“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing” is a slight misquotation of Alexander Pope’s “A little learning is a dangerous thing” dating back to 1774 and we do not think that there is a more appropriate quote that’s applicable to Dr Vivian.
We’ve recently been contacted by more than one pensioner, who have been reviewed by Dr Vivian under regulation 37(1) and have been reduced from band 4 to band 1 with a disability of 0%.
It would be most unusual for one pensioner to be reduced from band 4 to band 1, so what is going on?
Let’s firstly set the scene. Dr Vivian acted as the original SMP for the pensioners granting a band 4 injury pension in each case. He recommended that each pensioner be reviewed in two to three years time, which is now.
It may be worth pointing out at this stage, that such a recommendation is not part of the regulations and is likely to be contrary to the case of Goodland, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Constable Of Staffordshire Police [2020] EWHC 2477 (Admin) (16 September 2020) where the judge opined that Police Pension Authority (‘PPA’) cannot make a future decision regarding reviews. They have a duty to ‘consider at suitable intervals’ whether a pensioners level of disability has substantially altered and that decision is based on the here and now and cannot be diarised at a specific date in the future in the same way that Staffordshire Police were wrong to state that they were never going to review. We won’t labour this point here as this is not what this blog is about, but needless to say, we don’t agree with it.
When the pensioners hit their recommended review dates, the forces (conveniently) passed the cases back to Dr Vivian for a regulation 37(1) review. Nice work if you can get it!
Let’s look at the duty that is imposed on Dr Vivian under this reassessment.
Regulation 37(1) says the following –
Reassessment of injury pension
37.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, where an injury pension is payable under these Regulations, the police authority shall, at such intervals as may be suitable, consider whether the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has altered; and if after such consideration the police authority find that the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has substantially altered, the pension shall be revised accordingly.
The regulations specify that decision should be passed to a SMP.
Regulation 30(2)(d) says the following –
Reference of medical questions
30.—(2) Subject to paragraph (3), where the police authority are considering whether a person is permanently disabled, they shall refer for decision to a duly qualified medical practitioner selected by them the following questions—
…
(d) the degree of the person’s disablement;
and, if they are considering whether to revise an injury pension, shall so refer question (d) above.
It is abundantly clear from that regulation that the duty, the ONLY duty, of Dr Vivian conducting a 37(1) reassessment is to establish the degree of the person’s disablement today.
We are sure that everyone is aware of the case of Metropolitan Police Authority v Laws & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 1099 (13 October 2010) which confirms that regulation 37(1) is a comparison exercise whereby the SMP has to compare the pensioners current level of disability with their last known position. This can be the original granting of the award, or the last review, whichever was most recent. In order for the PPA to reduce a pension they have to identify substantial alteration (via the SMP) in the pensioners level of disability.
So, the first question that we should ask is did Dr Vivian identify substantial alteration? The answer to that question is a resounding ‘NO’. On this basis alone, Dr Vivian has acted unlawfully as he has not complied with his duty under the regulations.
Instead, Dr Vivian cited R (Metcalf) v Marcus and West Yorkshire Police [2002] EWHC 2892 Admin in order to reduce each of the pensioners on the basis that each of the pensioners has failed to either seek or accept suggested medical treatment, since being retired, for their condition. He has stated that, in his opinion, it is unreasonable for them to not seek or attempt such treatment and has reduced each to 0% (band 1) on the basis that had they done so, they would have substantially improved.
The facts in Metcalf are extreme. Four clinicians had proposed treatment for a serving officer who had a shoulder injury sustained during a struggle with a prisoner in the form of (i) joint injections, (ii) surgical intervention, (iii) desensitising physiotherapy and (iv) pain management but these options had been rejected by the claimant on the grounds that none of it was guaranteed to make him operational again. Unsurprisingly, his refusal was held to be unreasonable and the High Court declined to intervene.
In 2003, no doubt inspired by the case, there was an amendment to the Police Pension Regulations 1987 (‘PPR 1987’), the forerunner to The Police (Injury Pension) Regulations 2006 (PIBR 2006).
The Police Pensions (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2003 inserted the following onto the PPR 1987 –
(1A) For the purposes of deciding if a person’s disablement is likely to be permanent, that person shall be assumed to receive normal appropriate medical treatment for his disablement, and in this paragraph “appropriate medical treatment” shall not include medical treatment that it is reasonable in the opinion of the police authority for that person to refuse.
This amendment made it into regulation 7(3) of the PIBR 2006 –
Disablement
7.—(3) For the purposes of deciding if a person’s disablement is likely to be permanent, that person shall be assumed to receive normal appropriate medical treatment for his disablement, and in this paragraph “appropriate medical treatment” shall not include medical treatment that it is reasonable in the opinion of the police authority for that person to refuse.
Not only has Dr Vivian failed to comply with regulation 37(1) but the keen eyed readers amongst us may have also spotted the flaw with his logic and the application of this outdated case law?
The case law, the amendment to the PPR 1987 and the PIBR 2006 ALL place a duty on the SMP to ensure that the person has received “normal appropriate medical” ONLY when the question of permanency is being considered, and that question ONLY arises during the granting of the original award. Just to reinforce this point, this refers to officers who are going through the ill health retirement process, or are being assessed for an injury award.
