AUTH/3061/8/18: Health professional v Ferring — conduct of a representative (no breach) | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/3061/8/18
Parties	Health professional v Ferring
Issue	Conduct of a representative; alleged harassment for appointments and alleged misuse of a patient telemedicine voicemail
Complaint received	21 August 2018
Case completed	26 October 2018
Applicable Code year	2016
Clauses considered	9.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.9
Outcome	No breach
Appeal	No appeal
Published	May 2019 Code of Practice Review

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

📋

⌄

A nurse specialist complained about the conduct of a named Ferring representative, alleging harassment of department staff for appointments.
The complainant said the representative made repeated calls and left messages on a patient telemedicine voicemail that stated it was for patients only, upsetting three clinical team members.
The complainant also alleged Ferring failed to respond by an agreed date.
Ferring said the representative’s contacts were limited (email, one telephone message via switchboard, and leaving materials with a colleague) and that telephone records showed only one call to the patient telemedicine helpline (made after a secretary advised that was the best contact route).
The parties’ accounts differed; the Panel noted the difficulty of determining precisely what happened in “one word against the other” complaints and that the complainant bears the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities.

⚖️

⌄

No breach of the Code was found.
The Panel ruled the complainant had not proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the representative contravened the requirements relating to seeking appointments and causing inconvenience.
The Panel also found no evidence the representative had been instructed to overcall or contact health professionals in a way likely to lead to a breach.

🔒

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