Two leading skin experts used a colleague’s confid
Two leading skin experts used a colleague’s confidential diary in an attempt to expose his conflict of interest, the GMC heard today.
(MON)
Harley street professor Pauline Dowd obtained documents which appeared to show Dr Tony Chu had been paid pnds stlg 32,000 for research from a trust fund.
She passed the papers to Dr Jeffrey Cream after it emerged Dr Chu would be interviewing a relative of one of the foundation’s trustees for a job.
The allegation about the cash was entirely false because the pair had misread a word in the diary.
They later refused to apologise to Dr Chu when his boss blasted them for the ‘crass error’ and demanded an apology, it is claimed.
Dr Chu, a senior lecturer in dermatology at London’s Imperial College said he was disgusted by the allegations.
He told the GMC today: ‘I was completely flummoxed and did not have a clue what it was about.
‘I was confused and angry.
I was seething about the whole event.
‘
The committee heard the incident happened after Dr Chu’s bosses agreed to appoint a consultant dermatologist at Ealing and Hammersmith hospitals in 1998 to ease his workload.
A short list of three candidates was drawn up but some other London specialists had already written a letter to the hospital complaining about the job offer.
An appointments panel, featuring Dr Cream, was drawn up, but on the day of the interviews, in October 1998, he suddenly claimed to have evidence that Dr Chu, who was also on the committee, might be biased.
He alleged that one of the candidates, Dr Katharine Acland, was married to a trustee of the Garfield Weston Trust, which had made a donation to Dr Chu.
Jane Sullivan, for the GMC, said: ‘The highly sensitive information indicated that a member of the panel had received a very substantial sum of money from a family trust and that one of the candidates was a member of that family.
‘Dr Chu was extremely surprised at the allegation which was completely without foundation.
‘
After a discussion between the committee members it was decided to continue with the interviews but during Dr Acland’s, Dr Cream allegedly unnecessarily grilled her.
Dr Acland admitted she was married to George Weston, a trustee of the fund, but denied Dr Chu had received money from it.
Miss Sullivan said: ‘Dr Cream was aggressive in his questioning of Dr Acland.
‘
The committee heard that following the incident the chief executive of Ealing Hospital wrote to Dr Cream demanding an explanation and copies of the alleged evidence.
He was then sent photo-copies of two pages from Dr Chu’s work diary which he claimed had been given to him by Professor Dowd.
When he scrutinised the document he realised it was referring to money from ‘the Welton Trust’ and that Dr Cream had made an error.
The manager wrote back to the doctor informing him of the mistake and saying it was unfair to make an allegation of ‘bias.
‘
He also questioned the legitimacy of Professor Dowd’s involvement in the matter.
Later another professor from Imperial College also suggested that the diary may have been obtained illegally.
Despite repeated requests to both Dr Cream and Professor Dowd, neither apologised to Dr Chu for the mistake.
Miss Sullivan said: ‘We do not allege that either doctor acted maliciously but that they both took insufficient steps to ascertain the truth of the information and their conduct in that way was inappropriate.
‘It was also inappropriate for Dr Cream to draw the information to the attention of the appointments panel in the way he did.
‘This matter has been very embarrassing and upsetting for both Dr Chu and Dr Acland.
‘
The hearing was told that the diary was usually kept in a locked office, and that somebody had obtained it deliberately to use against Dr Chu.
Dr Cream, of Temple Sheen, Mortlake, southwest London, was a consultant dermatologist at the Chelsea and Westminster, Charing Cross and West Middlesex Hospitals at the time.
Professor Dowd, of Harley Street, Central London, was also a consultant dermatologist at the University College London Hospitals.
They both deny serious professional misconduct.
The hearing continues.
ends
adddiary.