Dr Vivian is NOT, in our opinion, entitled to revisit the question of permanency as this has already been decided, and there is NOTHING in the case law or regulations that allow him to apply this test on a regulation 37(1) review and he is therefore acting ultra vires.
What concerns us most, is that Dr Vivian is reducing people’s pensions who are seriously ill. The damage and the stress he’s causing these pensioners is immeasurable with his shenanigans and with his crackpot theories. His previous crusades on bad backs and acceleration has been discredited by the courts and overturned by PMABs.
When is this ultracrepidarian going to concentrate on the medical task in hand and leave the law to those who know what they’re talking about?
I am not surprised that many people are drawing comparisons with the post office scandal. I have had thoughts along the same lines. How strange that a judge is changed days before an important JR. You never know, sometime in the future when a lot of us are no longer here, there may be another national outcry!
I haven’t been on here for a long long time, I lost the will after another avenue was shut down, when the GMC’s flawed investigation into Willian Cheng went nowhere. For me there came a time when I just had to move on with my life and distance myself from the stress involved in trying to fight these corrupt untouchable bastards.
Having just looked on the latest bloggs, it seems nothing has changed, the SMP’s are as powerful and protected as ever, the organisations they work for just as corrupt and aloof. Wasn’t it a case that Vivian and Cheng were doing this ten years ago, when I went through the painful medical retirement? It’s a rhetorical question and what’s so worrying is nothing has changed!
All of a sudden, there is a tiny chink of light with the Post Office/Fujitsu case, big corrupt organisations can fall. I understand certain individuals involved in the Post Office cover up are being investigated for fraud, so if this is the case why shouldn’t Vivian and Cheng. False medical reports, falsifying documents, lying, totally ignoring the regulations, all in the name of saving forces money and to the detriment of injured officers. There’s enough evidence if there’s an appetite to use it effectively.
I still feel, that eventually it’ll be exposed and the flood gates will open, those involved will be exposed. In order to do this, the media needs to be aware and take an interest in how shoddily injured officers are being treated.
So id like to see a conjoined effort to expose what’s been going on with injured officers.
I cannot believe these corporate bullies can get away with making these decisions, purely to save money from slashed police budgets. It’s a real cheap and nasty tactic, to go for the lowest hanging fruit to save some money, namely injured pensioner’s. I have personally experienced going against the powers that be and witnessing tactics to discredit, bully and wear me down.
I was really put through the mill with my IOD application and review a couple of years back, with the SMP stating that my injuries (PTSD) were not a result of police work, despite clearly stating this on my initial ill health assessment that they were. I was so shocked, when it moved to the injury on duty stage and was completely denied an injury pensions. Basically, HR & senior officers had literally fabricated and omitted key facts and evidence to support the SMP’s assertion that this was not caused police work (what on earth else could it have been after over two decades in policing!). I was made to feel personally flawed, weak and responsible for developing PTSD!
What then entailed, was an extremely stressful & taxing appeals process, where I had to compile my own case in response by obtaining statements from witnesses and FOI requests from my old force, and by using recent case law and expert opinion from legal papers. Having to do all of this whilst struggling with the daily onslaught of life with PTSD, which was hideous. It got so bad with the toll on my mental health, that I even contemplated the worst! I was in a very dark place with no support whatsoever. I was about to withdraw from the process, due to the veiled threats of potential loss of pension and costs for the appeal, should it not go my way. Luckily, I have a supportive wife & family, who helped me hugely and encouraged me to persists and do what was right.
Upon submitting my appeal, I was given an appeal date for attendance at a PMAB hearing in London – this terrified me! I knew I was telling the truth and that maybe reason might be on my side with honorable decent people in power at the PMAB? However, I also knew from experience that big organisations can have the capacity to close ranks and dig in there heels, often throwing everything they have at discredit & crush opposition. I had nothing, apart from a tiny deferred pension coming in and could not afford any form of legal representation. All I can think is that this is some form or organisational psychopathy & deluded group think, where they end up believing their own lies and challenge anyone that disagrees with them. There are similar parallels to the Post Office/Fujitsu scandal, where big powerful organisation end up believing they are infallible and always right no matter what.
For me, the evidence was reviewed by the same SMP, which in my opinion, was overwhelmingly in favour of an injury pension. Not surprisingly, once this was reviewed, with no evidence to challenge the original assertion that there was no duty injury, the SMP backed down and granted a Band 4 injury award! The facts were no different from initial assessment, only now I had corroborative evidence in my favour. How can this have gone from nothing to a Band 4 based on the same information & facts, only with additional corroboration? It’s clear that they are not accepting genuine injured pensioners and not granting awards for deserving cases, making them fight tooth and nail. However, at least this SMP made the right decision in the end, although likely only because it would have looked so bad at the PMAB. However, I am now grateful that I can pay my mortgage!
I’m now coming up to that dreaded review time and the panic has started to descend. Am I in for yet another horrendous fight? Will I loose the money and not afford to pay my bills? I feel like I have barely recovered from the initial battle……is it all going to start again? How is it they can do this to injured police officers, who have done nothing more other than pay the ultimate price for years of selfless & dedicated service?
Well done Jack, when your in hell keep on going until you make it out the other side. They really are a shower. I have had and continue to battle with them, IODPA is great and lets us know we are not isolated and alone . Good luck
We all agree from the outset that these failed doctor’s, because that is what they are, incapable of carrying out the duties of a doctor, whether that is as a GP or hospital doctor, these failed doctors have found a way to keep their medical quackery certificates up to date, carry out some further fly by night degree courses to give themselves some credence as ‘specialist capable of ruining an injured person’s future by denigrating and demeaning that person and their suffering’s for 30 pieces of silver whilst behaving as lapdogs at the equally failed chief constables gravy trains..
Yes, that’s correct, ‘equally failed’ chief constables, supposed police officers at one time, who are never going to get any further in their miserable failed careers, why, because they have blotted their ‘copy books’ somehow. And having done, so have realised that their gleaming high profile careers they have aimed for, after having carried out the bidding of their political and local government masters, are going to be coming to an ignominious end (with or without the reached for knighthood) having ridden roughshod over the countless bodies of actual serving and working police officers to show their intent to climb the sticky greasy pole of corrupt high office within the police service at whatever cost to others, are of no further use!
And now, as a last miserable and disgusting act of a failed career, these failed and morally corrupt chief constables are going to continue with the malicious malevolent actions they have used previously on the long climb up that sticky greasy pole, and are going to hit out at those yet again who are the easy targets, who have not only served on the front lines of policing, but have suffered injuries in which these same failed chief constables (or others of the same ilk from whom they learned their pitiful traits) have victimised them previously whilst at equally previous low times in their lives, when instead of receiving and being supported, they were forced out of their jobs on usually spurious grounds.
So let us not forget and quite rightly criticise to the humph degree, that yes these quack doctors are shamefully filling out and submitting false declarations under the guise of being specialist in a medical field, but it being done at the behest of others, namely these failed chief constables and their political/local government masters who deserve far greater condemnation as the leaders of these despicable actions aimed at those who have given the most, carry the scars, mental and physical for carrying out their duties, and are yet again the easy targets of opportunity of those who are not fit to walk in their shadows!
I have just been reviewed by him and it was horrible. I really wished I had recorded the meeting as he has lied in his response to my challenge over his report.
I was awarded a band 4 upon retiring and he advised a review in 3 years which this was. He has basically stated that as I have turned down some minor treatment which I have already unsuccessfully had, he believes that I would have improved if I had taken the option. This was following a brief chat to a GP over the phone during a prescription review?? Obviously he has scoured my medical notes for an opportunity to jump on. Having been in and out of hospital several times over recent years, I would assume it’s reasonable to want to give some minor treatment a miss to protect my MH. So so frustrating with the way he has treated me with no compassion or impartiality. I could now lose over £700 per month at a time when I most need it.
This is disgusting Ian.
A doctor that has chosen to test his limited knowledge of the law and his crack-pot theories on someone who is ill is just despicable.
Now he’s also lied? If I had to believe an ex-police officer or a doctor feathering his own nest, I know which one I would choose!
A piece of fiction…
Dear team at IODPA,
I have always wished to make a name for myself in the world of medicine. I promise I tried very hard at university to become the best doctor there ever was. I know they mentioned about doing the right thing by the patient and I did try. But you know, when you get older and have to maintain a certain lifestyle, maybe a change in direction is the way to go so I dabbled in the world of occupational medicine and to my surprise, I find I am very good at it. I get employed lots by various ‘businesses’ around the UK for my skill set. I save the people who pay me lots of money which they are very pleased about. They keep employing me even though so many of them who I see, end up appealing my decisions and win. It is a bit embarrassing to keep losing but then, who cares when I am being paid handsomely for getting it wrong?
I try to be clever and have always got my nose in law books. (Maybe I should have gone this route instead?) I am brave and am on the cutting edge of pushing new law. Trouble is, those pesky kids at IODPA keep tabs on me and ruin it every time. Blog this blog that. How does a great doctor like myself achieve greatness without taking a risk?
I guess in the circle I am in, my name has become quite infamous. Hey, no such thing as bad publicity right?
Anyways, I thought I would drop a line to y’all to say thanks for your interest and I promise to keep trying. In the meantime, can you keep your nose out of what I do IODPA so I can eventually become a winner rather than the loser that I am?
Yours,
Carlie Vivre
“FIRST DO NO HARM”
The overarching principle of the Hippocratic Oath which this Charlie seems to have forgotten he swore several years ago. The oath once sworn applies to that person in ALL situations, whether in a patient/doctor scenario, working for a third party, or just acting as a private individual in everyday life.
The harm this so-called professional has done to literally hundreds of IODs is immense; he has broken his oath on numerous occasions. I certainly would not want to be one of his patients.
It seems however that he can break his oath with impunity, the inept GMC appears extremely reluctant to act.
I would have thought that there was now sufficient evidence to justify a complaint with the GMC that Dr Vivian is not professionally competent to undertake IOD casework?
According to the Police Injury Rules and Regulations, and It has also been held in court to be the case, that this is not a reassessment of the pensioners award but seeking a simple answer to the question of has their condition SUBSTANTIALLY changed since the pensioner was last reviewed ? I will make it even more clear, the answer is YES or NO.
