AUTH/2973/8/17: Anonymous (non-contactable) v Bayer — alleged undeclared conflict of interest by representative (No breach) | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2973/8/17
Parties	Anonymous, non-contactable complainant v Bayer
Issue	Alleged undeclared conflict of interest / access via representative’s husband at a named trust
Product	Xarelto (rivaroxaban)
Applicable Code year	2016
Clause(s) considered	Clause 15.2
Decision	No breach
Complaint received	31 August 2017
Case completed	28 September 2017
Appeal	No appeal
Sanctions	None

Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI

🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough

🎬

Video walkthrough — coming for members

Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.

Subscribe — from £299/yr

📋

⌄

An anonymous, non-contactable complainant alleged a named Bayer representative failed to declare a conflict of interest because her husband was a doctor at a named NHS trust and “gave her access”.
The Authority asked Bayer to consider the requirements of Clause 15.2 (high standards for representatives).
Bayer said the representative was employed by a third-party agency and contracted to Bayer for ~12 months; initially promoted Xarelto in primary care and later added two small hospital accounts.
The representative’s husband was a junior doctor (ST6 fellow) in cardiothoracic surgery at one of the named trusts; the representative disclosed this to her manager when she took on secondary care responsibility including that trust.
Bayer stated Xarelto was actively promoted only for two indications (non-valvular atrial fibrillation; DVT/PE treatment and prevention of recurrence) and that cardiothoracic surgeons were not within promotional scope.
Bayer’s call reporting system showed no call history for the husband or his team; he was not in Bayer’s customer database. The trust represented 2.62% of her overall call volume.

⚖️

⌄

No breach of the Code was ruled.
No breach of Clause 15.2 (no evidence the representative failed to maintain high standards).

🔒

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value

£249/year

Annual — save £99

£29/mo

Monthly

Join Now — Instant Access