Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Richard Stephenson — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:42:09 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]HOWEVER at crucial points in the process (such as service of notice of inquiry) a paper copy is always sent along with an email. [/quote]

Richard, my point is that surely those crucial points should be sent not just by post, but by recorded delivery, 'signature required'.

[/quote]

Dear Arlo,

I forgot to add that from the Autumn the RCVS will try to telephone both the complainant and the respondent vet BEFORE the initial complaint letter is sent out (that is of course at the other end of the process to the DC).although it doesn't always work the College does in fact try very hard to keep respondent vets informed as to how cases are progressed. In the future the RCVS will be much more proactive in picking up the telephone and talking to both public and vets. Given that the latest figures show that only 1% of complaints end up at a DC hearing it should be clear that a huge amount of work is concluded out of the lime light. Recent changes in staffing levels (increased) and a more efficient process should significantly cut down the length of time members have to wait for decisions (which the RCVS knows is very stressful).

Yours,

Richard S.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Bob Russell — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:21:28 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Oh come on Anthony... it was just a joke![/quote]

Sorry, bit over-sensitive; hoping he doesn't let me and others down....

[/quote]

I have long since come to the conclusion that Mr Chikosi has done himself and his profession no favours, nor has the DC on this occasion!

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:03:57 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Oh come on Anthony... it was just a joke![/quote]

Sorry, bit over-sensitive; hoping he doesn't let me and others down....

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Bob Russell — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:02:34 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]

[quote user="Bob Russell"]completely ludicrous that important bits of communication would be sent by anything other than signature required![/quote]

The standard adopted by the College is, I believe, the same one accepted by all other courts in this country.

Scenario: someone does bad and knows they have done bad. Refuses to sign for any official-looking paperwork. Trial can't go ahead.

[/quote]

Not saying for a second that the trial could or should not go ahead in the absence of a signature. By getting a signature receipt is confirmed. Signature refused indicates reasonable attempts have been made.

Not at this address or undeliverable provides an element of doubt which needs to be covered when deciding to proceed in the absence of a defendant! Trial goes ahead anyway!

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 15:23:32 GMT

Malcolm's right

Wynne

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Mark Hedberg — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:41:28 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]

Scenario: someone does bad and knows they have done bad. Refuses to sign for any official-looking paperwork. Trial can't go ahead.

[/quote]

Brilliant! Unfortunately you'll have to get a white persian cat to stroke before we let you into the Mad Scientist Evil Genius Supervillain Club!

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Malcolm Ness — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:37:40 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]completely ludicrous that important bits of communication would be sent by anything other than signature required![/quote]

The standard adopted by the College is, I believe, the same one accepted by all other courts in this country.

Scenario: someone does bad and knows they have done bad. Refuses to sign for any official-looking paperwork. Trial can't go ahead.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Dennison — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:28:22 GMT

Bit off topic, but reading this thread has made me realise I'm no longer getting Vet Times. I feel left out... why have they stopped sending it to me?

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Gillian Mostyn — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:59:30 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]No, just being fair and not prejudiced.[/quote]

Oh come on Anthony... it was just a joke!

It isn't prejudiced to think that a vet working in the UK should be prepared to engage with our regulatory body when they are asked to do so. Mr C has NEVER used ignorance of the complaint as the reason for his silence.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Bob Russell — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:48:19 GMT

It strikes me as being completely ludicrous that important bits of communication would be sent by anything other than signature required!

Email is not adequate for important documentation.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:18:45 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]HOWEVER at crucial points in the process (such as service of notice of inquiry) a paper copy is always sent along with an email. [/quote]

Richard, my point is that surely those crucial points should be sent not just by post, but by recorded delivery, 'signature required'.

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]In this day and age email really should be the primary method of data transmission but I'm discovering that read receipts are not universal nor totally reliable across all programs or ISPs.[/quote]

I disagree that email should be the primary method, regardless of members' preferences. As you've already pointed out, there is no reliable receipt system. There is also no way of guaranteeing delivery. And emails are prone to disappearing into spam folders (often on a server before they have even reached the spam folder on your computer).