This man Vivian’s paymasters require him to aid them in reducing their pension bill, and reducing that bill is clearly a task that Vivian has seized with gusto.
He is determined to reduce his customers pension budget and clearly doesn’t believe that rules or regulations should get in his way. To aid him this venture he operates his reviews beyond the scope of his responsibility by inventing various new rules and circumstances by which he reduce a pensioners award.
His actions are despicable, the worry and stress that his unlawful behaviour and actions cause to many vulnerable individuals is frankly obscene.
Perhaps we need the services of Gwyneth Hughes and James Strong (maybe Toby Jones too), to produce another TV drama, to bring our experiences in to the public domain. The levels of corruption, lies and maltreatment employed by some “Doctors” and Police Forces against injured officers is quite staggering. Talk about “kicking a man when he’s down”. The fact that so many sick and injured officers take their own lives speaks volumes about the poor treatment they endure. The numbers are probably much much higher than those of Post Office workers, yet the general public are oblivious to it. It’s high time that Vivian and Cheng were given a dose of their own medicine.
I would vote for that suggestion too. I think it’s about time that these people who feel they can use us and then discard us face the consequences. There doesn’t seem to be any person that is held accountable for the mistreatment of IOD officers. It’s time the public knew about it, and the ideal time is now when it’s being mentioned that Post Office workers have been waiting twenty- odd years for justice. I’m sure, just like myself, that there are many disabled officers who’ve been waiting even longer than that.
The Police authorities with the help of the SMP’s are acting like the Royal Mail against Mr Bates and others. I hope they like the Royal Mail are found out and their wrong doings exposed to the public. This is another case of they are big and the pensioner is small. It disgusts me that having worked as a police officer for many years upholding the law that my employers continually break it with regard to Injured Former employees.
It’s all about the money pure and simple. The forces don’t care what the SMP does as long as the pension gets reduced. Sadly they continue to get away with it while you have doctors like Vivian and others of the same ilk.Thank God IODPA are on the ball helping us when needed.
It appears that SMPs are operating a ‘gravy train.’ They receive a substantial payment for every consultation, every PMAB etc. so I honestly believe that money is their sole motivation. They don’t care if an officer gets ill health retirement, they don’t care if they win, lose or draw a PMAB hearing, all they really care about is money so they will look at a case and play it in a way in which means most payments for them.
The system really is terrible. So called ‘experts’, acting in a so called ‘independent’ and professional manner….., rubbish. Might as well put a fat kid in charge of a sweet shop.
My SMP made a sweeping round of recommendations, even certain medication that I should be prescribed. Knowing full well that I’d be heavily criticised for not even attempting his recommendations I took them to my actual doctor (a senior consultant), who looked in horror and quickly informed me that had I taken the combination of drugs the SMP suggested I’d likely be dead. He went on to say that the SMPs report was absolutely littered with out dated treatment recommendations that real doctors gave up using years ago, he was really shocked.
When I went through the ill health process, I often found myself questioning why a so called doctor would act in such a nasty way towards a genuinely ill person. Surely doctors are in their profession to help people? Yet my SMP was the complete opposite. I can say honestly that I was seriously ill entering the process but made so so much worse by my interactions with the SMP. They almost killed me. I could of easily killed myself, infact almost did, several times. Its clearer to me now though, it’s all about money.
I truely hope one day that this scandal, the scandal of the SMP gravy train, gathers traction and attention in the same way that the post office scandal has.
This doesn’t surprise me. Dr Vivian and his ilk have been denying the facts, ignoring the law and behaving in a thoroughly immoral and criminal manner for almost 20 years now. They do this in the full knowledge that they are acting unlawfully with the excpectation that, either they can steamroller those that they abuse, or overcome them with legal expenses should someone have the temerity to challenge them – and,until we got organised telling us that they were behaving correctly and that we each were the only one with a problem with them. Hopefully we now have the wherewithal to challenge this? If only someone could write a four-part ITV drama to bring this to public attention – I see so many parallels between the systematically mounted unlawful and irrational campaign against Injury Pensioners and the systematically mounted unlawful campaign against Sub-Postmasters. It has been pointed out by the courts when they have acted in a way that amounts to or borders upon criminal maladministration, but nothing seems to have changed the behaviour of either H.O. or Police Authorities. Isn’t it time somebody went to prison for the anguish and damage, both financial and emotional, that they are inflicting? And, after these past two decades of fighting us in the courts (and more often than not losing and bearing the expenses), what have they achieved? Noting but grief.
Strange to reply to my own post but I’ve just read of ANOTHER parallel between our situation and the Sub-Postmasters: an investigator for the Post Office has told the enquiry that he received a cash bonus for each person convicted, which he states affected his decision making – rather like an SMP receiving a cash bonus for each Injury Pensioner reduced in banding. So many similarities.
The whole SMP process is flawed , in my opinion. I’m not going to go into specifics, but I’m aware of an SMP who was basically in the pocket of SMT. Once that person’s position come to light their services were dispensed with.
