Sir, I write regarding S. Mynard's letter in BDJ 2004, 196: 248 In respect of the 'legal loophole', there is unfortunately nothing new in this complaint.

Some three years ago, I wrote to Professor Nairn Wilson asking why the General Dental Council did not make it a compulsory requirement for proof of appropriate insurance to be provided before registration on the General Dental Council list. I was informed at that time that they shared my concerns, but there were difficulties as far as administration was concerned.

Some three years later, this still seems to be the position, and I would agree with the letter writer that this is quite unsatisfactory.

In the matter of whether or not the insurance taken out should be discretionary or indemnity, this is not a simple matter.

If there has been evidence of fraud etc, insurance companies may well void policies. There has been considerable complaint that discretionary bodies do make their own judgements in whether or not cases should be taken forward, but my experience of insurance has unfortunately led me to the conclusion that unless all conditions of the policy are adhered to, indemnity insurers can also use exclusion clauses not to pay out to their policy holders.

However, these difficulties are not a reason for patients to be refused compensation because of failure either on the part of the dentist or insurers, and this matter does need urgent addressing if the public is to have confidence in us as a professional body.