I'd argue that the ideal is what Richard describes - just that the crucial stuff sent by post is sent recorded.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:56:27 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Love your optimism.[/quote]

No, just being fair and not prejudiced.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Gillian Mostyn — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:03:12 GMT

Love your optimism. Mr C doesn't bother to reply to a DC complaint but you think he'll reply to you within hours. Bless.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:30:30 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]As a very general comment,[/quote]

Thanks Richard for the reasoned response as is usual from yourself. In this day and age email really should be the primary method of data transmission but I'm discovering that read receipts are not universal nor totally reliable across all programs or ISPs.

Let's hope the RC and the DC take heed of this long saga and there won't ever be this controversy in the future.

Er, nothing from Mr C yet [from a hotmail address??].

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Richard Stephenson — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:01 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]all DC communication to a defendant by post, recorded delivery. And only send copies by email in addition[/quote]

Arlo,

The College has tried to speed up the whole complaints process and increasingly uses email rather than snail mail IF respondents indicate that they are happy to communicate in that way. HOWEVER at crucial points in the process (such as service of notice of inquiry) a paper copy is always sent along with an email. In the vast majority of cases the College receives helpful, polite, timeous, reasoned replies from its members and this generally means that only 2% of cases end up with the full weight of a disciplinary enquiry.

As a very general comment, whilst accepting that 'silence' is everyone's' prerogative, I have to say that I think the profession as a whole is let down by a tiny minority of its members who don't respond to the complaints process - it is very embarrassing and indeed humiliating for the profession (not just the College) when we have to tell complainants that we cannot locate a member or that they simply haven't responded and thus their complaint has not yet been properly addressed. It does bring into question whether we should be allowed to be a self regulating profession when members fail to assist an investigation and in my view criticism from the public is in that respect entirely valid.

Yours,

Richard S.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 10:06:42 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]Hope that resolves the matter for you.[/quote]

My understanding is that Mr C received notice of the hearing before he left the UK for Zimbabwe but didn't receive the hearing bundle of statements etc. in Zimbabwe and therefore believed the matter had been concluded, particularly with the subsequent time lapse.

As I see it this is his only justification for his silence.

Hopefully his reply to my inquiry will clarify what, if anything, he received in Zimbabwe.

I have emailed him and will report the reply verbatim if I get one.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Bob Russell — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:56:06 GMT

I tend to agree that the read receipt/ recorded delivery thing is a bit of a red herring but had these been documented this would not have been part of the discussion! A bit silly on the part of the RCVS IMO. I will use 'signed for' whenever I sent important things by post.

I still think Mr Chikosi would have argued the case if he had not been aware of proceedings. I cannot believe it would not haver been plastered over the front page of the VetTimes.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:13:53 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"]"The information put before the Committee was that on 22 January 2013 the Clerk to the Disciplinary Committee wrote to Mr Chikosi at his registered address, and sent him by email, as an attachment, the Notice of Inquiry and Reply Form. The Committee has viewed the email and attachment, which confirms the documents referred to were attached to the email. Mr Chikosi sent an email to the Clerk on 8 February 2013 advising her of a change of address in Harare. He requested that the Notice of Inquiry and Reply Form be sent to him again at the new address as "the mail sent may have been lost".[/quote]

Does seem to me that this whole read receipt / recorded delivery thing is a bit of a red herring WRT to Mr Chikosi. The evidence that he received communications / was aware of what was going on is pretty compelling.

That said, if not already the case, it would surely be prudent of the College to send all DC communication to a defendant by post, recorded delivery. And only send copies by email in addition, where speed would be helpful.

When I lived in France, I found you can't even cancel a car insurance policy except by notifying the insurer by recorded post!

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Richard Stephenson — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:26:33 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]There is no doubt he received the early notice of the hearing[/quote]

I think this might explain your misunderstanding of the process. The notice you refer to was THE notice of inquiry (not an 'early' notice) - effectively in lay terms the last communication in a long chain of letters and emails which started with the initial complaint letter in 2011.

Hope that resolves the matter for you.

Obviously it would be a complete travesty of justice if members could avoid the disciplinary process simply by not sending 'read receipts' or not keeping their registered address up to date as required by law.

Yours,

Richard S.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:49:06 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]Without fail I never send read receipts. I always cancel them[/quote]

As far as I can see neither gmail or hotmail have the facility to deal with read receipts which, with vital document transmission, seems odd??

