https://www.thompsons-scotland.co.uk/medical-product-claims/fake-psychiatrist-zholia-alemi
Zholia Alemi dropped out of medical school in her first year of study in New Zealand despite having no qualifications she registered as a Psychiatrist in the UK, falsely claiming to have a medical degree and worked in various parts of the UK for 22 years.
Alemi claiming to be a qualified Psychiatrist is thought to have treated many hundreds of patients in Scotland, Health boards in Scotland are currently writing to patients who were treated by the bogus psychiatrist and convicted criminal Zholia Alemi.
Zholia’s background came to light when she was jailed for five years recently for fraud and theft when she tried to fake a patient’s Will to steal 1.3 million pounds. Zholia Alemi is currently facing new criminal charges in England.
When Alemi's actions were uncovered, one health board - NHS Ayrshire and Arran - confirmed that she treated 395 adults while working as a locum for 18 months from 2007.
Alemi also worked for other Scottish health boards. These include:
If you or a loved one has been treated by the bogus NHS Scotland psychiatrist Zholia Alemi or received a letter from your Health Board, it’s important you seek legal advice as you may have a claim for compensation.
Thompsons are Scotland’s leading mass litigation lawyers and our specialist team are preparing legal action on behalf of those treated by Zholia Alemi.
Mass litigation lawyer and partner with Patrick McGuire has years of experience dealing with cases of this type. Says “The actions of Zholia Alemi are truly shocking. This fraudster and convicted criminal was allowed to practice as a NHS Psychiatrist for many years across Scotland while holding no qualifications.”
“During that time this fake doctor used her authority to change the treatment of extremely vulnerable patients. She used her position to commit patients to secure mental health units denying people their very liberty.”
“She used her position to dupe and endanger the lives of hundreds of vulnerable trusting Scots.” This disgraceful state of affairs will not go unanswered by the families affected. My team are at the early stages of preparing civil legal action on behalf of the patients Alemi conned and endangered. If you or a member of your family have been sent a letter by the health authorities concerning treatment by Zholia Alemi you can contact Thompsons Solicitors now on our dedicated confidential helpline 0141 280 7447.”
https://www.gmc-uk.org/news/news-archive/our-update-on-zholia-alemi
In November 2018 we became aware that Zholia Alemi used a fraudulent qualification to join the medical register in 1995 and worked as a doctor until June 2017.
Were any complaints made about Zholia Alemi during the time she was practising?
We received nine complaints during the 23 years that she was on the medical register and all were investigated fully.
At the time we became aware that her qualifications were fraudulent she was already suspended from our register.
By BHVISHYA PATEL FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 19:22, 20 August 2020 | UPDATED: 19:44, 20 August 2020
A fake psychiatrist who worked for the NHS for 22 years despite allegedly not having any qualifications has been charged with 13 fraud offences.
Zholia Alemi, 57, formerly from High Harrington, has been was charged with the fraud offences following an investigation by detectives in the area's Crime and Safeguarding Team.
Today Cumbria Constabulary confirmed the former NHS worker had been charged with two counts of making a false instrument with intent it be accepted as genuine.
Zholia Alemi, 57, formerly from High Harrington, who worked for the NHS for 22 years despite allegedly not having any qualifications, has been charged with 13 fraud offences
She has also been charged with eight counts of fraud by false representation and three counts of obtaining a pecuniary advantage.
She is now due to appear before Manchester City Magistrates' Court on September 22.
Alemi worked as a locum consultant psychiatrist for the Norfolk and Suffolk Foundation Trust (NSFT) between 2014 and 2015, mainly looking after disabled adults and children.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49363907
Zholia Alemi was found guilty of four theft and fraud charges in connection with a patient's £1.3m estate
Health boards in Scotland are to write to patients who were treated by the bogus psychiatrist Zholia Alemi.
The medical school dropout from New Zealand is thought to have seen hundreds of patients in Scotland.
Alemi worked for the NHS in various parts of the UK for 22 years despite having no qualifications.
