noted that the patient had ZERO out of pocket expense.  All treatment was billed to her insurance which is the policy for her insurance plan.  Treatment was rendered at the request of the patient and only treatment that was completely completed was billed to her insurance.  It is our belief that by filing this complaint with the Revdex.com that Mr. [redacted] is continuing on with his campaign of bullying an honest business that went above and beyond to help and keep costs as low as possible for his daughter.  The desired settlement is not a reasonable request.  Libel and slanderous claims of an individual are unfortunately the price of doing business.  Dr. [redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Well this response from Dr.[redacted] was even better than expected as it contains flat out lies. Lies that will be used against him when he must present himself to the [redacted] in the very near future. I will respond to what the good doctor has written. First of all, yes [redacted] is of legal age. However, it is the health trust fund of the company that I work for that Dr.[redacted] is charging and in fact defrauding. Furthermore, during the entire process of allowing the periodontal cleaning, the office manager [redacted] had not only talked to [redacted] but also myself. She was trying to convince us to have the cleaning performed that day.  That in my view makes me a party to this.  The appointment was not made until January 26th. She was not offered an appointment on January 18th since it would be another eight days before I even called and made the appointment in the first place. Dr.[redacted] states that the laser therapy was agreed upon by [redacted] and that is not a true statement. The only treatment agreed upon or even discussed to be performed that day was the periodontal cleaning. According to the paper work we have received, the laser therapy was another $900.00. [redacted] supposedly was going to keep the cost for that days visit at $800 because [redacted] only had $1500 to work with for the cleaning AND the root canal (which was performed on 2-2-15 at another dentist office). [redacted] mentioned to both of us multiple times that between the periodontal cleaning and the root canal [redacted] would be at her $1500. This did not allow for a laser therapy at an additional cost of $900.  It is true that [redacted] did sign a consent form, however this form has a total of $7400. Let me be clear here and assure you that [redacted] was not going to allow $7400 worth of work done on her that day. Especially not after [redacted] knew full well the budget we had to stay within ( and she reiterated on several occasions) . Very suspect that [redacted] NEVER mentioned the total cost of $7400 to [redacted] or myself. Dr.[redacted] is himself confused in his reply. He states the laser therapy was in addition to the gum therapy ( I assume he means the periodontal cleaning). He states that it was stopped by [redacted]. This is not true. The hygienist had just completed the periodontal cleaning and told [redacted] she was about to begin the laser therapy. This is when [redacted] had enough and left. Dr.[redacted] also states that [redacted]'s inflamed tooth became sore. Should'nt he have known her already inflamed tooth was going to sore? The shot he gave her was not going to last forever. The cleaning which Dr.[redacted] and his staff said was needed that day caused her even more pain. That is exactly what this entire issues has been about. Dr.[redacted] suggested a treatment that he KNOWS was going to cause her more pain. Dr.[redacted] also states that they honored the complimentary exam and x-rays. Yet he charged for both in the claim he sent to the insurance company. Further, we did not know when I made the appointment that [redacted] had been to this dentist office before. In fact Dr.[redacted] has taken over the practice from Dr.[redacted], who we stopped using as our regular dentist because of the shady business practices he and his staff engaged in. I did not know it was the same office until a day or two later when [redacted] called with some follow up questions. Now regarding the [redacted]. Let me be extremely clear here. This is the first time I have heard that Dr.[redacted] and his staff called the [redacted]. It is also not true that the [redacted] have talked to me regarding this incident. They have never left notes on my door or messages on my phone. My next call today is to the [redacted] Department to confirm they were never called to Dr.[redacted]'s office and that I was never contacted by the [redacted].  I received a letter from Dr.[redacted]'s office stating they felt threatened by me. They also suggested I remove any internet complaints I may have posted. Of course they threatened with legal action to libel and slander.  Since I filed my first complaint Dr.[redacted] has submitted another claim to my insurance carrier for the same work he already submitted a claim for. In this second claim ($900) he did not charge for the exam or x-rays but did charge for the periodontal cleaning AGAIN. In closing, in our first letter we gave Dr.[redacted] the chance to avoid what is now happening to him now. We contended the services only put [redacted] in more pain and should never have been performed or suggested to be performed that day. We asked him not to file his claim with the insurance carrier. We made it clear we would exhaust every single avenue at our disposal to make sure he did not get paid for the unnecessary procedure he allowed to be performed on her. Our complaint with the Revdex.com was one of those. It is clear the good doctor is not going to retract his claim and at this point we hope he does not file a third claim for the same job. We have all documents to verify what we are stating. This reply by Dr.[redacted] to the Revdex.com will be sent in addition to the pile sent to the [redacted] to help prove our claims. We thank the Revdex.com for their time on helping to resolve this dispute.

