The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) on Wednesday sealed a popular Lagos plastic surgery hospital, Med Contour, on “suspicion of illegal activities”.
The FCCPC revealed this on its official Twitter handle. It said it has commenced an investigation into a failed plastic surgery performed by a doctor, Anu Fella, of Med Contour.
The agency said the arrest was in furtherance of “an open investigation, on reasonable suspicion of illegal activities in an abundance of caution and consumer safety pending further inquiry”.
The popular Lagos plastic surgeon was recently called out by a Twitter user, Omohtee, for allegedly performing a fake surgical procedure on her.
Omohtee, who disclosed that she wanted a ‘normal’ waist, accused the plastic surgeon of blocking her on social media platforms after the alleged botched surgery.
She urged Nigerians to be wary of Med Contour clinic.
“So apparently my offence is that her waist is too tiny,” Ms Fella said in defence on Instagram.
“At the expense of another person’s name and profession some people just want their posts to trend…this is really sad. I leave this lady to God… let Gods will be done.”
Lately, there have been several reports and pictures of botched surgeries allegedly carried out by Ms Fella. But her accusers have remained anonymous.
Nigerians on Twitter last week called for Ms Fella’s arrest after the alleged botched hip reduction was made public. In a divided outrage, some Nigerians condemned the plastic surgeon while others advised Omohtee to accept her fate.
But ‘Dr Anu’ denied causing her deformity.
According to FCCPC chief executive officer, Babatunde Irukera, the agency said it became aware of complaints and dissatisfaction with respect to certain elective/cosmetic surgical procedures carried out by Med Contour services.
“The allegations are that Med Contour engages in conduct that is considered otherwise unprofessional, misleading and potentially injurious, including resulting in possible fatalities,” Mr Irukera said.
He said although the agency is not “a professional/licencing or disciplinary inquiry,” a review of the matter indicated that there was sufficient probable cause to inquire into the consumer protection aspects of the representations and services of Med Contour and its operatives.
“As such, the Commission has opened an active investigation into the practices and processes of Med Contour, its promoter, associates and employees,” the statement partly read.
Sections 17(5),(t),(x),(y) and 130 of the Act that established the agency, Mr Irukera said, prohibits “obnoxious practices, require services to be safe and for the Commission to act to reduce risk of injury to consumers, as well as ensure services comply with applicable standards of care.”
“Sections 123, 124 and 125 prohibit making misleading statements, issuing guarantees or statements about the efficacy, skills or probable outcomes with respect to services that are untested or scientifically unproven, and Sections 127, 128 and 129 prohibit unfair or unreasonable contract terms, exclusion, or waiver of legitimate liability for prevailing standards of care.”
He said the commission seeks to gather additional information from consumers with previous experiences with Med Contour or its operatives, “whether the experiences were satisfactory or otherwise, and from persons who have any such relevant information, including about the experiences of others”.
“The commission, therefore, requests credible information in this regard in the form of a concise narrative of facts including the identity of the Med Contour operatives the interactions occurred with.!nformat1’on should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org,” Mr Irukera said.