Errant dentist got off lightly

Errant dentist got off lightly

It appears that the dentist who made wrong Medisave claims has been dealt with very leniently ("MOH acts against dentist over wrong Medisave claims"; Tuesday).

Why are warning letters issued only after the third and fourth infringements?

Isn't one infringement already one too many?

Why was the dentist not prosecuted or suspended from practice, and made to pay a penalty for the wrongly claimed sum?

Perhaps the Singapore Dental Council and Attorney-General's Chambers can explain the issue?

Soo Weng Keong

This article was first published on December 6, 2014.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to for more stories.

More about

Purchase this article for republication.
Your daily good stuff - AsiaOne stories delivered straight to your inbox
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy policy and Terms and Conditions.