Regards,

[redacted] ll

Revdex.com Complaint ID #: [redacted]Marie,I will respond one last time to this issue dealing with [redacted].  In terms of her initial claim, let me repeat my previous response….“This is in response to complaint ID# [redacted] involving [redacted].  [redacted] was a patient that was diagnosed with Malocclusion previously by anther dentist and the recommended treatment made was for the fabrication of a Neuromuscular orthotic to help position the upper teeth to the lower teeth where the muscles are in a physiological rest position.  This diagnosis and treatment recommendations were confirmed by myself.  Both the previous treating dentist and I made the same treatment recommendations.  A balanced and relaxed rest position can be an effective treatment modality in the treatment of malocclusion and the myriad of symptoms that this can cause the patient.   This rest position is found using industry standard TENS unit that relaxes the muscles in the same way that physical therapist sometimes do on their patients as well as a Myomonitor K7 computer that can measure the EMG’s (electric activity of a muscle) and allow a clinician to record a muscularly relaxed position where the orthotic can be fabricated to replicate this balanced and relaxed position.  As to the fee for treatment, the fee is something that is consistent with the skill, time and equipment required to provide this service.  I have multiple patients who have commented that my fee was not anywhere near what the results that they have received had in value in their lives. The patient agreed to this treatment and its subsequent fee and began treatment on 8/4/2015.
On 9/15/2014 the patient came for an adjustment of her orthotic and was not able to seat it which is a clear indication that the patient was not following her treatment directions of wearing the appliance 23 hours a day.  Patients that are following directions are very comfortable placing and removing their orthotics and get to this point within a few days of initial delivery.  Compliance with directions and that the patient needed to wear her orthotic 23 hours a day was stressed to the patient at this appointment.
On 10/6/2014 the patient came to the office for an adjustment.  She stated that she was doing “pretty well”.  The patient also stated that the orthotic felt “fine”.  Reconfirmed that the recommendation of orthotic wear is 23 hours a day.  The patient had no other questions at this appointment.On 11/10/2014 the patient came to the office for another adjustment appointment.  At this time, the patient reported that the only pain that she now had was due to her biting her cheek on the left side but that was the only pain that she was reporting.  The patient still had a very difficult time placing and removing her orthotic, which as stated before is a clear indication that the patient is not wearing it.  We advised the patient that her treatment required 45 minutes of TENS therapy in addition to adjusting her orthotic but the patient refused this as she was too busy to follow our treatment recommendations.  Again stressed to the patient that her treatment success is dependent upon her compliance with treatment recommendations because if she does not follow the recommendations of treatment, she is compromising her care and result.At this point the patient did not return for any more additional treatment visits.  Compliance is a must for results with these cases and with all recommended treatment.  While it is true that additional medical factors can also play a role in the patient’s symptoms, arthritis as this patient states was diagnosed after her treatment was begun, the treatment will still provide relief of symptoms for the compliant patient.[redacted] was not a compliant patient.  She did not follow recommended treatment guidelines and recommendations.  She is still welcome to continue to be seen for her treatment with the neuromuscular orthotic at our office.  However, unless she is willing to follow the directions of the treatment, she will not get the results she desires.  Compliance is a must for treatment that works.  As a provider of health care services, I cannot force a patient to follow the directions no matter how much I might want to do so.  The patient always has a choice whether or not to do this but as to the request to refund the patient her case fee, it is not something that I will do as I kept my part of the bargain with the patient and provided all services that I said that I would, for the fee that I said that I would provide them.”            I provided the services that I said that I would at the fee that I said that I would.  I maintain that I will still work with the patient to adjust her orthotic as needed.  