Call Kurtis

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) ― The state was forced to drop charges against a plastic surgeon in the case of a cancer patient he's accused of leaving deformed.

Kurtis Ming has been investigating this doctor and the medical board for three years.

We now have proof, the medical board sat on her case for years failing to act in time.

The State Medical Board would never admit it sat on the case. This week, we found out the agency first learned of a cancer patient who was left disformed way back in 2002.

The case went nowhere. --in fact, it was closed.

Then 5 years later only after our investigation, the state filed charges against the doctor. But, it was simply too late.

Her family is outraged.

"Do they have any accountability?" Terry Pryde said of the medical board.

We're under court order not to name her sister, a cancer patient who was left disfigured at the hands of plastic surgeon Doctor Brian West. She showed us her deformities during a 2006 interview, "my intestines covered with a skin graft".

She lost her battle with cancer earlier this year.

The breast cancer patient went to Doctor West for breast reconstruction after a mastectomy.

She sued him for performing an operation without her permission. West paid her 250-thousand dollars in a settlement in 2002

Under state law, his medical malpractice insurance company was supposed to notify the medical board of that settlement so the state could investigate Doctor West, to determine if he should be disciplined.

MEDICAL BOARD'S HANDLING OF CASES

"We can't go on a fishing expedition," Candis Cohen, spokesperson for the California Medical Board told Kurtis in 2005.

She explained whenever the board receives any complaints or information questioning the care a doctor gave a patient, as policy it's sent to a medical consultant for review. If they feel a doctor did something wrong, it goes to an investigator.

Then it's forwarded to the attorney general's office to file a case against the doctor.

If no charges are filed Cohen said, "It would be reasonable to infer we did not have sufficient evidence."

A year later, in 2006 we interviewed the then head of the Medical Board, Dave Thornton about Doctor Brian West and an alcohol problem the plastic surgeon battled.

We asked prior to our 2005 investigation, did the board get any complaints, or any information questioning the care Doctor West provided any patients? Thornton responded, "not that I'm aware of."

He welcomed any information from patients or any other source involving the plastic surgeon.

"If we know about information early on, we're not going to have a statute of limitation problem," Thonton said.

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN QUALITY OF CARE CASES

Under the statute of limitations Thornton was talking about, The Medical Board has seven years to file charges against a doctor from the date the medical mistake was made.

Once the medical board learns of a mistake through a patient complaint form or notification of a settlement, they only have three years to file charges.

After we started our investigation in 2005, the cancer patient we can't identify, filed a formal complaint with the agency about her surgery mishap that happened 5 years earlier. Several other patients also filed complaints against West. All of these women claimed they didn't file earlier because they didn't even know the medical board existed.

CHARGES FILED AGAINST PLASTIC SURGEON

In February of 2007, the state agreed the treatment several patients received from Doctor Brian West fell below the standard of care.

They filed gross negligence charges in the cases of the cancer patient we can't name, and three other women.

One year later, before the case could be heard by a judge, the state mysteriously dropped the charges against West involving the treatment of this particular cancer patient. Prior to her death, she was angry. "None of them are doing their jobs, they're not doing their jobs," the patient said.

WHY WAS THE CASE DROPPED?

Without explanation, the state said it was a statute of limitations issue.

But the state filed its case within seven years of West allegedly performing the surgery without her permission, well within the seven year statute of limitations.

So if as suggested by the Medical Board in earlier interviews, the state never received any sufficient evidence about Doctor West prior to our investigation, how did the statute run out?

No one would answer that question, but it came out this week on the stand inside a Natomas court room where cameras have been barred.

As Doctor Brian West sat before a judge in a separate negligence case against him, under oath, a Medical Board Senior Investigator admitted her agency did in fact, get that notification from the insurance company back in 2002 about the quarter million dollar settlement with the cancer patient.

She admitted, back then the medical board closed the case.

That notification from the insurance company started the clock for the three year statute of limitations.... overriding the seven years for the alleged mistake was made.

The clock ticked until the three years ran out.

"They should've begun investigating my sister's case thoroughly, it's their job," Terry Pryde told Kurtis outside court.

PATIENT'S COMPLAINT NEVER HAD CHANCE OF BEING HEARD BY JUDGE

In 2005, as Terry Pryde's ailing sister wrote out her complaint to the Medical Board, she had no idea the state received information about her case years earlier. She had no idea there was no chance the doctor who she says disfigured her for life, would ever face the Medical Board in her case.

In her final interview before her death, she told us she was concerned about **your safety. "The Medical Board is there to protect me, my sister, or you or their mother. They're not doing it. They just sweep things under. This is serious."

Her family wonders how many times has this happened? How many patients of potentially dangerous doctors have been hurt because the state of California dropped the ball.

"Please care and take it seriously. That's your job," Pryde said. "They are representing a person's pain. Please keep that person's face in front of you, make it personal and do your best."

She certainly feels they didn't in this case.

QUESTIONING THE MEDICAL BOARD

We had questions for the Medical Board, but have been told they will not speak with us on camera again about the West case.

We sent Medical Board Spokesperson, Candis Cohen these questions to answer in a statement.

Does the Medical Board admit it dropped the ball investigating Anderson's case after receiving that 801 report (the medical malpractice settlement insurance notification) about her settlement?

What happened with that 801 report?

Did it ever get reviewed by a medical consultant or physician? If not, why?

If so, why was the "cancer patient's" (name redacted based on court order) case closed after the notification in 2002, only to be part of a gross negligence accusation in 2007?

What is the medical board's message to the now deceased cancer patient's upset family who feels the medical board failed them?

Is it possible this happened in other cases, and if so how many?

How will this be addressed within the Medical Board? Internal Investigation? New policy? New training? Employee Reprimand?

In the wake of what appears to be an apparent mistake on the part of the Medical Board, what is the agency's message to the general public who puts faith in the Medical Board every day to protect them from doctors?

MEDICAL BOARD'S RESPONSE

In a return email from Cohen, this is how she addressed all of CBS13's questions.

"Single patient cases which do not rise to the level to support a gross negligence charge cannot be pursued. However, if multiple patient complaints come to the board's attention, then we are able to review the evidence for the possible filing of administrative action, citing repeated negligent acts.

In November 2005 the board received multiple patient complaints related to Dr. West. Those cases were investigated and ultimately lead to the hearing taking place at this time. The Medical Board does not comment on individual complaints or investigations, but every complaint and 801 report undergoes the same level of review".

(© MMIX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)