Can this Shill Dr not be reported for medical malpractice ? isnt the fundamental basis for a legal professional to “do no harm” and then going against guidance and case law would surely be evidence that he is doing this and causing issues and harm.
How on earth do these people keep thier jobs, any other profession it would be classed as gross misconduct and they would be sacked.
Reading an article recently I spotted some traits that Charlie boy has and I thought I would share them to see if you agree?
Stubbornness: Stubbornness is a trait that’s often associated with people who never admit they’re wrong.
Imagine trying to persuade a brick wall to move – that’s how it can feel when dealing with someone stubborn. They’re typically unyielding and rigid in their beliefs or decisions, even when presented with compelling evidence to the contrary.
The root of stubbornness often lies in an intense fear of being perceived as weak or incompetent. As a result, stubborn individuals tend to double down on their mistakes rather than admitting they’re wrong.
Remember, we all have our stubborn moments. But if this trait becomes a consistent behavior, it might hinder one’s ability to learn from mistakes and grow.
Pride can be a major roadblock for people when it comes to admitting they’re wrong.
It was a humbling experience that taught me the importance of setting aside pride when faced with evidence that you might be wrong. Pride can blind us to our mistakes and hamper our personal and professional growth.
Vulnerability: Being wrong can expose us to feelings of vulnerability. When we admit that we’re wrong, we’re essentially revealing a flaw or a gap in our knowledge – and that can be scary. Psychologically speaking, vulnerability is often linked to fear. While it’s uncomfortable to feel vulnerable, it’s in these moments that we open ourselves up to growth and learning. Embracing vulnerability can be a powerful step toward overcoming the fear of admitting when we’re wrong.
People who struggle to admit they’re wrong often lack self-awareness.
Without self-awareness, it’s hard to identify when we’ve made mistakes or when we’re in the wrong, let alone acknowledge these instances to others.
Cultivating self-awareness can help bridge this gap, making it easier for people to recognize and admit their mistakes.
Insecurity: Insecurity can often hold people back from admitting they’re wrong.
Being wrong can feel like a direct attack on one’s self-esteem, particularly for those who are already insecure. They may worry that admitting a mistake will lead others to think less of them or question their abilities.
This fear often results in defensive behavior, such as refusing to admit they’re wrong, even when evidence suggests otherwise.
Fear of Rejection: The fear of rejection is a powerful force that can prevent individuals from admitting they’re wrong.
Imagine you’re in a close-knit group of friends or colleagues. You’ve worked hard to establish yourself and you fear that admitting a mistake could lead to rejection or ridicule. This fear can be so intense, it often overshadows the importance of honesty and personal growth.
But here’s the truth: those who truly care about you will respect your ability to own up to your mistakes. It shows courage, integrity, and the willingness to learn and improve.
So don’t let the fear of rejection keep you from acknowledging when you’re wrong. It’s a part of life and an essential part of personal growth.
Perfectionism: Perfectionism can be a significant hurdle when it comes to admitting mistakes.
Growing up, I was always striving for perfection. Whether in academics, sports, or even social interactions, I felt the need to be flawless in every aspect. This pressure that I put on myself made it incredibly difficult to admit when I was wrong. In my mind, being wrong was synonymous with failure.
It took me quite some time to understand that mistakes are not a sign of failure but rather growth opportunities. Letting go of perfectionism allowed me to embrace these opportunities and become more open to admitting when I’m wrong.
We need to remember that no one is perfect and making mistakes is a natural part of life. It’s how we learn and grow.
Empathy: A lack of empathy can often prevent individuals from admitting they’re wrong.
Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. When we empathize with someone, we’re more likely to consider their perspective, which can lead us to recognize when we’re in the wrong.
Without empathy, it’s difficult to see beyond our own viewpoint, making it harder to acknowledge when we’ve made a mistake.
Cultivating empathy not only allows us to admit when we’re wrong but also strengthens our relationships with others. It enables us to understand their feelings and perspectives, leading to better communication and mutual respect.
Resistance to change: The most crucial aspect to understand about people who struggle to admit they’re wrong is their innate resistance to change.
Change is inherently uncomfortable. It pushes us out of our comfort zones and requires us to adapt and grow. However, growth cannot occur without acknowledging our mistakes and learning from them. Those who resist change may find it challenging to admit they’re wrong as it necessitates a shift in their thinking or behavior.
But embracing change and the discomfort that comes with it is an essential step in personal growth and development.
@ Lachlan Brown. Psychologist.
So it appears that Charlie boy may be unwell, suffering from the above traits. Maybe he should go and see a proper Doctor?
Does anybody see the Traits? Charlie?
Sadly all the traits you have listed are synonymous with narcissism – and narcissists never change.
What I struggle to comprehend is how many chief constables are still employing this monster as an SMP when his recent CV is littered with lost legal wrangles.
It seems that Vivien is continuing to operate under his ‘guidance’ from the Nicholas Wirz school of legal quackery, cherry picking bits of past cases to suit his perverse arguments.
The sad thing is that PPAs continue to use him and others like him even after their incompetence has been exposed. They are either completely oblivious, actively complicit or simply just don’t care.
Whatever happened to the idea of ‘The Police Family’
I dispair
Rules and regulations mean little to nothing to this man Vivian who acts as he wishes.