Her background came to light when she was jailed for five years last October at Carlisle Crown Court.
She had been found guilty of four fraud and theft charges.
The court heard she faked a patient's will in an attempt to inherit her £1.3m estate.
The Scottish government has said the relevant clinical records in each of the health boards are being reviewed by consultant psychiatrists.
They will identify decisions made by Alemi "to offer appropriate advice and support".
Letters will be sent to the affected patients over the coming months. BBC Scotland understands the first of the letters are about to be sent.
Health Secretary Jeane Freeman said: "I know that this will be extremely upsetting for people and their families.
"The General Medical Council now has processes in place to ensure that this won't happen again.
"I also wish to reassure people that the remainder of their care and treatment was delivered by fully qualified doctors."
Ms Freeman added: "If anyone affected has any further questions, they can get in touch with their local board."
When Alemi's actions were uncovered, one health board - NHS Ayrshire and Arran - confirmed that she treated 395 adults while working as a locum for 18 months from 2007.
During this time 24 of these patients were detained by Alemi under the Mental Health Act.
NHS Ayrshire and Arran medical director Dr Alison Graham said the health board would be contacting all those affected.
She added: "We would like to apologise for any distress this situation may have caused. If patients were treated by this individual and have concerns, we would advise them to contact our mental health services team."
The General Medical Council (GMC) has said checks were now more "rigorous" than those carried out at the time Alemi moved to the UK.
The GMC has created a web page with advice for anyone who is concerned that they were treated by Alemi.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-48320608
Zholia Alemi was found guilty of four theft and fraud charges after a week-long trial last year
A bogus psychiatrist who treated hundreds of patients in Scotland may have referred some for needless electro-convulsive therapy, Scotland's chief medical officer has warned.
Dr Catherine Calderwood said others may have been detained under the Mental Health Act or "groomed" to gain access to their finances.
Zholia Alemi worked in the NHS for 22 years despite having no qualifications.
One health board confirmed 24 of her patients were detained or "sectioned".
Alemi was jailed for five years last October for defrauding patients.
A court in Carlisle heard she faked a patient's will in an attempt to inherit her £1.3m estate.
After her conviction, it emerged that Alemi had dropped out of medical school in her first year in New Zealand but was employed by the NHS after moving to the UK in 1995.
She worked at a number of locations across the UK, including six Scottish health boards which have now been asked to check their records about patients she treated.
Dr Calderwood has now written to these boards, saying she expects the review to identify some patients who were significantly affected by Alemi's activity through "prescription of drugs, electro-convulsive therapy, treatment or diagnosis, or in the use of the Mental Health Act".
In the letter, obtained by the Herald newspaper, she also warns: "She is known to have befriended and 'groomed' vulnerable people that she came into contact with through working as a psychiatrist, with the ultimate aim of accessing their financial affairs."
Another concern is that she may have played a role in determining outcomes for patients while sitting on mental health tribunals, she said.
One health board - NHS Ayrshire and Arran - has confirmed that Alemi treated 395 adults while working as a locum for 18 months from 2007.
During this time 24 of these patients were detained by Alemi under the Mental Health Act.
NHS Ayrshire and Arran medical director Dr Alison Graham said the health board would be contacting all those affected.
She added: "We would like to apologise for any distress this situation may have caused. If patients were treated by this individual and have concerns, we would advise them to contact our mental health services team."
NHS Tayside said Alemi was employed as a locum psychiatrist for a "short period" in 2009 while NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde said she worked in the former NHS Argyll & Clyde area between May 2005 and July 2006.
It is understood that Alemi also worked in the NHS Borders, NHS Highland and NHS Grampian areas.
The General Medical Council (GMC) has said Alemi was allowed to join the UK's medical register under a section of the Medical Act which has not been in force since 2003.
This allowed medical graduates from certain Commonwealth countries to register on the basis of qualifications obtained at home, without sitting tests that most foreign doctors have to pass before working in the UK.
