Fitness to Practise hearings - Final, interim order, reviews, appeals & more

Advice & representation

If you are facing either a final hearing or an interim order hearing in GMC, NMC, SWE or HCPC fitness to practise proceedings, you are probably feeling both upset and very worried; quite justifiably so.  Fitness to practise referrals can result in restriction of your practice by conditions, suspension or ultimately even strike off.

Wherever your hearing, I can represent you throughout at both interim and final hearings, at the latter closely questioning the GMC, NMC, SWE or HCPC witnesses for you and making persuasive submissions on your behalf at all stages.

Even if I am not able to attend your hearing, my advice can be the difference between being struck off the register, and keeping your PIN.

My testimonials page contains many examples of instances where my help has meant cases against my clients have ended with no case to answer or with a ‘warning’, in some quite difficult cases.

I understand that your registration, and therefore your professional status and reputation is at stake. 

Interim Order hearings are held when your regulator wants to restrict your practice whilst it carries out its fitness to practise investigation. An interim order may impose conditions on your practice or suspend you from your practice and both restrictions are likely to last for many months - sometimes in excess of 18 months.

It is important that you understand the NMC, GMC, SWE and the HCPC approach to these matters, or that you hire someone who does - like me!

Many registrants think that an interim order application hearing is an opportunity to protest their innocence, and get the case against them dismissed. It isn’t, unfortunately. The panel at an interim order application hearing are conducting a risk assessment, which means essentially that if there is some credible evidence that the allegations might be true, then that may well be sufficient for an interim order to be made - even if you might subsequently be found “not guilty”.

You need to take certain steps in order to preserve your right to practise without restriction, and those steps should be taken as soon as you get that letter.  Early intervention is best!

I know how to contest interim order applications and reviews, in order to either prevent restrictions being imposed or to have imposed restrictions lifted, and I have successfully helped clients on many occasions.

I advise doctors, nurses, midwives, biomedical scientists, paramedics, social workers and other registrants through the investigation process and represent you at interim and final hearings. 

With me, you get support and counsel throughout the process.

If you take my advice early enough, it is often possible to prevent matters reaching a final hearing. 

Think about it: in your work, isn't early intervention almost always better?

Here’s an example of what I can do for you.

Case Study

“I represented a social worker referred to SWE on health matters involving allegations by two different employers of attending work whilst under the influence of alcohol.

Social Work England were applying for an 18 suspension order to stop my client working whilst they carried out their fitness to practise investigation.   My client did not attend the hearing and instructed me to attend and make submissions in their absence.

After considering my detailed submissions on the material before them, the panel imposed a three month conditions of practice order!”

Call me on 01223 803873, use my Online Form or send me an email for professional and reasonably priced advice on your fitness to practise case.

 *Concerned about cost?  Ask me about my flexible payment terms, or pay by credit card. 

Testimonial

"I can highly recommend the service Marc offers. I was registered with HCPC as a registered psychologist with 35 years in practice when I contacted Marc in relation to an HCPC fitness to practice complaint that I had sought prior legal advice for via my insurers. It was the first complaint of my entire professional career and a malicious one. On the first occasion I spoke to Marc I realised I had been ill advised to provide documents I should not have by the previous representative.
From the outset, it was clear to me that Marc’s knowledge of HCPC’s processes was highly specialised. Although he came across as softly spoken, his letters to HCPC were concise, to the point and he certainly did not mince his words when highlighting the discriminatory nature of the vexatious allegations against me.
Eventually almost a year later, HCPC concluded there was no case to answer. I subsequently decided to de-register shocked by the entire process. It certainly was a shocking eye opener I could not have imagined having assumed that these formal processes were fair.
I found Marc to be accessible, responsive and knowledgeable throughout the entire process and would highly recommend him over and above the legal adviser my insurers referred me to. I am certain that without Marc’s skilful intervention I would have been entirely at the mercy of HCPC and the outcome would have been a hugely different one. Thank You Marc, your work is invaluable in what has become a risky time for professionals like myself."
M.J., Beds, Feb 2021