He denied charges relating to the former client who accused him of treating her barefoot and topless, swearing, asking her to undress then failing to provide draping, talking about weed and hugging her then advising her to hug other people.
The physio told the tribunal the woman was lying, but delivering her closing submissions Lane said the woman had nothing to gain by laying her complaint which was just weeks after the alleged incident happened.
The client claimed that as she sat filling out a form in a chair, she was asked to slide forward and he sat down behind her and proceeded to adjust her back.
Lane noted that the physio initially denied he would have been able to fit in the chair, but in cross-examination agreed he would have been physically able to.
Lane said the woman was consistent in delivering her evidence, from the day she first laid her complaint to telling the tribunal this week.
She claimed his bare chest touched her as he positioned her, he denied that but accepted if it did, it would cross a professional boundary.
As for swearing, Lane noted the physio used the word “crap” in his earlier interview with the PCC.
She suggested if he used that word with them, it was possible he could use swear words when in a work setting.
As for her claims the physio told her she needed to hug more, hug “heart to heart”, and that he gave her a hug, which were all denied initially, under cross-examination he accepted he “probably did” tell her about heart-to-heart hugs.
Physiotherapy patients needed to understand both what was happening to them and why it was happening, she said.
That included carrying out part of an examination outside on the grass, which subsequently led to her suffering a rib injury.
Lane said the physio still refused to take responsibility, nothing his comments to the tribunal yesterday that, “an accident is an accident”.
Claims the woman was asked to take her top and shorts off, wasn’t offered anything to cover herself with, and that he then took off his top and began talking about “weed” were also successfully proven and amounted to professional conduct, Lane submitted.
As for him straddling her on the plinth, Lane said this was “clearly a memorable event” for the patient, was very specific, and not something she could have exaggerated.
Lane suggested to the tribunal the client’s recollection of events, from the two appointments was likely to be more reliable, and the physio had admitted his memory was blurred with other patients.
He had accepted the storage of his client files in his car for a “long time”, which saw an unknown number lost during a transfer to another office, was “not good enough” but maintained it was okay because his car was able to be locked.
She added it was essential that health practitioners “only provide services they are trained and capable of providing safely”.
Duncan McGill, for the physio, reminded the tribunal that there was no suggestion of sexual impropriety by his client, and he refutes most of the allegations.
“[Physio] and [client] describe starkly different versions of events ... he did not use any swear words, nor any other inappropriate language.”
Positioning himself on the same chair as the woman and readjusting her shoulders was “not plausible” and his not making any contact when on the chair, with either his chest or legs, meant the complaint was “simply not credible”.
He said it would have been “very simple” for the physio to have simply leaned over the back of the chair and done that.
The woman was “fixated” on seeking treatment for an injury she sustained, but failed to consider assessments he was doing as a registered physiotherapist.
“With these expectations, it is hard to envisage a situation where [physio] could do anything right.”
McGill said finding him guilty of the charges involving the woman would be “unsafe” as she failed to mention most of her claims in her original complaint, particularly the use of the word c***, which was only revealed this week.
The physio saying “f*** the ACC forms” was a peculiar comment, he said, especially as his business was reliant on being paid by ACC, McGill said.
The woman’s evidence was also “vague and non-specific”, and further “oddities” include seeking treatment for her right side, yet she filled out an ACC form the injury was on her left side.
He also submitted her evidence had been “embellished over time”, appearing to be fuelled by conversations with other people, while his client “has remained consistent”.
She consented to be treated on the grass outside, and he accepted causing her rib injury but otherwise refuted all other allegations made by her.
Despite claiming to be “uncomfortable”, “vulnerable” and experiencing “bizarre” actions by the physio she still proceeded to book a second appointment.
“None of her behaviour is consistent with someone who had concerns about the physiotherapy treatment she was receiving.”
As for practising while suspended, his client had testified that he was instead practising as a “meditative healer and spiritual bodyworker”, not a physio, therefore his work fell outside the broad scope of the definition of a physiotherapist, he said.
Belinda Feek has been a reporter for 19 years, and at the NZ Herald for eight years before joining the Open Justice team in 2021.