The GMC said the checks were now more "rigorous" and it is reviewing records of up to 3,000 doctors who were allowed to work under the same rules as Alemi.
The GMC has created a web page with advice for anyone who is concerned that they were treated by Alemi.
However, due to lax procedures in the UK when it came to screening foreign doctors at the time, Alemi managed to practice her form of medicine on more than 3,000 unwitting patients, with the majority being the elderly and infirm.
Having dropped out during her first year at University, Alemi moved to the UK for a fresh start. Having registered in 1995, Alemi claimed she had a medical degree from the University of Aukland, but that was a lie. That lie only came out 22 years later when she was convicted of fraud and by that time she had attended to the needs of thousands of patients who thought she was a real doctor.
The blame falls squarely at the feet of The General Medical Council (GMC), which is the main watchdog for doctors in Britain. The GMC has even issued an embarrassed apology, admitting that Alemi and thousands of others have slipped through the net due to poor background checks and massive flaws in procedures. They said they were sorry for “any risk arising to patients as a result” and that it was confident its current processes are “far stronger.”
Ironically, Alemi was only flagged and caught by authorities after she attempted to defraud a dementia patient in her care. She planned to forge the patient’s will and to inherit a portion of her estate as a result. But that plan was stopped in its tracks as authorities began to question Alemi’s qualifications or lack thereof.
Even more shockingly, Alemi worked for years on a full-time basis as a consultant psychiatrist for a dementia service in west Cumbria. At one point she redrafted a patient’s will and fraudulently applied for power of attorney. Her ploy was not a smart one and was easily flagged and directed to the right authority.
When the police interviewed the victim of the fraud attempt, the woman was lucid enough to tell investigators that she felt Alemi was taking her for a ride. When asked whether Alemi had assisted her with her financial affairs she said, “I think she just helped herself,” according to a News and Star report.
Alemi, who was so wealthy she drove a Lotus Elise sports car, was summoned to court before long to explain her illegal actions. Judge James Adkin, who presided over the case, described her as “wicked” and she was found guilty by that judge at the Carlisle Crown Court and jailed for five years. She had already lost her job in 2016 and was suspended by the medical tribunal service in 2017.
When the GMC was asked how it was possible that Alemi ever became a doctor in the UK despite not having any qualifications, they said it was to do with the UK’s medical register under a section of the Medical Act. Alemi slipped through the net of an already failing system which failed to check the qualifications of doctors for years.
The difficulty arose due to the act’s provision for immigrants to the UK from Commonwealth countries such as New Zealand. Such applicants were entitled to join the register on the basis of the qualification they obtained back home but much of the system was simply run on trust and was understaffed in any event.
Applicants from Commonwealth countries didn’t even need to sit the standard two-part medical exam for foreign doctors when they arrived. As a result of cases like these and countless others, the GMC has now put in place more rigorous checks and can identify any fraudulent applicants to the register. However, in many cases, the damage has already been done.
As a result of the controversial and highly sensitive Alemi case, up to 3,000 Commonwealth doctors working in the UK are under urgent review by the GMC. Meanwhile, the chief executive of GMC, Charlie Massey, told reporters that the issue is a “serious” one and has been referred to the police as well as to NHS England.
The debacle has left egg on the faces of many people involved at the executive level, although the various health authorities say they’re confident that the system is now robust enough to stop further fraudulent cases like this from occurring in the future. “We are confident that, 23 years on, our systems are robust and would identify any fraudulent attempt to join the medical register,” said Massey.
While the GMC confirmed that they were aware that their patients put their trust in them to endure the doctors that treat them are qualified, a Department of Health and Social Care spokeswoman spoke about following the Alemi conviction. “As the organization responsible for regulating doctors, we expect the GMC to investigate how this criminal was able to register as a doctor and put measures in place to make sure it can’t happen again,” she said.