He quite simply doesn’t care. He gets paid by those who employ him, if his report is later overturned at a PMAB he gets paid for attending the PMAB. Further he recommends another review be performed in just a few years so that he gets paid again when he will come up with some latest nonsense that may be challenged but again win or lose he will be paid yet again. For him his medical licence is simply a licence to print money and money is all this man cares about.
He is the epitome of Hubris.
hubris /hyoo͞′brĭs/
noun
Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance.
Excessive pride, presumption or arrogance (originally toward the gods).
Overbearing pride or presumption.
Dr Vivian resign!
Seems to me that the SMP confuses his Hippocratic oath with being a hypocrite.
However, to be fair, the medics attracted to the role of SMP do not appear to be motivated by anything other than money – perhaps they have forgotten why they first studied medicine.
Thank goodness we have the collective wisdom of IODPA to hold these people to account.
Firstly, thanks to IODPA for all your support and assistance.Most of us would have found it more or less impossible to keep up the battle on our own. Thanks also to our amazing Solicitors.
And yes, it’s exactly the same as Mr Bates and the Post Office, we also need to start going ‘wider’ perhaps in getting more publicity in our fight for what’s right.
As for Dr Vivien, can’t the GMC be notified if he is going against the actual regulations? The more he loosely applies what he feels he can do to the regs, the more others will follow and do the same.
I have now read a number of blogs on this Doctor, and I have to ask, where is his moral compass?
Does he think that he’s clever trying to put his own interpretation on the regs and case law, which seems to have failed in every case? I therefore question his competency?
Nobody can quantify the damage he is doing to people who are seriously ill with physical and mental disabilities with the stunts that he’s pulling.
Is he fit to be a doctor?
His moral compass is MONEY. Having also been through the personal injury process, ‘ doctors’ instructed by the defence do exactly the same thing. When comparing the reports from both sides (defence and claimant) you are left wondering if the reports relate to the same person. These types of Doctors do what their paymasters want them to do.
Seems to me that after such a short time these supposed reasonable treatments would have been available when the officers were first declared disabled to do the full duties by him. Why ask now that they be looked at. When not then. Is he trying to cover his own mistakes.
My first thoughts would be to appeal on the back of that they had been examined previously and not suggested.
All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. Well done IODPA for turning the spotlight onto this shady character who does nothing more than his paymasters bidding.
Yet again, IODPA are holding people to account. Interesting blog but so very sad to readhow one doctor is taking apart so many vulnerible lives.
The damage he must be causing to peoples already fragile health is unforgivable.
Keep up the good work IODPA.
Dr Vivian seems to be wanting to be seen as the ‘one’ who has pushed boundaries to test for different methods to screw over injured officers.
He has tried the ‘bad back’ theory where most people suffer from a bad back as they get older so an officer who has been beaten up and left with a bad back….that isn’t from the injury, that would have been an age related problem….that didn’t work. Blown out the water.
He has tried the theory that people who suffer from PTSD shoud be able to get over it if holocaust victims could get over their problems…Blown out the water.
He has tried the theory of acceleration…officers would have suffered from a particular issue regardless and the duty injury would have just speeded it by ‘x’ years….leading officers to be reduced in ‘x’ amount of years. Blown out the water. One Judical Review later shows there is no place for acceleration. (Yet, as I understand it, Vivian seems to be (wilfully?) ignoring case law and continues to do this)
He is now trying the theory that officers should be trying more treatments when retired and if they don’t, they should be reduced….where does it say this in the regulations or in case law? I have scoured the internet for such and can find nothing. This will be the next thing to be blown out the water.
My worry is, what is the next thing he is going to try? And how many more lives is he going to ruin and destroy by pushing these theories?
Vivian, stick to medicine and just doing the right thing. Follow the regulations and the case law actally in existence. If you are so keen to be a master in law, read the case law, read the regulations and know what your remit is. It is not your job to screw people over. Your job is to be a fair and ‘independent’ selected medical practitioner. Just do your job properly. I know this is a big ask when you have to keep pay masters happy.
Anyone noticed the similarities between the Post Office (corrupt and disgusting) and the little man fighting for ‘the truth’?
The parallels between the above and IODPA are huge. Both started out in the same way. Not accepting that those in power were telling the truth, things being concealed by government agencies, the sheer arrogance of those people in charge.
Corruption, just in two different governmental bodies.
The fight taken on by those who couldn’t sit back and do nothing. Fighting on behalf of those who were just too poorly and scared if fighting theirselves.
Bloody heroes. Mr Bates, you are a legend. IODPA, you will always be held in the highest regard by myself and my family for all you do on my (and tens of thousands) behalf. True heroes. Police officers owe you a tremendous debt.
Absolutely agree with every word .
Those responsible in both scenarios should hang their heads in shame but even that is far too good for them.
The General Medical Council (GMC) is a public body that maintains the official register of medical practitioners within the United Kingdom. Its chief responsibility is to “protect, promote and maintain the health and safety of the public” by controlling entry to the register, and suspending or removing members when necessary.
