Dr Susan Lim asks - Is it an offence to be expensive?

[Ramseth]

NKF Durai case was a good one. They sent a S$2m per year minister KBW to preside over his case of overpaid salary of S$600k. Even Mrs. GCT said it was peanuts in context and comparison and GCT had to shut her the fuck up. Then they sent Gerald Ee take over NKF. Then they sent him to review ministerial salary.

 

[numero uno]

In normal business transaction eg buy house, the customer decides whether or not to buy a product for a price. Customer is 'king'.

In healthcare, patient (customer) is in a completely different emotional position. Patient with cancer spread all over is like someone with a death sentence, maybe with lot of torture and pain before death. Doctor can possibly 'save', extend life or at least make it bearable. Such a customer is no longer 'king'. Such a person may be willing to do anything, pay any price, ignorantly ask for the impossible.

Can such patient be treated like a normal customer by a doctor? What safeguards are there that a doctor does not take advantage of this situation? The Medical Council would not be doing their duty if they do not make sure of this. In fact, they have already cocked up the first round.

If the good doctor has done nothing wrong, then it is very simple. There are many cancer experts all over the world. Many celebrities have had cancer, including Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, PM etc. Just get a few such experts to go through all the steps she has done for this patient, the price, and stand up and say for the record that they are perfectly reasonable. Case closed. But it clearly doesn't look so simple....

on the contrary it is very simple. it's ridiculous to try to hire all the PR sh!theads to try to gloss over a simple case of overcharging till the moon. call a spade a spade. she apparently was overcharging >$45m since 2001, NOT just $25m as alot of people think. even the top oncologists in US and europe as asking in disbelief. $28 m in the last month before patient died. its a simple case of cheating using patient's emotional imbalance to squeeze as much as possible from somebody related to the richest royalty in the world. it's not as if the whole business was set up to cater to just one patient as her PR team try to potray it. cut the cr@p. period. moreover if you follow the whole story in the press it also involves more than money according to the lawyers. overcharging and then arrogance of the ultimate. those who know the whole story knows it is an insult to the decent doctors in singapore. worse is that she has employed a team of PR team and top lawyers to try to paint a different picture and argue about semantics like prejudge etc . all these are nonsense use by western lawyers to try to camouflage misdeed. common sense would tell you that charging $28m for just one of supposedly treatment is just plain obscene and vulgar. moreover the patient died soon after that. even if she counts all the effort put in, even $1m for 1 month is still very high and ridiculous. why don't you ask what the top USA or european centres/oncologists who are the real top experts how much they charge. definiitely not $28 m. period

 

[Mdm Tang]

Dr Susan Lim is so unpopular among the doctors and their clinic staffs in Mt E Hospital. They simply can't stand the bitch's snootiness!

Every morning her clinic manageress has to wait at the main entrance of the Mt E medical center for her to arrive in her chauffeured driven car
to open the car-door, carry her brief case and walk behind her to their clinic.

When she married her keling kia husband from City Bank, about 60% of the invited doctors from Mt E refused to attend her wedding dinner.

.

Bro, thk u for the hard truth.

I think it is paying back time.

Good luck to her.

 

[scroobal]

Very well said.

Also lets not forget that the late Brunei lady was not the only victim. She even cheated her own professional colleagues. A doctor who did a procedure for $12k sent his bill to her and she loaded close to an additional $200K to the bill without the doctor or victim knowing.

She should have been charged in criminal court.

