i a, STATE OF FLORIDA 0 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH “7 fur 3 BOARD OF HEARING AID SPECIALISTS, / © : 2 Ut Ve : a 4Ojay: 28 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, : e = PETITIONER, @ ot vs. CASE NUMBER: 99-01234 p - TERESA MOORE, , Of wiky, CL RESPONDENT. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW, the Petitioner, Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Hearing Aid Specialists against TERESA MOORE, hereinafter referred to as “Respondent,” and alleges: 1. Effective July 1, 1997, Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of Hearing Aid Dispensing pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 484, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43 (3)(g), Florida Statutes, the Petitioner has contracted with the Agency for Health Care Administration, hereinafter “Agency,” to provide consumer complaint, investigative, and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils, or boards, as appropriate. - a _Respondent is, a licensed hearing aid specialist, having been issued license : ~ number A.S. 0002282. won ~C3AI393U repeegegne te bem tigen on = ed ae > 3. Respondent’s last known address is 800 Lomax Street #101, Jacksonville, Florida 32204. > March 19, 1998 Delivery 4. On or about March 18, 1998 Respondent delivered to Patient 0.G. (hereinafter Patient) a new Siemens 684 hearing aid by allowing Patient's husband to pickup the new hearing aid and take it to the Patient. 5. Approximately 2 days later, on March 20, 1998 the Patient returned the hearing aid to Respondent for adjustment. 6. Respondent's employee surreptitiously switched the Siemens hearing aid , with a less expensive Starkey hearing aid and returned the Starkey to the Patient, who unknowingly used the Starkey hearing aid for approximately four months. 7. The Patient discovered the switch when she returned the hearing aid (Starkey) for maintenance. 8. “Although Respondent knew Patient's hearing aid had been stolen and converted by Respondent's employee Respondent waited 3 months until her insurance company paid off before ordering Patient a replacement Siemens hearing aid. 9. ; When Respondent delivered the Siemens hearing aid on March 18, 1998 the sales receipt did not contain the written AHCA address and phone number mandated by Section 64B6-6.010 (1) F.A.C. to be provided in writing. 10. / When Respondent delivered the Siemens hearing aid on March 18, 1998 "the written receipt did not contain the “terms and conditions" of the Statutory guarantee ; mandated by Section 484 5 12 Florida Statutes to be provided in writing, The disclosure falsely advised the Patient that the basis for a refund was "failure to achieve a specific measure performance." ~ il. Respondent failed to record the serial # on the receipt for the Siemens hearing aid delivered on March 18, 1998 as required by Section 484.051(2) Florida Statutes. COUNT I 12. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 - 11. 13. Respondent is guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence for failing to provide the written statutory disclosures, and failing to record the hearing aid serial , number and for failing to promptly replace Patient's stolen/converted hearing aid. 14. Based on the foregoing Respondent is guilty of violating Section 484.056 (1) (g) Florida Statutes upon proof that the licensee is guilty of Fraud or deceit or of negligence, incompetency, or misconduct in the practice of dispensing hearing aids. COUNT I 15. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 - 11. 16. _ Based on the foregoing Respondent has violated Section 484.056 (1) (h) Florida Statutes by violating Section 455.624 (1) (k) by failing to perform any legal duty rncdwpon cea i , o~ COUNT III 17. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 - 11. 18. Based on the foregoing Respondent has used a representation which is -misleading, deceiving or untruthful and has violated Section 484.056 (1) (k) Florida Statutes by failing to provide the correct required written statutory disclosures. oan 3 ‘provide the required disclosures in writing. (3 CO November 11, 1998 Delivery 19, On or about November 11, 1998 Respondent delivered to patient anew Siemens hearing aid to replace one that had previously been stolen by Respondent's employee. 20. The sales receipt falsely advised the Patient that the standard for obtaining a refund was "failure to achieve a specific measure performance." 21. | When Respondent delivered the Siemens hearing aid on November 11, 1998 the sales receipt did not contain the written A.H.C.A. address and phone number mandated by Section 64B6-6.010 (1) F.A.C. to be provided in writing. ) 22. . When Respondent delivered the Siemens hearing aid on November 1 1, 1998 the sales receipt did not contain the written "Further hearing loss" prevention disclosure mandated by Section 64B6-6.010 (2) F.A.C. to be provided in writing. 23. | When Respondent delivered the Siemens hearing aid on November 11, 1998 the sales receipt did not contain the written "terms and conditions" of the statutory " guarantee mandated by Section 484.0512 Florida Statutes to be provided in writing. _ COUNT IV 24. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 -4, 6, 7, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 25. Respondent is guilty of misconduct and/or incompetency for failing to 26. Based on the foregoing Respondent is guilty of violating Section 484.056 () (g) Florida Statutes upon proof that the Heense i is guilty of Fraud or deceit or of negligence incompetency, or misconduct i in the practice of dispensing hearing aids, 8 eat COUNT V 27. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-4, 6,7,19, 20, 21, 22> and 23. 28. Based on the foregoing Respondent has violated Section 484.056 (1) (h) Florida Statutes by violating Section 455.624 (1) (K) by failing to perform any legal duty placed upon a licensee. COUNT VI 29. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1-4, 6, 7, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23. . 30. Based on the foregoing Respondent is guilty of using misleading, _ , deceiving or untruthful representations and has violated Section 484.056 (1) (k) Florida Statutes by providing the wrong required written Statutory disclosures. December 1, 1998 Delivery 31. On or about December 1, 1998 Respondent delivered to patient a new Phonak hearing aid. 32. When Respondent delivered the Phonak hearing aid on December 1, 1998 the sales receipt did not contain the written AHCA address and phone number mandated by. Section 6486-6 010 ¢ 1). F A. C. to be provided i in n Writing. the sales receipt did not contain the v written "further hearing loss" prevention disclosure ss mandated by Section 64B6-6. 010 (2) F.ALC. to be provided i in writing. : 34. ~ When 1 Respondent delivered the Phonak hearing aid on December 1, 1998 _the sales recel t did 1 not contain the w written n terms and conditions” of ine statutor ; P y : guarantee n mandated aby Section 484.0512 Florida Statutes to be provided in writing. The - Whe n » Respondent delivered the Phonak héating aid on December 1, 1998 2 oboe AE Go C disclosure falsely advised the patient the basis for obtaining the refund was "failure to achieve a specific measure performance." - COUNT VII 35. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges all paragraphs 1 - 3, 31, 32, 33, 34. 36. Respondent is guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence for failing to provide the written statutory-disclosures. 37. Based on the foregoing Respondent is guilty of violating Section 484.056 (1) (g) Florida statutes upon proof that the licensee is guilty of Fraud or deceit or of negligence, incompetency, or misconduct in the practice of dispensing hearing aids, : , COUNT VIII 38. Petitioner repeats and re-alleges paragraphs 1 - 3, 31, 32, 33, and 34. 39. Based on the foregoing Respondent is guilty of using misleading, deceiving or untruthful representations and has violated Section 484.056 (1) (k) Florida Statutes by providing the wrong required written Statutory disclosures. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Hearing Aid Specialists enter an order i imposing « one or more © of the ne following penalties: revocation or Suspension of the Respondent s license, restriction nof the Respondent’ s S practice, sone a i imposition of an ‘administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, assess costs of investigation and prosecution assess costs of investigation and Prosecution and/or any other relief that the Board of Hearing Aid Specialists deems: appropriate. , 2000. SIGNED this_f{ day of a.8 ir COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Rudolph C. Campbell, Senior Attorney Agency for Health Care Administration Practitioner Regulation - Legal Building 3, Room 3139B 2727 Mahan Drive Tallahassee, FL 32317-4229 (850) 410-3465 RCC/ffm paki $2312? Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health Nancy M. Snurkowski Chief Attorney Agency for Health Care Administration DEPARTME, FILE D DePun SLM EALTH CLERK Uibipa R 4 OME" (3-200

Docket for Case No: 01-003131PL