Well I for one have no reason to doubt that Dr Viel paid compensation because he had done something wrong. I only wish that my friend had researched him before she visited.
She went to have some botox for the first time and 3 weeks later she was back in as her eye was drooping. Dr Viel then put even more botox in her eyebrow to 'lift it'. Didn't make any difference. She had to live with the drooping for at least 6 months
Stupidly or naively she went back to see him almost a year later to see what he could recommend for the deep forehead creases. He suggested that if he used less botox then it wouldn't result in a dropping eye. But it happened again and this time even worse - a drooping eye and a 'chipmonk' looking cheek below the eye. She seriously looked as though she had had a stroke or was a bells palsy sufferer. When she went back to Dr Viel he told her that the botox had 'travelled' and that she shouldn't do it again.
Personally I think she should have reported him as he never should have done the botox again.
The 'Employment Agreement' that was issued by the Naturalization and Residency Administration states:
[b'>The Fourth Article (Accomodation)[/b'>
The first party shall provide suitable, safe and hygienic accommodation for the second party
So I guess that means that it is OK to live out. So is sharing a room legal now then?