I again restate my belief that the patient was not compliant with the wearing of her orthotic 23 hours a day as she was instructed to wear it.  After literally thousands of patients removing and placing dentures and orthotics, it is obvious very quickly who is wearing their appliance and who is not wearing them.  After a day or two or wear, placing and removing a denture or orthotic (they are extremely similar in this characteristic) becomes second nature and can be done rapidly.  [redacted] was not able to place or remove her orthotic without difficulty on 11/10/2014 which indicates that she was not wearing it to me.  Compliance is not only in wearing the appliance though.  Compliance is in coming in to the office and allowing us to use TENS therapy for an hour and then having the orthotic adjusted.  [redacted] repeated told us that she was too “busy” to stay for tensing and that she did not have the time for the full needed TENS and adjustment.  I appreciate being busy with work and family obligations.  We deal with this all the time.  An orthotic timeframe for treatment is related to the length the symptoms have been present, the longer the symptoms have been present, the longer treatment time takes.  Two months with only 3 visits is hardly enough time to get to the end of treatment with an orthotic.  If [redacted] had stated that treatment had to be successful in two months or she wouldn’t have done it, I would have respectfully declined treated her and her condition.  It is not near enough time, especially in a patient that does not wear the appliance as directed and come in for the needed TENs therapy and adjustments.  Let me remind [redacted] that this very point is made in the consent form which she signed prior to treatment where estimated treatment time is given to be “up to twelve (12) months.” 
As to her new claim about advertising, at no time does any advertising that Dr. [redacted] or myself make claims about “cures”.  We state that we can help with neck and shoulder pain as it is sometimes related to a pathologic bite or occlusion.  We have helped many patients in this regard.  There are other inconsistencies with her statements in her response but the facts of this are very simple and it appears that she is just trying to find whatever reason so can come up with not to live up to her end of our agreement. 
[redacted] was given a treatment plan for a neuromuscular orthotic.  This treatment had a fee that included follow up care.  She was free to accept this treatment or not.  It was entirely her choice.  She chose to accept care and accepted the fee for the treatment.  Now, after the fact, she wants money back.  The service she asked me to provide were provided as best as I could, given the limitations from the patient noncompliance.  The service was provided at the cost that I stated it would be provided at, exactly as it was promised it would be.   Any other statements or claims on her part are just trying to get past these simple facts.  Facts are not subjective.  Facts do no change.  The fact is that the patient agreed to a treatment and the treatment was provided until such a point as the patient discontinued treatment with her decision.  It really is very simple, with all the all other words, claims or whatever, these simple facts do not change and cannot change.Thank you,

Revdex.com Complaint ID#[redacted]To Whom It May Concern,This is a second response to Ms. [redacted]. It is unfortunate that the condition of her mouth requires the extensive dental treatment that it does.  It is unfortunate that the cost to fix the severe problems of dental caries and periodontal disease present with Ms. [redacted] is extensive. Diagnosis was made of these treatment needs and the cost to fix these needs was also made and presented to the patient.  Ms. [redacted] stated she wanted a filling different than the one she asked about during her visit.  I have checked my notes and cannot find any other reference from our examination that indicated she wanted any other tooth filled that day.  I am not sure what to make of her description of the tooth on the other side of her front teeth.  It doesn’t correspond to any other teeth and treatment that I am aware of at this time. Ultimately, the patient has elected to have her treatment completed elsewhere for whatever reason.  That is her choice and we strongly support her decision to receive the care she wants at a price that she agrees too.  This is where this matter should end. With these things said, this does not change anything about the situation and the initial reason that the Revdex.com was involved in this situation.  The Revdex.com was contacted as Ms.