Poor record-keeping leads to OO's erasure

Elliott David Bloom, who failed to attend the London hearing of the GOC disciplinary committee and attempted to get it adjourned for a second time, also received a fine of £1,600 for inadequate record-keeping and for claiming payment for spectacles that were not supplied. The hearing, held in his absence, was originally scheduled for June.
NHS staff became suspicious of Bloom's practices when they noticed a high number of claims for prism-controlled bifocals, worth £100 per patient, on the GOS3 forms he submitted.
Expert witness, optometrist Geoff Brown, looked into the claims and found it immediately clear that the patients' spectacles were standard bifocals rather than the prism-controlled variety for which Bloom had claimed.
Brown also sat in on four re-tests that Bloom had been invited to undertake in the presence of an expert. Although he expected 'the red carpet treatment', Brown witnessed very brief examinations, one lasting just five minutes. There was also little attempt by Bloom to communicate with his patients.
Another witness, optometrist Geoff Roberson, who examined 46 patient records from nursing homes visited by Bloom, said there were 'very few records where the outcome of every examination is recorded'. Spectacle prescription and clinical acuity were the only consistent records made.
One patient's notes included what Roberson could only describe as a squiggle. 'I have been unable to ascertain what that squiggle represents,' he said. 'It's a meaningless symbol as far as I'm concerned, it conveys no useful information.'
The committee found eight of the nine accusations against Bloom proven and pronounced him guilty of serious professional misconduct under section 17(1)(b) of the Opticians Act. He has 28 days to appeal.
'We have found Mr Bloom failed to keep adequate records which are necessary for the good health of the patients and continuity of care,' said committee chair Geraldine Huka. 'We also found that he claimed money from the NHS to which he was not entitled.
'Notwithstanding his previous good character we have decided that Mr Bloom's name should be erased from the register and a penalty order of £1,600 should be made.'