Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission

Investigation of failed elective cosmetic surgical procedures by Dr. Anu and associates/employees/operatives of MedContour

Wednesday, April 15, 2020

Pursuant to Sections 17(s),(t),(x),(y); 18; 32; 123, 123-125; 127-130 Federal Competition & Consumer Protection Act 2018

On April 11, 2020; the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) became aware of complaints and dissatisfaction with respect to certain elective/cosmetic surgical procedures carried out by MedContour services. Essentially, the allegations are that MedContour engages in conduct that is considered otherwise unprofessional, misleading and potentially injurious, including resulting in possible fatalities.

The Commission’s initial review indicates that there is sufficient probable cause to inquire into the consumer protection aspects of the representations and services of MedContour, and its operatives. As such, the Commission has opened an active investigation into the practices and processes of MedContour, its promoter, associates and employees.

This is not a professional/licencing or disciplinary inquiry. However, the issues of authorization of the business and or its promoters, associates or employees to conduct the subject surgical procedures; representations made to customers about their skills, generally expected outcomes for similar procedures, and assurances of specific outcomes in relevant cases; responsiveness during follow-up or post procedure complaints; and transparency to consumers and applicable regulatory authorities, are implicated under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA).

Sections 17(s),(t),(x),(y) and 130 prohibit 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 guaranties 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.

In furtherance of this investigation, the Commission is keen to gather additional information from consumers with previous experiences with MedContour 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 MedContour operatives the interactions occurred with. Information should be sent to: failedcosmeticsurgery@fccpc.gov.ng

Babatunde Irukera

Chief Executive Officer