[redacted] wanted to get copies of her x-rays. I refer the Revdex.com back to my initial response as it states all that is needed and necessary to understand the frivolous nature of Ms. [redacted]’s request and ultimately this complaint. This is a well-established principle set forth in the Arizona DentalPractice Act and upheld by the Arizona Board of Dental Examiners.  Practices are allowed and morally justified to charge to make copies of x-rays.  Thisis a fact and it is not in question.  Any other statements in this matter are not needed. All the extra misstatements,charges and emotional pleas made would require one to ignore the state law of Arizona(Arizona Dental Practice Act) and that this law as it has been upheld over and overby the Arizona Dental Board.   I wish Ms. [redacted] well in her future endeavors and hope that she finds a dentist that is willing to work with her treating her myriad of dental conditions. Sincerely, Dr. Scott Condie  P.S.  I have inserted my initial response the complaint from Ms. [redacted] for your records

Revdex.com Complaint ID #: [redacted]Marie,I will respond one last time to this issue dealing with [redacted].  In terms of her initial claim, let me repeat my previous response….“This is in response to complaint ID# [redacted] involving [redacted].  [redacted] was a patient that was diagnosed with Malocclusion previously by anther dentist and the recommended treatment made was for the fabrication of a Neuromuscular orthotic to help position the upper teeth to the lower teeth where the muscles are in a physiological rest position.  This diagnosis and treatment recommendations were confirmed by myself.  Both the previous treating dentist and I made the same treatment recommendations.  A balanced and relaxed rest position can be an effective treatment modality in the treatment of malocclusion and the myriad of symptoms that this can cause the patient.   This rest position is found using industry standard TENS unit that relaxes the muscles in the same way that physical therapist sometimes do on their patients as well as a Myomonitor K7 computer that can measure the EMG’s (electric activity of a muscle) and allow a clinician to record a muscularly relaxed position where the orthotic can be fabricated to replicate this balanced and relaxed position.  As to the fee for treatment, the fee is something that is consistent with the skill, time and equipment required to provide this service.  I have multiple patients who have commented that my fee was not anywhere near what the results that they have received had in value in their lives. The patient agreed to this treatment and its subsequent fee and began treatment on 8/4/2015.
On 9/15/2014 the patient came for an adjustment of her orthotic and was not able to seat it which is a clear indication that the patient was not following her treatment directions of wearing the appliance 23 hours a day.  Patients that are following directions are very comfortable placing and removing their orthotics and get to this point within a few days of initial delivery.  Compliance with directions and that the patient needed to wear her orthotic 23 hours a day was stressed to the patient at this appointment.
On 10/6/2014 the patient came to the office for an adjustment.  She stated that she was doing “pretty well”.  The patient also stated that the orthotic felt “fine”.  Reconfirmed that the recommendation of orthotic wear is 23 hours a day.  The patient had no other questions at this appointment.On 11/10/2014 the patient came to the office for another adjustment appointment.  At this time, the patient reported that the only pain that she now had was due to her biting her cheek on the left side but that was the only pain that she was reporting.  The patient still had a very difficult time placing and removing her orthotic, which as stated before is a clear indication that the patient is not wearing it.  We advised the patient that her treatment required 45 minutes of TENS therapy in addition to adjusting her orthotic but the patient refused this as she was too busy to follow our treatment recommendations.  Again stressed to the patient that her treatment success is dependent upon her compliance with treatment recommendations because if she does not follow the recommendations of treatment, she is compromising her care and result.At this point the patient did not return for any more additional treatment visits.  Compliance is a must for results with these cases and with all recommended treatment.  While it is true that additional medical factors can also play a role in the patient’s symptoms, arthritis as this patient states was diagnosed after her treatment was begun, the treatment will still provide relief of symptoms for the compliant patient.[redacted] was not a compliant patient.  She did not follow recommended treatment guidelines and recommendations.  