How long until someone makes an official complaint on the grounds of false advertising because they paid for Dr Leah but instead got Nurse Practitioner Maggie?!
This is the issue that I have. I think calling the brand "Dr. Leah" is false advertising. I think if there are any complications, this could be a serious issue.
This is the issue that I have. I think calling the brand "Dr. Leah" is false advertising. I think if there are any complications, this could be a serious issue.
It's not false advertising unless they claim that all treatments will be administered by Dr Leah herself. I don't think it's that big an issue, to be honest. More trivial, I know, but nobody expects Mr Kipling cakes to be made by Mr Kipling, Ben & Jerry's ice cream to be made by Ben & Jerry's or Ford cars to be made by Henry Ford.
Indeed, several brands deliberately misrepresent themselves with their names. Haagen-Dazs ice cream has a Danish name, but it was created in the US. Indeed the umlaut which is used over the first a of 'Haagen' doesn't even exist in Danish. It's purely a made-up name intended to convey something it isn't.
Wow, Luisa was behaving like these grumpy menapausal women who hate everyone and she's only 24. Imagine how shw would be like when she is actually menapausal?
Besides, no one will ever expect Leah herself to be there. If it's a big brand, you'd never expect the chief executive to be there personally - in fact, you'd be amazed if they were. Or maybe I'm just giving people's intelligence too much credit...
It's not false advertising unless they claim that all treatments will be administered by Dr Leah herself. I don't think it's that big an issue, to be honest. More trivial, I know, but nobody expects Mr Kipling cakes to be made by Mr Kipling, Ben & Jerry's ice cream to be made by Ben & Jerry's or Ford cars to be made by Henry Ford.
Indeed, several brands deliberately misrepresent themselves with their names. Haagen-Dazs ice cream has a Danish name, but it was created in the US. Indeed the umlaut which is used over the first a of 'Haagen' doesn't even exist in Danish. It's purely a made-up name intended to convey something it isn't.
I don't agree. Medical aesthetics is an unregulated business. By the calling the brand "Dr. Leah", a customer could be led to believe that Leah is acting in her remit as a doctor. Regardless of whether she delivers the treatments or not, all doctors who are employed or acting as such be it privately or in the NHS are subject to regulation by the GMC. Yes, her staff do not have to be medically trained to deliver the treatments but by mentioning doctor in her brand, she is using her profession as a USP and therefore misleading customers.
The manner in which doctors conduct themselves is scrutinized. Should they do anything that may call their judgment or professional conduct into question, be it outside of their work, it still reflects on their profession.
I don't agree. Medical aesthetics is an unregulated business. By the calling the brand "Dr. Leah", a customer could be led to believe that Leah is acting in her remit as a doctor. Regardless of whether she delivers the treatments or not, all doctors who are employed or acting as such be it privately or in the NHS are subject to regulation by the GMC. Yes, her staff do not have to be medically trained to deliver the treatments but by mentioning doctor in her brand, she is using her profession as a USP and therefore misleading customers.
Possibly - we'll have to agree to disagree. I do believe it's still not false advertising, though - not least because branding isn't advertising. I don't think the Advertising Standards Authority has any jurisidiction on this, unless people are led to believe via adverts that Leah will be providing those treatments personally.
Perhaps the medical authorities? Honestly, I don't know.
I also imagine that some thought has gone into the rebranding to ensure there are no potential legal issues. Remember, Leah will have been working up the proposal for some time since the final - given Sugar's sensitivity around the industry, I imagine they would want to be whiter than white when it comes to branding.
Possibly - we'll have to agree to disagree. I do believe it's still not false advertising, though - not least because branding isn't advertising. I don't think the Advertising Standards Authority has any jurisidiction on this, unless people are led to believe via adverts that Leah will be providing those treatments personally.
Perhaps the medical authorities? Honestly, I don't know.
I also imagine that some thought has gone into the rebranding to ensure there are no potential legal issues. Remember, Leah will have been working up the proposal for some time since the final - given Sugar's sensitivity around the industry, I imagine they would want to be whiter than white when it comes to branding.
I'm certain that Sir Alan's legal team have considered this and checked the legalities of it all. I can't see him going into this with his eyes closed. He may decide to hire doctors to deliver the treatments which will cut into his profits, but lessen the extent to which he is liable as the business owner.
I don't think it will be an issue until a complication arises. As it an unregulated industry, a customer could complain to the GMC given Leah's profession and the fact that she chose to market herself as a doctor whilst working in this industry. Maybe I am a little bit more sceptical of this, as I work in medicine. I do agree that Sir Alan would have probably sought legal advice regarding Leah's profession and expertise in the industry.
I'm certain that Sir Alan's legal team have considered this and checked the legalities of it all. I can't see him going into this with his eyes closed. He may decide to hire doctors to deliver the treatments which will cut into his profits, but lessen the extent to which he is liable as the business owner.
