On 24/07/2026 I attended Dr Poon for a clean and oral examination. A high-volume suction tip was used instead of a saliva ejector; I was not warned and became drenched when I tried to close my mouth around it. I was also charged $50 for item 072, “photographic record”, although the image was taken on a smartphone rather than an intraoral camera. On 04/08/2026 I returned with sharp pain on biting and a suspected crack in tooth 36. Dr Poon said he could not see the crack. Given my history of cracked teeth, crowns and three implants, I wanted it protected. He applied an “adhesive restoration” to 36 and charged $300, saying it would hold the crack in place. He also prepared a treatment plan leading towards root-canal treatment. On 03/09/2026 I returned because the pain persisted. Before drilling, Dr Poon again said he could not see a crack in 36. No topical anaesthetic was used before the local anaesthetic injection, which I found extremely painful. No cheek/soft-tissue protector or lip balm was used. A high-volume suction tip was again used. No computer-controlled anaesthetic delivery system was used. No interproximal finishing strip/tape was used; floss was used instead. The $300 adhesive was left despite irritating my gum and interfering with cleaning. Immediately after drilling 36, Dr Poon said the pain could instead be coming from 37 because the teeth are very close together, but he did not investigate 37. He said, “I trust my patients with their symptoms”, yet continued to tell me I would ultimately require a root canal despite no diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis. After the anaesthetic wore off, 36 became highly sensitive, including to air, and painful continuously rather than only on biting. On 05/09/2026 I requested an endodontist referral with clinical notes, test results and x-rays. On 07/09/2026 I received only a brief referral for suspected crack 36 without that information. I followed up and asked for 37 to be included because it was painful on biting. On 08/09/2026 the practice told me I could refer myself. The specialist clinic said a detailed referral and x-rays were required. Dr Poon refused to provide the detailed referral I requested. On 09/09/2026 the clinic manager told me Dr Poon had said I had self-referred and, in his opinion, did not need expert evaluation. I was told my appointment would be cancelled if the required material was not supplied by 16/09/2026. I saw another dentist on 10/09/2026. He has 156 Google reviews and a 4.9/5 rating. He examined me, took x-rays and intraoral photographs, and tested pulp vitality. Both 36 and 37 were vital and neither required root-canal treatment. He advised that 36 needed to be completely redone. I saw the photographs: the restoration was rough and the tooth had been extensively reduced towards 37. He advised that the $300 adhesive had no useful clinical role, interfered with cleaning and visibly irritated my gum. It had to be removed. The second dentist found 36 vital with a healthy pulp and said it should not have been touched. Dr Poon had drilled a healthy, vital tooth while the actual source of my sharp biting pain remained untreated. On 15/09/2026 tooth 36 was completely redone, with a protective cavity liner beneath the new filling. The hypersensitivity and pain disappeared as the anaesthetic was wearing off. Most importantly, the second dentist investigated 37 and found a major crack extending along the tooth. I was advised this was the source of my sharp biting pain. He saved 37 by identifying the crack in time and arranging prompt crown protection. I was advised that, if the crack progressed, it could lead to irreversible pulpitis, root-canal treatment and potentially extraction. Dr Poon himself had raised 37 as a possible source immediately after drilling 36, yet did not properly investigate it. Instead, healthy, vital 36 was drilled while the significantly cracked 37 remained untreated. I regret not seeking a second