She is still welcome to continue to be seen for her treatment with the neuromuscular orthotic at our office.  However, unless she is willing to follow the directions of the treatment, she will not get the results she desires.  Compliance is a must for treatment that works.  As a provider of health care services, I cannot force a patient to follow the directions no matter how much I might want to do so.  The patient always has a choice whether or not to do this but as to the request to refund the patient her case fee, it is not something that I will do as I kept my part of the bargain with the patient and provided all services that I said that I would, for the fee that I said that I would provide them.”            I provided the services that I said that I would at the fee that I said that I would.  I maintain that I will still work with the patient to adjust her orthotic as needed.  I again restate my belief that the patient was not compliant with the wearing of her orthotic 23 hours a day as she was instructed to wear it.  After literally thousands of patients removing and placing dentures and orthotics, it is obvious very quickly who is wearing their appliance and who is not wearing them.  After a day or two or wear, placing and removing a denture or orthotic (they are extremely similar in this characteristic) becomes second nature and can be done rapidly.  [redacted] was not able to place or remove her orthotic without difficulty on 11/10/2014 which indicates that she was not wearing it to me.  Compliance is not only in wearing the appliance though.  Compliance is in coming in to the office and allowing us to use TENS therapy for an hour and then having the orthotic adjusted.  [redacted] repeated told us that she was too “busy” to stay for tensing and that she did not have the time for the full needed TENS and adjustment.  I appreciate being busy with work and family obligations.  We deal with this all the time.  An orthotic timeframe for treatment is related to the length the symptoms have been present, the longer the symptoms have been present, the longer treatment time takes.  Two months with only 3 visits is hardly enough time to get to the end of treatment with an orthotic.  If [redacted] had stated that treatment had to be successful in two months or she wouldn’t have done it, I would have respectfully declined treated her and her condition.  It is not near enough time, especially in a patient that does not wear the appliance as directed and come in for the needed TENs therapy and adjustments.  Let me remind [redacted] that this very point is made in the consent form which she signed prior to treatment where estimated treatment time is given to be “up to twelve (12) months.” 
As to her new claim about advertising, at no time does any advertising that Dr. [redacted] or myself make claims about “cures”.  We state that we can help with neck and shoulder pain as it is sometimes related to a pathologic bite or occlusion.  We have helped many patients in this regard.  There are other inconsistencies with her statements in her response but the facts of this are very simple and it appears that she is just trying to find whatever reason so can come up with not to live up to her end of our agreement. 
[redacted] was given a treatment plan for a neuromuscular orthotic.  This treatment had a fee that included follow up care.  She was free to accept this treatment or not.  It was entirely her choice.  She chose to accept care and accepted the fee for the treatment.  Now, after the fact, she wants money back.  The service she asked me to provide were provided as best as I could, given the limitations from the patient noncompliance.  The service was provided at the cost that I stated it would be provided at, exactly as it was promised it would be.   Any other statements or claims on her part are just trying to get past these simple facts.  Facts are not subjective.  Facts do no change.  The fact is that the patient agreed to a treatment and the treatment was provided until such a point as the patient discontinued treatment with her decision.  It really is very simple, with all the all other words, claims or whatever, these simple facts do not change and cannot change.Thank you,

Hi Marie,