on the contrary it is very simple. it's ridiculous to try to hire all the PR sh!theads to try to gloss over a simple case of overcharging till the moon. call a spade a spade. she apparently was overcharging >$45m since 2001, NOT just $25m as alot of people think. even the top oncologists in US and europe as asking in disbelief. $28 m in the last month before patient died. its a simple case of cheating using patient's emotional imbalance to squeeze as much as possible from somebody related to the richest royalty in the world. it's not as if the whole business was set up to cater to just one patient as her PR team try to potray it. cut the cr@p. period. moreover if you follow the whole story in the press it also involves more than money according to the lawyers. overcharging and then arrogance of the ultimate. those who know the whole story knows it is an insult to the decent doctors in singapore. worse is that she has employed a team of PR team and top lawyers to try to paint a different picture and argue about semantics like prejudge etc . all these are nonsense use by western lawyers to try to camouflage misdeed. common sense would tell you that charging $28m for just one of supposedly treatment is just plain obscene and vulgar. moreover the patient died soon after that. even if she counts all the effort put in, even $1m for 1 month is still very high and ridiculous. why don't you ask what the top USA or european centres/oncologists who are the real top experts how much they charge. definiitely not $28 m. period

 

[Merl Haggard]

Very well said.

Also lets not forget that the late Brunei lady was not the only victim. She even cheated her own professional colleagues. A doctor who did a procedure for $12k sent his bill to her and she loaded close to an additional $200K to the bill without the doctor or victim knowing.

She should have been charged in criminal court.

on the contrary it is very simple. it's ridiculous to try to hire all the PR sh!theads to try to gloss over a simple case of overcharging till the moon. call a spade a spade. she apparently was overcharging >$45m since 2001, NOT just $25m as alot of people think. even the top oncologists in US and europe as asking in disbelief. $28 m in the last month before patient died. its a simple case of cheating using patient's emotional imbalance to squeeze as much as possible from somebody related to the richest royalty in the world. it's not as if the whole business was set up to cater to just one patient as her PR team try to potray it. cut the cr@p. period. moreover if you follow the whole story in the press it also involves more than money according to the lawyers. overcharging and then arrogance of the ultimate. those who know the whole story knows it is an insult to the decent doctors in singapore. worse is that she has employed a team of PR team and top lawyers to try to paint a different picture and argue about semantics like prejudge etc . all these are nonsense use by western lawyers to try to camouflage misdeed. common sense would tell you that charging $28m for just one of supposedly treatment is just plain obscene and vulgar. moreover the patient died soon after that. even if she counts all the effort put in, even $1m for 1 month is still very high and ridiculous. why don't you ask what the top USA or european centres/oncologists who are the real top experts how much they charge. definiitely not $28 m. period

I fully agree with you both.

Way before she was exposed, all the upright doctors in Mt E and Gleneagles were already gossiping behind her back.

 

[Merl Haggard]

.

Bro, thk u for the hard truth.

I think it is paying back time.

Good luck to her.

It's also payback time for her for abandoning her husband, Lionel to fuck around with the keling kia.

 

[GOD IS MY DOG]

The Court of Appeal on Thursday reserved judgment in the case of the prominent surgeon accused of overcharging a royal patient from Brunei.

Dr Susan Lim is trying to overturn a High Court decision that the Singapore Medical Council inquiry into the allegations should go ahead.

The surgeon, who is in her 50s, is said to have charged Pengiran Anak Hajah Damit $24.8 million for seven months of treatment, although she argues that the figure was lower and included the cost of flying the patient between Singapore and Brunei.

During Thursday's hearing, her lawyer said the case was merely a commercial dispute and should never have escalated into disciplinary proceedings.

she might as well ask for 10% of Brunei's oil revenues..........................greedy old farkslut

 

[Mdm Tang]

It's also payback time for her for abandoning her husband, Lionel to fuck around with the keling kia.

.

Court of Appeal dismisses Dr Susan Lim's appeal


Posted: 30 November 2011 1743 hrs

SINGAPORE: Singapore's Court of Appeal has dismissed an attempt by prominent surgeon Dr Susan Lim to stop the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) from setting up a second Disciplinary Committee (DC) to investigate claims against her for over-charging a patient.

Her appeal was dismissed with costs by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and VK Rajah on Wednesday.

The case revolves around a decision by the council to hear 94 disciplinary charges against Dr Susan Lim arising from a complaint, and to stop the council from taking further disciplinary proceedings.

Among other grounds, the court ruled that the SMC has the power to appoint a second DC after revoking the appointment of the first DC.