When Alemi arrived in the UK, she was accused of forging documents to be able to work as a doctor. She provided both a Bachelor of Medicine and a Bachelor of Surgery certificate from the University of Aukland when she arrived, but those documents turned out to be false. Alemi then went on to exploit the British medical system to her benefit and earned well from it.
Having tricked authorities easily and without too much effort, Alemi worked as a psychiatrist for the UK’s National Health Service treating thousands of patients over the years. On top of that, Alemi was a good earner, netting roughly $188,000 in annual salary despite having no qualifications or experience.
In one of Alemi’s since-deleted social media profiles, she described herself: “I am a retired psychiatrist and a member of the London Royal College of Psychiatrists with a special interest in developmental conditions such as Asperger’s,” she wrote. But the GMC is now urging all patients who were treated by Alemi to come forward immediately and identify themselves.
Massey told reporters that the process is now far stronger and is supposed to be watertight. “Our processes are far stronger now, with rigorous testing in place to ensure those joining the register are fit to work in the UK,” he said. “It is clear that in this case the steps taken in the 1990s were inadequate and we apologize for any risk arising to patients as a result.”
According to a personal assistant of Alemi, Claire Wilkinson, who worked alongside her in Plymouth in 2014 and 2015, Alemi was obsessed with money. Wilkinson told the press that she tried to raise concerns about Alemi’s “bizarre actions” on many occasions but to no avail. She spoke about how Alemi was “money driven” and overly obsessed with “wealth.”
Wilkinson also told Plymouth Live that Alemi had many boyfriends, and that her intentions with them were quite clear. “She was very money driven; she lived for money. She would only find the wealthy men attractive – even if they weren’t attractive,” she said. “She went for wealth and hierarchy.”
The troubling case highlights the risk that patients face in the UK due to poor processes and a lack of proper checks at the medical level. Many feel that five years isn’t enough for Alemi, as Judge Adkin said following sentencing: “This was despicable, cruel criminality motivated by pure greed and you must be severely punished for it.”
Even politicians in the UK have become involved in the Alemi case. John Woodcock, independent MP for Barrow and Furness, said the case was “hugely alarming,” adding, “If this had been one individual that had slipped through the net it would have been concerning, but the idea that it could be a systemic loophole that has been exploited is hugely alarming. … It is understandable that patients are calling for an inquiry – this is of sufficient magnitude.”
https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j4425?sso=
News
BMJ 2017; 358 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4425 (Published 22 September 2017) Cite this as: BMJ 2017;358:j4425
A junior doctor who was accused of wrongly telling a patient that he had cancer has been exonerated after a medical practitioners tribunal found that the patient had become flustered at the mention of the word “cancer” and misunderstood the doctor’s comments.
Richard Schofield, who qualified in 2011, waited nearly three years for his hearing, only for the General Medical Council’s case against him to swiftly unravel.
The two expert witnesses, one for the GMC and one for Schofield, wrote in a joint statement, “The experts agree that in their experience it is common for patients of all ages, when faced with ‘bad’ news (including, for example, the possibility that they may have cancer), to become less receptive to receiving information. Both experts have witnessed this phenomenon in their working lives.”
Schofield, who was working at Warrington General Hospital as a foundation year 2 doctor in general surgery, saw “Patient A” in June 2014 to explain that computed tomography had shown a potentially suspicious lesion on one kidney. He recalled saying that the “cystic neoplasm” listed on the CT report might be cancerous and might not.
He told the tribunal he left the room to discuss the case with the consultant, who advised an ultrasound scan. He returned to explain this to the patient and discussed the ultrasound scan with him. After that he left again and spoke to a registrar, a consultant, and the radiology department about the imaging.
He returned to find that the patient gone, he told the tribunal. Eight days later he learnt from a nurse that she had spoken on the telephone to Patient A, who believed that he had aggressive cancer. Schofield called him the same day to clarify the situation.
The patient’s recollection was very different. He suggested that Schofield had said that he had “aggressive cancer” of the kidney. When asked if a person could live on one kidney, the patient said, Schofield had answered, “Nah.”
Schofield had apologised to him in the later phone call, Patient A said, saying that he had “read it wrong.”
The tribunal preferred Schofield’s version of events. It was inherently unlikely, said the tribunal chair, Victoria Goodfellow, that he had denied that a person could survive on one kidney.
In his letter of complaint to the trust Patient A acknowledged that his state of mind after the consultation was “confused” and that his mind went into turmoil after hearing the word “cancer.”
This is a common phenomenon, both expert witnesses testified. Schofield’s witness, the consultant urological surgeon Bo Parys, said that “once you use the word cancer, what goes after can be misinterpreted and what has gone before is often forgotten.”
Parys cited an incident from his own practice where he had told a patient he had cancer, only for the patient to tell a nurse that the doctor had said he was fine.
Similar confusion had already afflicted Patient A, said Goodfellow, when his own GP had referred him for the CT scan, telling him that the cyst might be benign and might not. Patient A told the tribunal that he left that consultation feeling that he had “no real reason to be concerned.” He believed he was seeing Schofield merely to discuss a cyst on his kidney and did not expect to hear the word “cancer.”
Goodfellow told Schofield, “The tribunal concluded that whilst Patient A was endeavouring to be honest and give a true account of the consultation, it is more likely that Patient A misremembered what happened. It found you to be inherently a doctor of good character.”
A GMC spokeswoman said that investigations proceeded to full hearings only if one lay and one medical assessor found a “realistic prospect of a doctor’s fitness to practise being found impaired.”
But, she added, “It is only at a hearing that the evidence is fully tested in that the demeanour of a witness can be observed and their credibility and recollection properly tested.”
A WARRINGTON Hospital doctor has been cleared of wrongdoing after he was accused of incorrectly telling a patient that they had cancer.
Dr Richard Schofield had faced a week-long Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service hearing after a patient alleged that the urologist had mistakenly diagnosed him with ‘aggressive’ cancer of the kidney in June 2014.
But the MPTS panel concluded that the patient had ‘misremembered’ his consultation with Dr Schofield and found the accusations unproven.
‘Patient A’ had been referred to Warrington Hospital after a 2cm cyst was discovered on his right kidney, the tribunal heard.
The patient claimed that Dr Schofield, who no longer works at the trust, had told him that he was suffering with an aggressive form of cancer.
But Dr Schofield stated that he had only raised the possibility of Patient A having cancer after telling him that he had a cystic neoplasm, which could have been either benign or malignant.
Dr Schofield described himself as feeling ‘gutted’ after learning that Patient A had left the consultation without fully understanding it and felt his explanation was ‘not good enough’.
The junior doctor had never discussed a potential cancer diagnosis with a patient prior to this occasion.
Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust’s then medical director Paul Hughes referred Dr Schofield to the General Medical Council in December 2014 following a complaint.
It had also been alleged that Dr Schofield told his patient that he could not live with one kidney, and that he had not performed an abdominal examination as he had recorded in medical notes.
But the MPTS found all the allegations against Dr Schofield to be unproven following the hearing, held between September 11 and 19.
Tribunal chair Andrew Young said: “The tribunal concluded that whilst Patient A was endeavouring to be honest and give a true account of the consultation, it is more likely that Patient A misremembered what happened.
“It found Dr Schofield to be inherently a doctor of good character.
“Before concluding this determination, the tribunal would like to stress in making its finding of fact it is not intended to suggest that Patient A was anything other than an honest witness doing his best to recall the consultation.”
Patient A was described by Mr Young as a ‘well-intentioned witness who did his best to tell the tribunal what he believed to be the truth’.
Professor Simon Constable, deputy chief executive of Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, said: “A complaint was submitted to the trust regarding this clinician in 2014.
“Due process was following in relation to the complainant which, as the doctor had left the organisation, included referring the matter to the GMC at their request.
“After undertaking their own investigation of the complaint, the GMC made the decision to refer the case to the MPTS.”
Clare Dyer, The BMJ Cite this as: BMJ 2017;358:j4141
A medical practitioners tribunal has taken the “exceptional course” of taking no action against the registration of a GP whose partners asked him to retire after learning that he had deleted some of his appointment slots to reduce his patient workload. Andrew Thomson (left), who qualified in Dundee in 1996, made several admissions of dishonesty relating to the “coping mechanism” he employed to deal with his workload at the Academy Health Centre in Forfar, Scotland. The tribunal held that Thomson’s fitness to practise was impaired but took no action after finding “powerful mitigating factors” in his case. He deleted some of his appointment slots using the practice’s IT system and also changed some of his 10 minute slots to 20 minutes. In one case, when a member of staff had freed up a gap in his schedule, he filled it by creating a fictitious appointment with a patient he called “M Mouse M” and subsequently recorded having seen that patient. But Thompson’s dishonesty was of a “highly unusual nature,” said the tribunal chair, Robin Ince. “The tribunal accepts that in the time freed by the deleted appointments you were either seeing other patients, or working on external activities for the benefit of the centre,” he said.
BMJ 2017; 358 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4141 (Published 05 September 2017)Cite this as: BMJ 2017;358:j4141
A medical practitioners’ tribunal has taken the “exceptional course” of taking no action against the registration of a GP whose partners asked him to retire after learning that he had deleted some of his appointment slots to reduce his patient workload.
Andrew Thomson, who qualified in Dundee in 1996, made several admissions of dishonesty relating to the “coping mechanism” he employed to deal with his workload at the Academy Health Centre in Forfar, Scotland.
The tribunal held that Thomson’s fitness to practise was impaired but took no action after finding “powerful mitigating factors” in his case.
He deleted some of his appointment slots using the practice’s IT system and also changed some of his 10 minute slots to 20 minutes.
In one case, when a member of staff had freed up a gap in his schedule, he filled it by creating a fictitious appointment with a patient he called “M Mouse M” and subsequently recorded having seen that patient.
He fabricated several telephone consultations, and on one occasion created an appointment for a patient he knew to be an inpatient at a nearby hospital. When queried by a partner, he told her that the patient had been discharged and was at home, a fact that she was able to disprove by checking.
But Thompson’s dishonesty was of a “highly unusual nature,” said tribunal chair Robin Ince. “For instance you did not defraud an employer; falsify or improperly amend patient records; submit false references or inaccurate CVs; make inaccurate statements in formal documents; or conduct misleading research.”
“The tribunal accepts that in the time freed by the deleted appointments you were either seeing other patients, or working on external activities for the benefit of the centre.”
Thompson had been taken on by the practice in part for his administrative skills, said Ince, and as the executive GP partner he bore a heavy workload of administrative tasks. He also had external roles with Angus clinical healthcare partnership, the Royal College of GPs, and the BMA.
He had been off work for 10 months from September 2010. On his return, he had sought to make amends with extra work, but had found himself approaching “burnout.”
Although Thomson had breached his partners’ trust, said Ince, his “actions were, essentially, related to internal partnership matters which did not impact upon patient safety and secured no additional financial benefit to you. Many of your actions might have been approved in any event, if you had dealt with them in a more transparent manner.”
Thomson was supported by glowing testimony from his former practice manager and colleagues and from his new colleagues at a GP practice in Brechin, Scotland. Brechin is an underserved area with a history of difficulty in finding and retaining GPs, the tribunal heard.
Ince noted that Thomson had been found guilty of misconduct, and that his practice had been ruled impaired as a result. But the misconduct did “not obviously fit into any of the examples indicated in the General Medical Council’s sanctions guidance,” said Ince, rejecting the GMC’s recommendation of suspension. The tribunal concluded that “ordinary, honest, and reasonable people, informed of the context and circumstances of this case, would regard the imposition of a suspension, even for a short period of time, as disproportionate.”
Copyright © 2023 GMC-Watch - All Rights Reserved.