An East Anglia pharmacist has been reprimanded by the Statutory Committee after admitting sales of pharmacy medicines in the absence of a pharmacist, and while the premises were not properly registered.
At its meeting on July 13, 1999, the Statutory Committee inquired into the case of Mrs Rabinder Thind, of 21 Welden Road, Hornchurch, Essex. A complaint had been received from the Council of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society which alleged that pharmacy medicines had been sold in the absence of a pharmacist. It was further alleged that, as the premises were not properly registered, trading from them was illegal.
Mr D. Bradly, of counsel (instructed by Walker Martineau, solicitors), appeared in order to put the facts of the case before the committee.
Mrs Thind was present at the hearing and was represented by Mr D. Reissner, of Charles Russell, solicitors.
The committee was told that on October 20, 1997, and October 27, 1997, Solpadeine had been purchased from premises trading as Christchurch Pharmacy, 62–66 Woodbridge Road, Ipswich, by one of the Society's inspectors. On neither occasion had there been a pharmacist on the premises.
It had subsequently come to light that the registration of the business as Christchurch Pharmacy Ltd had become void on January 17, 1995. After that date, Mrs Thind had been operating as a sole trader but had not transferred ownership of the business from the company. In consequence, every medicine dispensed and every sale and offer for sale of a pharmacy medicine, and the use of the title "pharmacy" had been a criminal offence.
Giving the committee's decision, the chairman (Mr Gary Flather, QC), said that Mrs Thind's company, Christchurch Pharmacy Ltd, had been dissolved as accounts had not been filed. It was not a legal entity, although the company's name had been entered as owner in successive applications for reregistration. There was room for debate as to how much Mrs Thind had known what the situation was until it had been pointed out to her that she had been trading as a limited company when she had said she was a sole trader.
The committee wished to emphasise that a pharmacist had not only to be a good pharmacist but also had to keep a grip on things as an administrator. She should be alert to business as well as pharmaceutical matters. The chairman advised Mrs Thind to join her local branch of the Society, and participate in its activities.
With regard to the illegal sales of a pharmacy medicine, which had been admitted,they were said to have occurred when Mrs Thind had been out of the premises talking to other pharmacists about matters of local concern to the profession. That explanation was not an excuse, the chairman said. The offences aggregated to serious professional misconduct, for which Mrs Thind had expressed remorse.
The committee directed that Mrs Thind should be reprimanded.