It also felt that none of the circumstances raised by Dr Lim to support her argument of possible bias met the legal test of whether there were circumstances that would give rise to suspicion that the SMC was biased.

Also, Dr Lim's arguments on considerations of unfairness, prejudice and oppression were "taken out of context" and did not independently support the Grant of Prohibition Order.

The court ruled that the SMC had held a valid meeting to revoke the appointment of the first DC and appoint the second DC.

It said that the appellant's case before the Judge and on appeal vis-a-vis the Quashing Order was "entirely misconceived".

Referring to Dr Lim's appeal that the SMC's decision to appoint a second DC was unreasonable or irrational, the court felt that it would be "irrational and a dereliction of duty" for the SMC not to have appointed another DC to continue its disciplinary proceedings after the first DC was removed.

The 41-page Judgement was read out by the Chief Justice.

- CNA/fa

 

[kemana]

farking excuse of a sg woman and disgrace to her profession. Hopefully this will ruin her rep.

 

[Cruxx]

Supply and demand

 

[Merl Haggard]

.

Court of Appeal dismisses Dr Susan Lim's appeal


Posted: 30 November 2011 1743 hrs

SINGAPORE: Singapore's Court of Appeal has dismissed an attempt by prominent surgeon Dr Susan Lim to stop the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) from setting up a second Disciplinary Committee (DC) to investigate claims against her for over-charging a patient.

Her appeal was dismissed with costs by Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and Judges of Appeal Andrew Phang and VK Rajah on Wednesday.

The case revolves around a decision by the council to hear 94 disciplinary charges against Dr Susan Lim arising from a complaint, and to stop the council from taking further disciplinary proceedings.

Among other grounds, the court ruled that the SMC has the power to appoint a second DC after revoking the appointment of the first DC.

It also felt that none of the circumstances raised by Dr Lim to support her argument of possible bias met the legal test of whether there were circumstances that would give rise to suspicion that the SMC was biased.

Also, Dr Lim's arguments on considerations of unfairness, prejudice and oppression were "taken out of context" and did not independently support the Grant of Prohibition Order.

The court ruled that the SMC had held a valid meeting to revoke the appointment of the first DC and appoint the second DC.

It said that the appellant's case before the Judge and on appeal vis-a-vis the Quashing Order was "entirely misconceived".

Referring to Dr Lim's appeal that the SMC's decision to appoint a second DC was unreasonable or irrational, the court felt that it would be "irrational and a dereliction of duty" for the SMC not to have appointed another DC to continue its disciplinary proceedings after the first DC was removed.

The 41-page Judgement was read out by the Chief Justice.

- CNA/fa

Am not surprised at all.

This matter was brought to old fart's attention by The Sultan.

It was he who directed that a thorough investigation be carried out.

 

[Checker]

SMC DC won't rule in her favour. But one also wonders what's driving this apparent uptick of issues with docs and money - GPs selling addictive meds, ophthamologist Marc being investigated. Rent too high? Present pay not dignified enough? Too many rich patients pushing them around and make them feel poor?

 

[IreneYeoh]

This Dr. Susan is a horrible disgrace to doctors and women. There's a difference between expensive and overcharging.

 

[Leongsam]

This Dr. Susan is a horrible disgrace to doctors and women. There's a difference between expensive and overcharging.

Expensive is when it costs a lot of money but is worth every penny. EG: An education at Harvard which can open doors to lucrative career options after graduating.

Overcharging is when a service is being provided at a much higher price than the rest of the market charges for the same service. EG: Charging $5 at a food court for a cup of coffee which costs only $2.00 in most other food courts.

Ultimately, value is in the eyes of the beholder.

If Dr Lim had saved her patient when no other doctor could, her treatment would have been viewed as very expensive but well worth the price. The patient died so it's now classified as overcharging.

 

[IreneYeoh]

Expensive is when you get value for money, yes. Let's say your professional job is worth $200k, it's a question of client can afford or not. Overcharging is not about bad service only. Overcharging is about blowing bill of $2m into $20m just because you know the client can afford it.