On the 30th January revised guidance from the GMC entitled ‘Good Medical Practice’ will come into effect. Doctors will be expected to follow this guidance. It sets out the principles, values, and standards of care and professional behaviour expected of all medical professionals registered with the GMC. It is an ethical framework, which supports medical professionals to deliver safe care to a good standard, in the interests of patients.
A copy of the guidance can be seen here:
https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/documents/gmp-2024-final—english_pdf-102607294.pdf
All who have been adversely affected by the actions of Dr Vivian should consider making a joint complaint to the GMC setting out where his ethics have fallen short of the expected standard. There is no doubt that he has caused real harm – and it is this aspect that should be emphasised.
Dr Charles Trevarthen Benedict Vivian, you must know now that you have been applying the Regulations incorrectly. You are therefore under an ethical imperative to admit your errors and to take all steps necessary to have them corrected.
There is, wuthout a doubt, a racket going on involving some ruthless SMPs. Charlie, I believe you may be one of these.
SMPs get paid to do the initial assessment. They then get paid AGAIN to attend PMABs.
So it is in their interest to refuse/ reduce officers as they know they are then onto a second pay day.
If they were to be paid just the once, and to get the result right in the first place, this may concentrate their minds in the first place .
The knock on effect for police forces is that they would not be having to pay £10,000 plus to hold the appeal board.
I wonder how much each force has paid out in PMAB costs where Charlie has been involved in?
Could be an interesting FOI request to find out how much various forces have paid out to fight PMABs and JR’s relating to SMP actions.
Then compare those figure to the ‘savings’ made.
“Dr VIVIAN” you are employed in a medico-field as such one would expect you to possess adequate up to date knowledge of such, clearly there is something wrong. Your lack of care and competence is becoming habitual and deliberate further more the frequency of your mistakes is increasing exponentially not only on the main land but in Northern Ireland, you have no excuse for not applying correctly Law, Guidance and Statute and you cannot make it up as you go along and not expect to be chastised. ” Dr VIVIAN” the sword of Damocles is hovering precariously above your head waiting to drop where upon you will face the consequences of your actions in front of a Judge who will administer the Law correctly as it should be without fear or favour. The sooner these SMP’s are forced to add a statement of truth to their decisions the sooner they as “expert” witnesses will be brought to appropriate order in the forum they are avoiding thus far…The Court!
Dr Charlie Vivian, is according to LinkedIn is a Consultant Occupational Physician working for his own company
Icarus Health Solutions Ltd since 2011.
He qualified at St Thomas’s Hospital Medical School with a
MB BS Medicine 1983 – 1988.
Interestingly he didn’t appear to spend much time working as a “medical Doctor “ because by May 2000 he describes himself as Director of Clinical Governance
Adastral Health Ltd
May 2000 – Dec 2006 where he Developed a clinical governance system, based on the Royal Society of Medicine system. This was also very similar to the governance system used by the FSA. (Not sure what this stands for). Clinical governance may be defined as ‘the framework through which healthcare organisations are accountable for continuously improving the quality of their services and safeguarding high quality of care’. SIC.
Adastral Health Ltd was dissolved on 31st May 2011.
Not long afterwards Icarus Health Solution Ltd came into being on 31st October 2011.
Charles Trevarthen Benedict VIVIAN born May 1965 is registered from 31.10.2011 as a director of the private limited company. A further director listed from 1stApril 2020 is Carita Julia Boyd Vivian nee GOMARA. Born in February 1965 she is described as a General Practitioner.
Icarus Health Solutions Ltd is listed as a company whose Nature of business is described as Specialists medical practice activities.
Now having looked at the name of the company, do we start to get an insight into its founder Charles Trevarthen Benedict VIVIAN.
If we look at the definition of Icarus we get this :-
In Classical Mythology Icarus attempted to escape from Crete with wings of wax and feathers but flew so high that his wings melted from the heat of the sun, and he plunged to his death in the sea.
The story of Icarus is a metaphor for self-sabotage through ego and confidence and is known as the Icarus Syndrome.
How well this description fits exactly what Charlie Vivian appears to stand for. His egotistical behaviour in his dealings with his patients who through no fault of their own are in their position of having been injured on duty and medically retired just beggars belief.
Another interesting point revealed in the Gov.Uk records of his company is that Charlie Vivian is described as a Doctor. Now we know that he spent very little time after gaining his medical degree actually treating patients for illness preferring to divert into Occupational Medicine.
It would seem that this was an area where he believed he could excel either because of his inability to carry out traditional Doctor patient interaction or maybe he saw that occupational health would be more lucrative. We will never know and this is truly speculative however by describing himself as a Doctor, it’s maybe relevant that in the English language the word Doctor and its derivatives have many meanings.
Just consider Doctored. Verb
To change the content or appearance of (a document or picture) in order to deceive; falsify.
“the reports have been doctored”. How many times has he done this? Yes he is a Doctor who has Doctored!
Doctoring. Noun.
The act of making different in order to deceive, tamper with, falsify, or adulterate.
I could go on but it’s plain for all to see that Charles Trevarthen Benedict VIVIAN is an accomplished Practitioner of his Doctoring profession. None of this fits within the Hippocratic oath which the said Doctor has no doubt signed. The passage from the original version of the Hippocratic Oath, “I will use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgement; I will abstain from harming or wronging any man by it,” This orders doctors to do their best in their job and not use their skill or knowledge to harm or kill their patients.