Microsoft Outlook etc does, apparently.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:10:45 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Are you suggesting that read receipts for emails and signed for "receipts" for documents are unnecessary in documents delivery or communications because there is a whole industry that seems to have been doing that for some time?[/quote]

Without fail I never send read receipts. I always cancel them.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Anthony Todd — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:48:39 GMT

[quote user="Richard Stephenson"] in my experience the internet is surprising reliable and world wide.[/quote]

True but unsurprisingly my address was not transferred for a period of about 10 days during which time I lost, or didn't receive, several important emails including the death of a friend so it does happen. To say nothing of the possibility of an error in the email address itself.

Also remember that this is a journalists account, sometimes verbatim it appears but no one would suggest that it would be complete or that the receipt of documents was an issue.

I am making attempts to contact Mr C and I'll ask him the question and let you know.

There is no doubt he received the early notice of the hearing; but no proof he received any thing after that, just "they were sent to both addresses; to Zimbabwe? With an address change?

Are you suggesting that read receipts for emails and signed for "receipts" for documents are unnecessary in documents delivery or communications because there is a whole industry that seems to have been doing that for some time?

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Stephen Courtney — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:46:30 GMT

I am rather dismayed by the current tone of events. I was one of the first to condemn the DC response to this mess, but am not impressed at all by a request for a huge fighting fund - there is no fight to be had now, the DC decision is final, the time scale for an appeal to the Privy Council has passed - and the only way for restoration to occur is for an apology and acknowledgement of failings to be made, sincerely, along with evidence of efforts to maintain currency .

There has been no explanation of the refusal to engage with the disciplinary process, at a time when adequate legal help was available, and frankly at this point I don't want to hear a blame game going on. I'm disappointed by these events, very much so.

Mr Chikose works in a country where the currency in use is the US$ - and the cost of living is higher there than here. He managed to find an airfare to get over here, and home again - so why is so much money needed for his restoration? That has never been satisfactorily explained.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

james herriot lied — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 13:44:56 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]

Ah, at last someone gets my point, I'll send you a case as well.........

[/quote]

To be fair, Anthony, by the time I'm getting the point, everybody else will be completely up to speed: see me as a back marker.

I think there are two issues:

1) Mr Chikosi isn't appealing the decision, but going for reinstatement. This would suggest that he's not trying to promote a defence of his actions, but a stance of contrition. Had he not received communications, I suspect the clever people around him would be weaving that in to his strategy.

2) It's a good thing overall that there's been this breathing space between the ruling and Mr Chikosi reappearing: had he done so in the immediate aftermath, with the grovelling tone that is apparently suitable for reinstatement, then the momentum that gathered and led to the recent breakthroughs with Council might have dissipated into inertia on one side and angry impotence on the other.

My argument was always on a different path, but this isn't a thread about that.

But mainly, champagne is a drink for rich old reactionaries like Bob and Malcolm. I'd really prefer port, if that's OK. Something from a decent mid90s vintage, which should leave just enough to have it properly couriered.

Re: Chikosi/VetsNow blame game!

Richard Stephenson — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 13:44:28 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"] but did Mr C receive them[/quote]

"The information put before the Committee was that on 22 January 2013 the Clerk to the Disciplinary Committee wrote to Mr Chikosi at his registered address, and sent him by email, as an attachment, the Notice of Inquiry and Reply Form. The Committee has viewed the email and attachment, which confirms the documents referred to were attached to the email. Mr Chikosi sent an email to the Clerk on 8 February 2013 advising her of a change of address in Harare. He requested that the Notice of Inquiry and Reply Form be sent to him again at the new address as "the mail sent may have been lost".

Given that Mr C replied to the email of the 24th he must have known the date and time of the hearing. Given that he stated that he had 'lost' the mail - he must have received it. You cannot reply to an email you have never received or subsequently state you have lost something you didn't know you once had.

As has been pointed out to you many times before the College has a legal obligation to serve papers on the lawfully registered address of the Member and the member has a statutory duty to keep that address current. There is therefore no possibility that Mr C didn't receive the papers as they were immediately served on both his registered address, his new one in Harare and in addition to an email address of his choice. As noted above such service was acknowledged by him on the 8th Feb 2013. Having visited Africa on many occasions I am aware that telecommunications are sometimes erratic - however in my experience the internet is surprising reliable and world wide.

Yours,

Further one also has to note that Mr C does not himself suggest that he didn't know that there was a hearing or hadn't received the paperwork - that seems to be a suggestion entirely of your own. If he had such a defence available I'm sure he would have voiced it in the Vet Times 16/06/14.