Dr. [redacted] is being totally dishonest in many ways: In 2013 I had responded to an advertisement regarding neck pain that Dr. [redacted] said could be successfully addressed.  I made an appointment for a free consultation. After Dr. [redacted] explained the orthotic, I decided not to opt for this treatment. A year later my pain had increased. I heard another dentist advertise regarding a cure for neck pain and made an appointment. When I arrived at the address, I realized it was the same office of Dr. [redacted].  On my arrival I let them know that I was confused and thought this was another doctor.  They informed me that Dr. [redacted] had purchased the business from Dr. [redacted] but that he was willing to see me if I wanted to go through with this procedure.  I was in great pain and was assured by this office that this was the solution for me.  The response below seems to imply that Dr. [redacted] and Dr. [redacted] both arrived at the same diagnosis after xrays/testing.  Actually Dr. [redacted] provided a free consultation telling me I was a good candidate.  Dr. [redacted] followed up with tests that he claims confirmed this.  I have not seen the results of these tests and had no reason to  doubt them until later.  When I started asking questions, I was perceived as problematic. I was given an appointment for 9/15 at which time I reported it was difficult to seat and remove the orthodic.  The dental assistant indicated it should be easier and not harder to do this. When I removed it they were able to see how I had to forcefully pry it out of my mouth.  They adjusted it a couple of times and it was still difficult to put in and take out. The response below indicates that this problem was a clear indication that I was not wearing it for 23 hours daily.  This is not true.  I was the one motivated by extreme pain to do everything in my power to get relief. There is no logical reason that I would pay $4900 to get relief and then not follow directions.  I can prove that I wore the orthotic 23 hours, removing it only to eat and brush teeth. Not sure why they assumed I was not wearing the orthotic. Did it not occur to them that maybe something was wrong with the appliance? I am 66 years old, responsible and follow directions very carefully especially when it has to do with my health. I have been retired from work since 2/27/2015.  Before this and during the entire time I was treated, I was employed and all my peers including my director can vouch that I wore the orthotic while at work ( 10 to 12 hours daily).  I conducted various meetings and I had to explain that my sudden lisp was due to the appliance. My family can vouch and sign a notarized statement that I wore the orthotic the remainder of the time. October appointment:  A standard greeting when anyone asks, how are you doing is "good, thank you" or something similar. Which would have been my normal response to the assistant.  My return to the office in October was for another adjustment so I am not sure where they got the idea that I said the orthotic felt "fine".  The orthotic was now causing my back teeth to hurt. It was still difficult to insert the orthotic in my mouth and remove to clean. Not sure if that is why my back teeth were starting to hurt. There were more adjustments to the orthotic. Even after this adjustment, when I put it back on, they were able to see and hear it was not a good fit. It was at this point that I began to suspect that something was terribly wrong. November appointment: I made another appointment to adjust the appliance. In addition to my back teeth hurting, the appliance was catching my check causing me to bite it especially when I was sleeping at night. Another adjustment was made to the appliance. At this time I was told that I required a 45 minute TANS treatment.  I had already completed a couple of TANS treatments with no benefits. I had to take time off of work to schedule these appointments so an additional unplanned 45 minutes was not possible. It was becoming more clear to me that now the TANS treatments would be used for the appliance not fitting and no relief.  There were no more excuses for "adjusting" the appliance. The accusation that is being repeated in the below response is the I was a non-compliant patient. That is only an accusation with no merit. Dr. [redacted] is only assumming this.  I am prepared to obtain notarized proof of my compliance in wearing the appliance 23 hours every day. I am also prepared to provide proof from two separate doctors that I was misdiagnosed.  I need to take responsibility for being naive and not doing more research for my condition.  My opinion is that Dr. [redacted] should also take responsibility in the realization that sometimes he may be wrong too. I am not willing to return to Dr. [redacted] for any more adjustments/treatments. I do think it is fair to pay a reasonable amount for his invested time/costs and for him to reimburse the remainder to me.Thank you, [redacted]

To Who it May Concern, This response is in regards to ID# [redacted].  I have included with this email the response that we sent directly to Mr. [redacted].  I think it appropriate to note that the person in question, Alexander [redacted], is an adult of the age of 22.  Mr. [redacted] is...

not the patient in question and consequently not the party that needs to be heard from in this matter. Regardless, the facts of this are clear.  Ms. [redacted] was offered an appointment to treat her dental emergency on January 18, 2015.  She choose not to be seen until January 30, 2015.  When she was seen, a full exam was completed with a diagnosis made that a tooth on the UL was in need of Root canal therapy.  She was also diagnosed need additional treatment.  But as to her tooth on the upper left, due to its root anatomy, it was not a tooth that would generally be treated by Dr. [redacted].  After the need of this tooth was recognized during the exam, phone calls were made to [redacted], a root canal specialist center, to attempt to obtain an appointment immediately for this treatment for [redacted].  Unfortunately, no appointments were available until the following Monday which was February 2nd, 2015.  At this time, Dr [redacted] asked the patient if she would like to have the offending tooth anesthetized to help alleviate her discomfort.  She agreed and after Dr. [redacted] performed this service, (this service was done free of charge), the patient thanked him and stated that she felt much better.  At this time, [redacted] was informed of her treatment needs which included several fillings as well as periodontal therapy to address her gum disease which shows a chronic infection in her gum tissues.  An opening was available in the hygienist’s schedule if she wanted to have the gum therapy completed.  She accepted the invitation for this after all applicable costs were explained to her and she agreed to these costs and signed the treatment estimate.  Due to the hygiene schedule, treatment would not be able to begin for about an hour.  Alexander was informed of this fact and choose to stay and wait until the gum therapy could be completed. During the gum therapy, the tissues are numbed to help the cleaning be more comfortable.  Once this is done, an additional therapy which was previously discussed in terms of cost was started.  This laser therapy is in addition to the gum therapy cleaning and was also explained and agreed to by the patient as she signed the treatment plan with its associated explanation of costs PRIOR to her having any treatment.  At this time, [redacted] inflamed tooth became sore and she asked to stop the laser treatment as she wanted to go.  She was acknowledged and her wishes were honored immediately in terms of she wanted to stop and treatment was stopped.  At this point, the patient was advised to contact the root canal specialist office ASAP to schedule for her treatment of the tooth that needed the root canal as they would be expecting her call.  The patient was dismissed without anything out of the ordinary. Several days later, Mr. [redacted] began sending multiple faxes to our office.  He also began posting multiple reviews online.  His reviews were incorrect and libelous in nature.  His faxes to the office were personal and threatening in nature.  On Friday January 13th, 2015, his tone and message were elevated to the point that the [redacted] were called.  They looked at all the documents, treatment estimates etc that were signed by [redacted] as well as the plethora of faxes of a threating nature from Mr. [redacted].  At this point, they contacted him and advised him that he was engaging in cyber bullying and that if he continued that our office could pursue charges.  He was also advised to remove all online posting as these postings did not represent facts and reality as well as the fact that he was not the actual patient to begin with.  At this point, several of the reviews have been removed online. It is unfortunate that [redacted] had a toothache.  It is unfortunate that she chose to ignore this toothache for over a week before seeking treatment.  It is unfortunate that she had some discomfort arise prior to finishing her treatment that she agreed to and even waited for.   However, at no time and in no way was [redacted] treated poorly.  At no time did she not receive standard of care treatment for her gum disease issues.  All efforts went into helping her from numbing her tooth to help her feel better, to honoring her complimentary exam and x-ray coupon ( $320 value) that clearly stated on the coupon was only for new patients and she was not a new patient as she had been to the office multiple times previously.  The patient was diagnosed with multiple items that needed treatment.  She was given a treatment plan and estimate and signed this document.  The patient is an adult and was given all opportunities to ask and had all of her questions answered.  The only treatment that was accepted for by the patient for completion this day was the therapy for the gum treatment,  no other treatment was scheduled.  All efforts were made to help the patient out with whatever costs we could as an office.  It should be noted that the patient had ZERO out of pocket expense.  All treatment was billed to her insurance which is the policy for her insurance plan.  Treatment was rendered at the request of the patient and only treatment that was completely completed was billed to her insurance.  It is our belief that by filing this complaint with the Revdex.com that Mr. [redacted] is continuing on with his campaign of bullying an honest business that went above and beyond to help and keep costs as low as possible for his daughter.  The desired settlement is not a reasonable request.  Libel and slanderous claims of an individual are unfortunately the price of doing business.  Dr. [redacted]