What has the PIP breast implants fiasco got to do with accountancy, you may well ask
Well, there is an illuminating situation arising from comments made by the Chairman of the Harley Street Medical Group, the company responsible for fitting 13,900 women with the notorious cheap industrial silicone breast implants between September 2011 and March 2010 (BBC News report January 11th 2012).
The Chairman of HMG is quoted as saying that the company has neither the resources, the surgeons, nor the operating facilities needed to do the surgery required. He says that the Government must accept “moral responsibility” for replacing the PIP implants.
The published financial information for the Harley Medical Centre Ltd (the perceived operating company carrying out the procedures) shows consistent annual turnover of £30 million per annum and profits before other operating expenses of £14 million.
It therefore seems that very considerable profits have been made from amongst other procedures, the PIP implants. Whilst no precise detail is given, the perception exists that the Chairman and his associates have personally been well rewarded out of these implant procedures.
So where does this all lead us, apart from a massive bill for British taxpayers? For a ‘professional’ business, what are the Harley Medical Groups’ customer care criteria? Where is their aftercare service? Where is there any evidence of the business putting its customers first? Where is the company ethos that if anything goes wrong, they put it right at their cost, without quibble?
It seems to me that the Harley Medical Group has merely taken the considerably substantial sums of money from the mostly insecure and vulnerable ladies, and run. It has absolved itself of any responsibility and is seeking to pass the buck to us taxpayers. Frankly, that just sucks.
What it has failed to recognise is that with this attitude it has damaged its reputation in a way that will probably be more expensive in the long term than if it had at least offered some way of sharing responsibility.
For a ‘professional service business’ it has committed the cardinal sin of blaming everyone else rather than taking any responsibility themselves.
It has however successfully presented us with a classic case study of stupidity and rampant immoral greed.
All clinics that provided PIP breast implants have a legal duty to cover the costs of revision surgery and additional compensation. Regardless of what may be said by clinics in the media the stark realisty is that their losses can be recovered from the company which provided them with PIP breast implants. So, they may not be able to pay the upfront costs but they have not released any statements about what they can do about the situation… Kevin
You are spot on with what you say. I totally agree.