The Grants in control of Sand Crest Before the relationship wen south
The Grants in control of Sandy Crest before the relationship went south

In 2013 BU posted a blog to react to the surprising news well respected Dr. Grant and his wife were charged with theft from the company they founded.  The recent news that the charge  brought by the Peter Harris controlled Sandy Crest Medical Centre was dropped is good reason for BU to revisit this horrible wrong done to an honest Barbadian family.

BU refers to a document which immediately predates the falling out of Dr. Malcolm Grant and his wife, with Dr. Brian Charles once a very close, trusted and long-term friend of Dr. Grant. The key learning for those thinking of venturing into business with friends – you must make sure that everything is documented and be guided by someone who has the training, knowledge and experience to provide such guidance. For those already in business with friends without the appropriate documentation, this is a good time to formalize the partnership.

Below is a three page letter written by Dr. Charles to his fellow executive directors of Sandy Crest Medical Centre. In the letter, Dr. Charles craftily outlines why the post of CEO should have been created for him at Sandy Crest.

To provide some background, Sandy Crest Medical Centre was first conceptualized by the Grants in October 2003. After incorporating the parent company, Trans Med Inc, the Grants approached Dr. Charles to see if he would join them in the development of and the rolling out of their dream. He was subsequently given shares in lieu of his services.

After careful consideration, Charles later agreed to join the Grants, but pointed out clearly in the beginning that he had no intention of playing an active role in the running of Sandy Crest. This was because of his then positions of Medical Director and head of the A&E of the QEH. The Grants as we understand it agreed to accommodate Charles’ wishes.

Charles joined the Grant’s and became a member of the team known as the executive directors. This arrangement worked very well for the first five years of the company’s existence. With Charles using his experience and contacts as an emergency physician to help primarily with the recruitment and training of other emergency physicians and registered nurses for the medical centre. However, he played little to no role in running any other aspect of the Sandy Crest operation. This was not a problem because Charles, at the time, had no private practice experience when it came to drawing up business plans, negotiating with financial institutions, seeking private sponsorship, financially running, marketing, designing, constructing, outfitting, staffing (administrative), etc. of a private health care facility. Too besides, the Grants were somewhat wary of Sandy Crest becoming another QEH Accident & Emergency Department, so they felt quite happy with the self restricted role Charles played over the first five years of the business.

This dynamic all changed in mid 2008 when Charles was fired from his posts at the QEH. He was without a job and therefore was seeking employment. Therefore he first turned to his good friend Dr. Grant and fellow executive directors for employment.

Dr. Grant welcomed Dr. Charles’ sudden interest in playing a more active role at Sandy Crest although both of them differed as to what role Charles would ultimately play going forward. BU understands that Dr. Grant saw Charles as being an important member of Sandy Crest’s clinical team, offering to appoint him as Clinical Director, while Charles saw his role as being entirely administrative.

Dr. Grant objected to Charles coming on as an administrator because he knew that the Centre could not afford to pay Charles his asking price of $15,000 / month for a proposed 25 hour work week (see letter). Further, Grant noted that what Charles was proposing to do, was already being adequately performed by the Executive Directors and the administrative staff at Sandy Crest. Charles saw Grant’s objection to his proposal as a betrayal of a 28 year friendship, and from then on Grant was considered an enemy.

The rest is history.

The Grants learnt the hard way, having offered a number of friends shares in their dream, the following quote is instructive to others who may be in a lose business arrangement: –

friendship founded on business is better than a business founded on friendship. – John D. Rockefeller

Dr. Brian Charles’ Letter: Parts 1,2 and 3

61 responses to “Key Takeaway from the Grants’ Sandy Crest Experience”

  1. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Ah guess, it did not go as planned for Gnome.

    Why did Morris not print all of that in the first article….why leavr out the most important detsils, goes to show as people have been saying all along, the nation newspaper only gives ya half the story.

    And why did Harris not post all the information or any of the information re the case in his barbadostoday. ….is Morris the fall guy..lol

    What’s wrong with posting a copy of the signed document, according to Morris. ..it is public knowledge.

