Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 273 No 7325 p713-714
13 November 2004

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 66K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· New contract
· Boots the Chemists
· Dispensing
· MedicinesComplete
· The Society
· The Journal


Letters to the Editor

Boots the Chemists

An inducement to obtain a prescription?

From Mr M. H. Franks, MRPharmS

I have had three patients bring in vouchers from Boots The Chemists offering 250 points (equivalent to £2.50) if they sign up to the Boots prescription collection service. I was under the impression that it was unprofessional to offer an inducement to obtain a prescription and also against the NHS terms of service.

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society has informed me that the professional requirements were removed when resale price maintenance was abolished and only primary care trusts can take action against terms of service complaints.

Since an individual complaint has to be made to each PCT, no doubt Boots thinks that by the time a complaint is investigated and brought to a terms of service hearing enough people will have signed up to make any fine insignificant to the profit made out of the service.

As a pharmacy under the 2,000 items per month limit for the new annual establishment fee, I believe the new contract is not in my interest. However, those dispensing above 2,000 items may believe it is in their interest. With this cynical action by Boots, those doing above 2,000 items may well find that, in a short period, their numbers drop below the comfort zone of 2,000.

We should all think twice before voting because this action by Boots to obtain more prescriptions could have dire consequences for smaller pharmacies doing fewer than 3,000 items per month.



M. Franks
London N6 6QS

 

DIGBY EMSON, superintendent pharmacist, Boots The Chemists, replies:

We have a significant number of pharmacies dispensing fewer than 2,000 items per month. We constantly review ways to improve services to our patients in these and our other pharmacies. The activity referred to is targeted at a limited group of existing loyal Boots customers to raise awareness where a prescription collection service is offered. Patients retain absolute freedom to use the pharmacy of their choice for their prescriptions. It is, therefore, incorrect to infer, as Mr Franks appears to be doing, that there is any attempt adversely to affect competitors in the manner implied.

 

 

Send your letter to The Editor

Next Topic (Dispensing)
Previous Topic (New Contract)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal