Mr. Victor T. Minas

Discipline Referral Date: February 15, 2022

It is alleged that on or about March 9, 2015, the Client had her initial appointment with the Member and/or a dentist at the Clinic, for a consultation regarding dentures, extractions, and bone grafts; It is alleged that the Member advised the Client that he would arrange for the work to be performed by various dental service providers, including the Member, at the Clinic; It is alleged that the Member conveyed to the Client that he would be doing more than simply fabricating and/or providing dentures; It is alleged that the Member told the Client that the services would cost approximately $28,000; It is alleged that based on the Member’s representations, the Client agreed to the terms as described by the Member and/or paid a deposit of $1,000 to the Clinic and/or paid the remaining balance of $27,000 to the Clinic on or about May 1, 2015. March 2015 onwards, It is alleged that from approximately March 9, 2015 to May 8, 2015, the Client met with the Member and/or various dental service providers at the Clinic for services associated with her dentures, extractions and bone grafts; It is alleged that the services were not provided in accordance with the agreement and/or services were not provided at all; It is alleged that the Client required additional surgery. It is alleged that this occurred outside of the Clinic. It is alleged that the Member and/or the Clinic undertook to pay for the additional surgery but did not do so; It is alleged that the Member accompanied the Client to dental visits outside of the Clinic; It is alleged that the Member and/or the Clinic advised the Client that she would be reimbursed for services not provided but did not do so; It is alleged that the Member failed to properly document the Client record in accordance with College standards and/or in accordance in the best interests of the Client; It is alleged that the Client needed to take out a line of credit in order to pay for the additional surgery; It is alleged that the Client made repeated attempts to receive the reimbursement for the unused services and/or the additional surgery; It is alleged that the Member failed to reimburse the Client until or around January 2022. Misrepresentation, It is alleged that the Member misrepresented his role in the Client’s treatment and his affiliation to the Clinic. Allegations of Professional Misconduct, As a result of the above, it is alleged that the Member engaged in professional misconduct pursuant to Clause 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, and as set out in one or more of the following paragraphs of section 1 of Ontario Regulation 854/93 under the Denturism Act, 1991: a. Paragraph 2: Failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; b. Paragraph 7: Failing to fulfil the terms of an agreement with a patient, except in accordance with paragraph 6; c. Paragraph 10: Making a misrepresentation to a patient including a misrepresentation respecting a remedy, treatment, device, or procedure; d. Paragraph 26: Charging a fee that is excessive or unreasonable in relation to the services performed and/or e. Paragraph 47: Engaging in conduct or performing an act, relevant to the practice of denturism, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, unethical or unprofessional.

Hearing Date: To be determined by Order of the Discipline Committee

Hearing Location: Virtual, Arbitration Place

Decision Date: June 26, 2023

The Panel accepted the joint request for an adjournment. It is in the authority and jurisdiction of the Panel to grant an adjournment, including with terms and conditions, pursuant to sections 16.1, 21, and 25.0.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, RSO 1990, c S.22. The Member’s behaviour did not indicate a lack of compliance with previous orders and the Member had not previously requested an adjournment. The Panel weighed heavily that both counsel were in support of the submission for adjournment on terms and conditions. The Panel considered the doctor’s letter explaining the health concerns of the Member that could potentially jeopardize the fairness of the hearing if it were to proceed at this time. The Panel felt the affidavit from the Member reinforced that the Member took the hearing seriously but was enduring health issues that would make it difficult to proceed with the hearing. The Panel considered past cases where discipline hearings were adjourned due to health issues of a member impacting the member’s ability to meaningfully participate in the hearing. The Panel felt that the Member agreeing to reduce his clinic hours was appropriate to protect the public and ensure the Member’s health issues improved so that the hearing could proceed. The Panel also believed that the requirement that the Member continue to be treated by his physician and that the physician provide updates on the Member’s health will help ensure the hearing will be able to proceed reasonably soon. The Panel was supportive of the terms and conditions being posted on the College’s public register to be transparent to the public with regards to the Member’s hearing status and practice limitations.

Order: The request for an adjournment by Mr. Minas was granted on the following terms and conditions: 1. Mr. Minas will continue to be followed by Dr X on a regular basis. Dr X will provide a written update within the next four weeks; 2. Mr. Minas will not work as a denturist more than the 1 ½ days over the course of a one-week period, being the same rate of work that he has worked as a denturist recently. Mr. Minas will document the hours worked by a sworn affidavit which will be submitted at the same time as the written update of Dr. X; 3. The hearing date of the discipline committee will be adjourned to a date that is after the date of receipt of the update of Dr. X and sworn affidavit of Mr. Minas in order to assess the information in the update from Dr. X and to ascertain next steps. The Panel also ordered that the fact of the adjournment and the terms and conditions of the adjournment be included on the public register.

Conditions and Limitiations
1. Mr. Minas will continue to be followed by Dr. X on a regular basis. Dr. X will provide a written update within the next 4 weeks; 2. Mr. Minas will not work as a denturist more than the 1½ days over the course of a one week period, being the same rate of work that he has worked as a denturist recently. Mr. Minas will document the hours worked by a sworn affidavit which will be submitted at the same time as the written update of Dr. X; 3. The hearing date of the discipline committee will be adjourned to a date that is after the date of receipt of the update of Dr. X and sworn affidavit of Mr. Minas in order to assess the information in the update from Dr. X and to ascertain next steps.

Discipline Referral Date: April 2, 2024

1. Victor Minas (the “Member”) has been a registrant of the College of Denturists of Ontario (the “College”) since on or about February 16, 1988. 2. The Member works at and/or owns and/or co-owns and/or is the founder of Victor Minas Denturist Professional Corporation and/or Smilecorp (the “Clinic”). 3. It is alleged that the Member treated the Client between approximately February 2023 and August 2023. 4. It is alleged that the Client attended the Clinic because her lower partial denture was broken. 5. It is alleged that: a. The Member told the Client he could not fix her lower denture but told her he would make a new upper denture (the “Upper”) and/or a new lower denture (the “Lower”); b. The Client paid the Member and/or the Clinic $5,900.00 in total (the “Total”) for the full services rendered; c. Out of the Total, the Client paid the Member and/or the Clinic $3,350.00 for the Lower; d. The Member provided the Upper and/or Lower that the Client could not use and/or that did not accord with College standards despite the Member’s adjustments; e. The Member adjusted the Upper and/or Lower multiple times over multiple appointments; f. The Upper and/or Lower broke; g. The Client was left without an Upper and/or Lower she could use; h. The Member and/or the Clinic did not address the Client’s concerns because the Member and/or Clinic was moving its physical location; i. The Member and/or the Clinic did not provide the Client with new contact information in advance of and/or during and/or after the Member closed the Clinic; j. The Member and/or Clinic did not refer the Client to another denturist and/or another clinic to address her concerns; k. The Client returned to the Clinic and it was closed and/or in darkness; l. The Client had to attend another clinic (the “Other Clinic”) to have her concerns addressed; m. The Other Clinic provided a lower partial denture for $837.00 which is approximately a quarter of what the Member charged her for the Lower; n. The Client paid the Other Clinic a total of $2,003.00 for the full services rendered; and/or o. The Member advised the Client not to contact the College if she had questions and/or concerns about the Member and/or the treatment he provided. Allegations of Professional Misconduct 6. As a result of the above, it is alleged that the Member engaged in professional misconduct pursuant to Clause 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, and as set out in one or more of the following paragraphs of section 1 of Ontario Regulation 854/93 under the Denturism Act, 1991: a. Paragraph 2: Failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; b. Paragraph 6: Discontinuing denturist services to a patient without adequate reason; Paragraph 26: Charging a fee that is excessive or unreasonable in relation to the services performed; and/or c. Paragraph 47: Engaging in conduct or performing an act, relevant to the practice of denturism, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, unethical or unprofessional.

Hearing Date: TBD

Hearing Location: TBD

Discipline Referral Date: September 19, 2023

It is alleged that the Member engaged in professional misconduct pursuant to Clause 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, and as set out in one or more of the following paragraphs of section 1 of Ontario Regulation 854/93 under the Denturism Act, 1991: a. Paragraph 2: Failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; and/or b. Paragraph 47: Engaging in conduct or performing an act, relevant to the practice of denturism, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, unethical or unprofessional.

Hearing Date: TBD

Hearing Location: TBD

Discipline Referral Date: September 19, 2023

It is alleged that the Member engaged in professional misconduct pursuant to Clause 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, and as set out in one or more of the following paragraphs of section 1 of Ontario Regulation 854/93 under the Denturism Act, 1991: a. Paragraph 2: Failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession; b. Paragraph 4 – Abusing a patient verbally or physically; c. Paragraph 7: Failing to fulfil the terms of an agreement with a patient, except in accordance with paragraph 6; d. Paragraph 14 - Failing to refer to a dental surgeon or a physician a patient who has an apparent intra oral condition that the member recognizes or ought to recognize is outside the scope of practice of denturism; e. Paragraph 47: Engaging in conduct or performing an act, relevant to the practice of denturism, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, unethical or unprofessional.

Hearing Date: TBD

Hearing Location: TBD