I don't think it will be an issue until a complication arises. As it an unregulated industry, a customer could complain to the GMC given Leah's profession and the fact that she chose to market herself as a doctor whilst working in this industry. Maybe I am a little bit more sceptical of this, as I work in medicine. I do agree that Sir Alan would have probably sought legal advice regarding Leah's profession and expertise in the industry.
Interesting insights. I'd certainly be more comfortable about it being 'above board' legally knowing that Sugar and his lawyers have had a while to consider the issue than if it had just been Leah pushing forward on her own. Of course though, as you say, we may not find out if there are any grounds for complaint until someone raises a grievance.
It's not false advertising unless they claim that all treatments will be administered by Dr Leah herself. I don't think it's that big an issue, to be honest. More trivial, I know, but nobody expects Mr Kipling cakes to be made by Mr Kipling, Ben & Jerry's ice cream to be made by Ben & Jerry's or Ford cars to be made by Henry Ford.
Indeed, several brands deliberately misrepresent themselves with their names. Haagen-Dazs ice cream has a Danish name, but it was created in the US. Indeed the umlaut which is used over the first a of 'Haagen' doesn't even exist in Danish. It's purely a made-up name intended to convey something it isn't.
But these are huge corporations where in many cases the originator is dead, so you can't compare them with a small business where the whole point is the "head" is hands on and personal service, people will think why bother to go there if it is just another practitioner doing it, even if they were trained personally by Dr Leah herself!
The problem with Dr Leah as a name is that, ironically, it loses what is supposed to be the selling point of the clinics, which is that staff are trained medical and/or nursing professionals, because it sounds cheesy.
The advantage of the name (besides not being NIKS) is the immediate tie-in with The Apprentice but since no national service is offered -- by their nature, a fixed clinic is a local facility -- and local media will be interested anyway once they get Lord Sugar's press release, this really is not much of an advantage.
A quick search of the GMC List of Registered Practitioners shows that she graduated with her medical degree in 2011, which is consistent with her being an F2 and her being 24 at the time of filming The Apprentice.
But these are huge corporations where in many cases the originator is dead, so you can't compare them with a small business where the whole point is the "head" is hands on and personal service, people will think why bother to go there if it is just another practitioner doing it, even if they were trained personally by Dr Leah herself!
How about Bannatynes, then, if you want a more similar example! Or Jamie's Italian! No-one's expecting Jamie Oliver to actually cook the meals, but he's a good brand all the same.
I kind of love that, only two and a half years on from Stuart Baggs, Lord Sugar is now actively recommending that one of his candidates start marketing herself as, "Dr. Leah: the brand."
I kind of love that, only two and a half years on from Stuart Baggs, Lord Sugar is now actively recommending that one of his candidates start marketing herself as, "Dr. Leah: the brand."
Stuart Baggs was ahead of his time.
'Dr Leah' is coming in for a fair bit of stick from the medical profession for setting herself up as an expert in these procedures after initial medical training and what amounts to a short introductory course. I think Big Al's first instinct to steer well clear of a potentially litigious and ethically questionable business was the right one.
'Dr Leah' is coming in for a fair bit of stick from the medical profession for setting herself up as an expert in these procedures after initial medical training and what amounts to a short introductory course. I think Big Al's first instinct to steer well clear of a potentially litigious and ethically questionable business was the right one.
I completely agree.Only time will tell as to whether investigating in Leah's business was the right one. It would be embarrassing or potentially disastrous for the show if a customer were to sue the business. I wonder if the recent revelations from Lousia herself regarding her attendance at dubious parties had some what of an effect on Sir Alan's decision.
Possibly - we'll have to agree to disagree. I do believe it's still not false advertising, though - not least because branding isn't advertising. I don't think the Advertising Standards Authority has any jurisidiction on this, unless people are led to believe via adverts that Leah will be providing those treatments personally.
I agree with you. Dr Leah won't do all the procedures in the same way Mr Kipling doesn't bake all those cakes. In fact not only does he not make them all himself, he doesn't even exist, and never did.
I agree with you. Dr Leah won't do all the procedures in the same way Mr Kipling doesn't bake all those cakes. In fact not only does he not make them all himself, he doesn't even exist, and never did.
But he does bake them all it says so in the advert..
Next you'll be telling me Aunt Bessie doesnt make all her own yorkshire puddings...
She is already running a,successful company employing people, and how can she be 24 and have all that training? She would have had to be at least 18 before she could go to medical school and then it takes at least 5 years to train as a hospital doctor, if she is doing research .......
She isn't doing research!!! The "Final Five" TV Programme showed her Graduation Certificate (from the "University of East Anglia" - not, btw, anything close to being a well-known medical school!) in 2011. She was/possibly still is doing her compulsory two years after graduation in NHS hospitals as a Junior Doctor.
If she wanted to be a Plastic Surgeon (which IS NOT needed for her "freeze and fill" business - and probably not her aim!) then that would need MANY years more work!
Besides, no one will ever expect Leah herself to be there. If it's a big brand, you'd never expect the chief executive to be there personally - in fact, you'd be amazed if they were. Or maybe I'm just giving people's intelligence too much credit...
You're giving people's intelligence too much credit...
Comments
This is the issue that I have. I think calling the brand "Dr. Leah" is false advertising. I think if there are any complications, this could be a serious issue.
Indeed, several brands deliberately misrepresent themselves with their names. Haagen-Dazs ice cream has a Danish name, but it was created in the US. Indeed the umlaut which is used over the first a of 'Haagen' doesn't even exist in Danish. It's purely a made-up name intended to convey something it isn't.
I don't agree. Medical aesthetics is an unregulated business. By the calling the brand "Dr. Leah", a customer could be led to believe that Leah is acting in her remit as a doctor. Regardless of whether she delivers the treatments or not, all doctors who are employed or acting as such be it privately or in the NHS are subject to regulation by the GMC. Yes, her staff do not have to be medically trained to deliver the treatments but by mentioning doctor in her brand, she is using her profession as a USP and therefore misleading customers.
The manner in which doctors conduct themselves is scrutinized. Should they do anything that may call their judgment or professional conduct into question, be it outside of their work, it still reflects on their profession.
Perhaps the medical authorities? Honestly, I don't know.
I also imagine that some thought has gone into the rebranding to ensure there are no potential legal issues. Remember, Leah will have been working up the proposal for some time since the final - given Sugar's sensitivity around the industry, I imagine they would want to be whiter than white when it comes to branding.
I'm certain that Sir Alan's legal team have considered this and checked the legalities of it all. I can't see him going into this with his eyes closed. He may decide to hire doctors to deliver the treatments which will cut into his profits, but lessen the extent to which he is liable as the business owner.
I don't think it will be an issue until a complication arises. As it an unregulated industry, a customer could complain to the GMC given Leah's profession and the fact that she chose to market herself as a doctor whilst working in this industry. Maybe I am a little bit more sceptical of this, as I work in medicine. I do agree that Sir Alan would have probably sought legal advice regarding Leah's profession and expertise in the industry.
and Col. Sanders is an old chum of his
Icwutudidthur
It says on qualifying as a doctor she immediately started training in Harley street.
So she must have qualified before going to Harley street.
But these are huge corporations where in many cases the originator is dead, so you can't compare them with a small business where the whole point is the "head" is hands on and personal service, people will think why bother to go there if it is just another practitioner doing it, even if they were trained personally by Dr Leah herself!
The advantage of the name (besides not being NIKS) is the immediate tie-in with The Apprentice but since no national service is offered -- by their nature, a fixed clinic is a local facility -- and local media will be interested anyway once they get Lord Sugar's press release, this really is not much of an advantage.
cLeah Medcial
Play on words, instead of clear it has Leah in it as well.
There are Medical Aesthetics training courses in Harley Street that are 1, 2, 3 or 4 days long, so she could easily have done one of those. http://www.medicsdirect.com/botox-training-courses.php
A quick search of the GMC List of Registered Practitioners shows that she graduated with her medical degree in 2011, which is consistent with her being an F2 and her being 24 at the time of filming The Apprentice.
How about Bannatynes, then, if you want a more similar example! Or Jamie's Italian! No-one's expecting Jamie Oliver to actually cook the meals, but he's a good brand all the same.
I kind of love that, only two and a half years on from Stuart Baggs, Lord Sugar is now actively recommending that one of his candidates start marketing herself as, "Dr. Leah: the brand."
Stuart Baggs was ahead of his time.
'Dr Leah' is coming in for a fair bit of stick from the medical profession for setting herself up as an expert in these procedures after initial medical training and what amounts to a short introductory course. I think Big Al's first instinct to steer well clear of a potentially litigious and ethically questionable business was the right one.
I completely agree.Only time will tell as to whether investigating in Leah's business was the right one. It would be embarrassing or potentially disastrous for the show if a customer were to sue the business. I wonder if the recent revelations from Lousia herself regarding her attendance at dubious parties had some what of an effect on Sir Alan's decision.
I agree with you. Dr Leah won't do all the procedures in the same way Mr Kipling doesn't bake all those cakes. In fact not only does he not make them all himself, he doesn't even exist, and never did.
But he does bake them all it says so in the advert..
Next you'll be telling me Aunt Bessie doesnt make all her own yorkshire puddings...
If she wanted to be a Plastic Surgeon (which IS NOT needed for her "freeze and fill" business - and probably not her aim!) then that would need MANY years more work!
You're giving people's intelligence too much credit...