How many patients will he continue to harm or maybe even kill indirectly until someone in Authority puts a stop to his nefarious activities.
When will Mr Bates Vs The Post Office be replaced with IODPA Vs
Charles Trevarthen Benedict VIVIAN. Time will tell.
It is still quite astounding that these SMP’s and their nefarious ways are still able to practice via this Government based system.
I have no doubts that soon their bleeding of the cash cow and fraudulent antics will soon be up.
I say fraudulent as that is what it is in many cases. It’s fraudulently obstructing the legitimate process by lying, willfully making the rules and regulations up in an attempt to clearly deny an injured Officer their correct entitled Pension or Injury Award.
At its worse, it is corrupt.
It takes a very shallow, evil, greedy and anti Police individual to carry out these antics, even continuing after being challenged and proven wrong.
There is going to come a day when these SMP’s will not be able to walk down the street without embarrassment. Their lies and intent on defrauding will be published relentlessly, like a snow ball turning into an avalanche effect.
You cannot hide from the likes of social media, YouTube, street journalists, investigative journalists.
Your antics are slowly coming to an end, especially once relentless exposure takes a hold. Oh, and it will not be defamation, it will be facts and the many already recorded incidents that you have willing taken part in.
There is only a handful of SMP’s in our Country and possibly thousands of injured Officers who have been victims to you all. That is something that will and is starting to speak at volume.
That volume is getting a lot louder thanks to these incredibly brave Officers coming forward and speaking out against the tyranny of you so called Doctors.
Thank you IODPA for your continued tenacity against this evil.
“Doctor” Charlie Vivian is to injured police officers what “Doctor” Harold Shipman was to old people !
He is such a narcissist who dishes out such callous cruelty that I wonder if he is the product of a union between Shipman and Cruella Deville !
If I’d ignored regulations while in the job HR would have dropped on me from a great height, yet an SMP does the same and makes a decision to the forces financial benefit and HR do nothing. Now there’s a thing.
This SMP should be struck off the medical register never mind being an SMP.He is causing additional stress to the injured pensioner and should be sued for damages.
Has Mr Vivian now taken the title from Willy Cheng as the countries worst ‘Medical practitioner?”
I’m astonished that he is still able to operate in the capacity he does. Surely there must be a system of assessed competency to allow him to continue in his role ? Does he come under the remit of the BMC ? Would they be able to investigate his unlawful application of these regulations?
I do find it incredible that those who are injured on duty, rather than being seen as a casualty whose service should be acknowledged and appreciated, are instead seen as a financial burden to be targeted, and regulations manipulated to achieve it. I look back on my police career and think that if I knew I would be treated in this way if I was injured on duty, I might have been a lot more reluctant in giving my all.
I tell people about how my reward for being a victim of GBH on duty was to be downtrodden, treated as a malingerer, and threatened with dismissal because, despite three rounds of surgery, I never regained full use of my right arm and hand.
This was after threatening me with disciplinary action for the amount of time I’d taken off…for operations!
One lad I told of my experience had actually been accepted and was awaiting his start date to roll around, and he withdrew. I glad I’ve saved at least one person from risking having to go through that which I did.
If you’re reading this and thinking of joining the police then take my advice – don’t.
How on earth do these people keep thier jobs, any other profession it would be classed as gross misconduct and they would be sacked.
I find it shocking that SMP’s are still getting away with stuff that is totally wrong. Plus how can Vivian declare an IOD officer as permanently disabled, then suggests a review in 2 or 3 years? Permanent means FOREVER unless some miraculous CURE has been found. IODPA members are absolutely right that a review can only take place if there has been a substantial alteration in the injury condition. It also seems to be that these days a new worm has come in.. SMP’s looking for another medical condition, (old age, arthritis etc,) and be reducing the disability level for the IOD Pension. Is that legal?
Yes, it’s legal. Injury pensions are designed to only compensate you for duty injuries.
The statement that “Big egos have little ears”, by Dr. Schiller, is so apt for Dr. Vivien.
As one of his many ‘victims’, his perceived ego as a ‘Quasi Coroner’ and Diagnostic expert in relation to ‘Acceleration’ and bad backs, despite evidence to the contrary, by leading consultants, shows his ‘small ears’. He believes that via his inflated ego, he can justify these false decisions through his ‘superior intellect’.
it’s like Arkwright’ from ‘Open All Hours”, telling the CEO of Tesco, how to run his multi billion business. Totally out of his depth and living in this egotistically superior Cloud Cookoo land, where facts don’t matter.
The problem is the system, that allows people like Vivien to operate with apparent impunity. It rewards such people with the opportunity to get rich by allowing repeat appointments, whether necessary or not, and does not take action in disqualifying them from further work, when proved wrong, even by the higher Courts of Law!
Until the system is changed, (and it used to be fair long ago), then egotists like the said Doctor, will continue to destroy disabled people lives.
It would appear that yet again someone, in this case the SMP is forming their own interpretation of the regs to suit what enables them to incorrectly reduce the pension banding of injured officers, a decision probably made before their examination 😡