A well-known local businessman is claiming that the complaints process at King Edward VII Memorial Hospital has been rendered ?null and void? by unethical insurance restrictions which prevent hospital bosses from admitting culpability for fear of losing their coverage.

Jeweller Peter Crisson said he is still waiting for an official apology from the Bermuda Hospitals Board (BHB) after a major breakdown in communication resulted in his not being told he had developed cancer over two years ago.

Mr. Crisson was admitted to KEMH in May, 2003 complaining of severe pain in his abdomen ? a complaint which had already been wrongly diagnosed by his then-physician Roger Wong as a kidney infection.

At the hospital the diagnosis was altered to appendicitis and Mr. Crisson was ultimately operated upon by surgeon Terrence Elliot.

The appendix was then sent to KEMH?s pathology lab for analysis, where the cancer?s existence was first uncovered ? although neither Dr. Elliot nor Dr. Wong told him of the findings at the time.

In fact, ten days after the operation Mr. Crisson returned to KEMH and was given a clean bill of health by Dr. Elliot.

It was not until seven months later ? as Mr. Crisson himself was casually leafing through his own medical records ? that he came across a reference to the pathology report purely by accident.

A panicked Mr. Crisson then flew immediately to see specialists at New York?s Presbyterian Hospital, and was eventually forced to undergo a debilitating six-month course of chemotherapy.

But while it is understood that Dr. Wong has apologised to his former patient, it has subsequently emerged that the BHB has been informed by its lawyer Allan Doughty of Trott and Duncan law chambers that any similar action could lead to either the withdrawal of the hospital?s insurance coverage or a hugely inflated premium that it can ill-afford.has learned that behind the scenes, BHB chairman Jonathan Brewin and CEO Joan Dillas-Wright are sympathetic to Mr. Crisson?s complaint, but have been forced into an impossible position because of the ramifications of admitting liability.

Mr. Crisson said: ?Up to now there has been a complete lack of transparency in dealing with the whole issue and the only thing that is clear is that the hospital is being shackled by its insurers.

?You have a situation where regardless of what complaints system is in place, and regardless of whether they are in the wrong, the terms of their insurance policy prevent them from admitting liability for anything.

?This is one of the fundamental stumbling blocks of the whole system and should be of grave concern to the whole community. What is the point of having a complaints process if the hospital cannot afford to admit that it is in the wrong?

?I have made it clear from the outset that despite what happened to me, this is not a vendetta. My goal at all times has been to get the hospital to admit its systems failed completely and to be part of the solution to fix the problem.?

The BHB has been reluctant to comment publicly on the issue since the story of Mr. Crisson?s ordeal first ran on June 30, saying only that it was taking his complaint ?very seriously? and that an investigation of the incident was ongoing.

But under pressure this week to provide a more comprehensive explanation, the BHB met with Mr. Crisson yesterday morning to discuss his complaint further ? releasing the following statement in the meeting?s aftermath.

?We have met with Mr. Crisson to discuss his case and the systems improvements we have made at KEMH as a result of his experience,? said Mr. Brewin.

?Mr. Crisson has indicated he will join one of our teams as a patient advocate, which will greatly benefit the hospital and our patients as we move toward a culture of constant quality improvement.?

While the statement represents the first time the BHB have conceded that all was not as it should have been in their care of Mr. Crisson?s illness, they are still refusing to divulge what exactly has been done to ensure a similar incident does not reoccur ? at least, they said, until their ?dialogue? with Mr. Crisson is complete.

Meanwhile, Mr. Crisson also said yesterday that the meeting was the ?very first time? he felt the BHB had taken his complaint seriously ? faced as they were with the story of the communications blunder and their struggles in the face of the insurance dilemma going public.

He added further that he has now been promised an official letter in the coming weeks which will outline the BHB?s position in greater detail.

Attempts to uncover exactly who is the insurance provider for the BHB have been only partially successful.

Local company Kitson Insurance have admitted they are the insurance agent (essentially an intermediary between the BHB and an overseas insurer) while refusing to divulge the name of the company which insures the Government quango, saying only that it is based in London.

Further attempts to establish the veracity of some claims that Lloyd?s of London is the insurer in question were not successful by Press time.

Health Minister Patrice Minors meanwhile did not respond to a request for comment yesterday ? although Shadow Health Minister Michael Dunkley was far more talkative, calling on the BHB to demonstrate greater transparency in their handling of patient?s grievances.

?I have been following this episode very carefully over the last two years and I have to say that I find it deeply, deeply disturbing,? he said.

?These conflicts and difficulties with insurance policies come up in all walks of life but are particularly troubling in healthcare where you are often dealing with issues of life and death. But it is unacceptable that the BHB should run and hide on this up to now, hoping that Mr. Crisson will simply go away. He won?t go away. He?s not on any vendetta, he just wants redress. I for one applaud him for using the experience in a positive way by not seeking damages but by using his experience to make the hospital a better place and make sure this sort of thing does not happen again. The BHB needs to act responsibly and come up with a solution which is agreeable to both parties.?

?I think we would all agree that establishing public confidence in Bermuda?s only major hospital has to be a top priority,? he continued.

?Incidents such as this ? which is not an isolated one ? do nothing to help a situation which has been on the slide for years. We?ve seen one fiasco after another and both the BHB and the PLP Government have done nothing of any great substance to arrest this slide. If a private business was run the way the BHB is run then it would not survive in business very long and it is time we started holding them to the very highest standards instead of tolerating or appeasing major screw-ups.?