Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Spanish Dude
Hello Mailman, have you returned from your vacation yet?
|
Hello Spanish Dude,
First of all, why do you think I was on holiday?
Because Coen Gho, his technicians and I determined that maybe a quarter of the moved grafts (sorry; partial grafts and stem cells
) generated hairs, we agreed in 2007 a refund of fifty per cent of the costs of the treatment. Although we had this agreement (I taped our conversation), it lasted a few months, telephone calls, e-mails and text messages before I received the money. Coen Gho is an excellent brawler (I think he even is able to sell his mother), but a horrible businessman. He forgets who you are, forgets his agreements and doesn't see what the implications are for somebody else of his own actions. I'm not feeling a victim, contrary, but a treatment is also a business agreement. And that agreement doesn't end after the treatment and periodical checks.
During the intake the 2nd of august 2010 with Bart at Prohairclinic in Belgium, Bart determined that also the donor area didn't generated regrowth. Ofcourse Coen Gho claimed during the checks in 2006 that -ofcourse- regrowth in the donor area took place. I attached one of the photos Bart took. You can clearly see the white spots. These spots are scarfs from the 'stemcell' treatment Coen Gho executed. It is clearly visible that almost none of the scarfs are filled with hairs. This photo is made by Bart before my FUE treatment upthere and after my stemcell treatment, and after my FUT treatment by Laser Aesthetic.
You can imagine that I was surprised about Bart's findings, because Coen Gho claimed regrowth in the donor area during the checks. Recently I sent Coen Gho an e-mail about the findings with a carbon copy to the general e-mailadress of Hair Science Institue, with the friendly question to give his professional remarks. I didn't received a reply, also not after sending him a reminder.
I'm now at a point considering starting a law suit against Hair Science Clinic Amsterdam, because I think it's fair receiving a refund concerning the other 50 per cent. In 2005 Coen Gho already guaranteed regrowth in the donor area (I have it on paper), and now it became clear he failed. For people who might think my claim passed the period of limiation; it doesn't. I don't explain why, because I prefer to use that argumentation during the law suit. You never know who's reading along.
For my profession I'm a laywer, so a law suit is for me like a walk through the park. Ofcourse I'm never able to guarantee myself that I win the law suit, but I think the coin flips to my side, because I have all the evidence in my file.