  2. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Piece…ah bet you there is a digital recording out there…lol


  3. When has Roy Morris ever written a substantive editorial on rape? Especially the subject statutory rape. If he does ever tackle such a touchy subject, is this going to be written in the first person? Does anyone think it is merely coincidental that he has avoided this subject because it’s too close to home – the Nation & Morris? If you do think that his avoidance is coincidental, you are obviously living in the Outbacks of Australia or your name is Roy Morris. Is this the same Roy Morris who receives a personal and under the table retainer fee of 5-10K per payee per month, from a number of people, including Peter Harris, to ensure that the Nation does not publish any bad press on these guys or their companies? I guess that as of late, he has become a born again moralist. Morris as the proverbial leopard cannot change his spots, or for that matter, change his feelings of pride for those dastardly and repulsive spots. Et est id quod est.

  4. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, I look forward to your continued ventilation and prosecution on these pages.

    As noted by @Sargeant, it appears that the same document which you consider ‘incomplete’ is the one Morris used to set out an effective rebuttal.

    The fact David is that we can only ask any journalist to put the facts out there and let the the chips fall where they may…in that regard there was nothing preventing a publication of the Gnome document…incomplete or not.

    But realistically this is a personal matter re Dr. Grant, his friends and family and is not of public interest…. Unless of course as Well-well asserts it speaks to a deep and devilish scheme of medical fraud and other illegal acts within/between the insurance companies and the medical fraternity.

    About that we are all interested!!!

    An amusing side note is that Morris boldly stated in his piece that the lawyer of standing (one of them anyhow) was the same one that was identified here by a blogger as the insider Gnome…seems that blogger knew of what he spoke.

    @Well-well, I ask one or two questions and I am lambasted as playing as a piece-a lawyer. O me miserum, how dah does work! A fellow can’t push a checker along the board without getting huff!

    Everyone in life has an agenda I believe. So we always must be open to be questioned.

    This in got one bad-word to do with ‘… de jouer avocat’.

  5. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Pedant…ya too touchous..lol

  6. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    And Pedant…ya may have noticed, or not, that Morris did not publish the document either, partial or in whole…what does that tell you.

  7. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ LOL

    Regarding your question about “When has Roy Morris ever written a substantive editorial on rape? Especially the subject statutory rape….”

    THe scum did!!

    Rather he did by proxy when in May Coo Coo and flying fish published that nasty piece about the rape of a female who is same sex oriented.

    THe salaciousness of the article got another “Nation” the United Nations Representative? involved and he had to apologise

    Between he, Ooo Coo and Flying Fish and Sankey Price dem does either publish or get into some serious sexual commentary or hankey panky with guns.


  8. Let this sink in for a moment: Roy Morris is the Editor In Chief of Barbados’ leading newspaper, the Nation. What message is that sending to our youth? Does anyone else have the same hopeless feeling about our society?


  9. @piece

    I was aware of that sad and disturbing article, but I gave Morris the benefit of the doubt. I honestly thought that it was the Saturday Sun editor who committed this faux pas. Obviously, I should have realised that this was Morris’ Freudian slip, and the real Morris was just showing his true colours.

    Is it true that Morris was head hunted for his current job at the Nation? Are things that bad that the directors/ owners of the Nation had to dig deep down into the cesspit to find/ recycle Morris?

    Are there any surprises that Barbados has retrogressed over the latter ½ of the 50 years since our independence? Politically, socially, economically, spiritually, morally, editorially and otherwise.

  10. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Well, well, touchous nah…only if it’s some hanky-panky funny business. Otherwise all good and well in joust-riposte!

    Now re your Morris not publishing the doc…it tells me that the Nation don’t want to get them backside in court over publishing private data…I ain’t playing lawyer here but I imagine that people could get into a bit of trouble when they get things dat fall off a truck.

    He purportedly said what was in the document so publishing the actual thing was totally unnecessary.

    When the big shot journalist in Washington start their story on the Watergate matter for example they got hold of private data which they wrote about but they surely didn’t publish documents as is…you know well enough it doesn’t always work that way or really is there a need for it to work that way.

    But anyhow I have no brief for the Nation so don’t let we get caught up that I defending dem one or way or other. Just saying there was no need to publish the doc itself…so it really doesn’t signify anything.

  11. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    “He purportedly said what was in the document so publishing the actual thing was totally unnecessary.”

    Pedant…real newspapers back up their stories with evidence, if the nation backed up their story about two minors having sex with a photo of all things, 2 minors having sex for the world to see…why can’t Morris show the document..because he says so dont make it true..given his relationship to Harris….why is he so shy all of a sudden

    Doesn’t signify anything if it’s true…but if it’s not.

    Again..Harris has an online newspaper to publish whatever he wants, why would he need BU or nationnews to publish anything in whole or in part.

    Somebody os playing games..but…..one smart….

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading