It is not possible to over-emphasise the benefit of not only taking advice on how to deal with your fitness to practice referral, but also having representation at any hearings.

Unless you are practised in the arts of the hearing room, you will not be able to present your case to best advantage.

A case that ended yesterday unfortunately demonstrated this for a registrant in the worst possible way.  A client had instructed me to assist with preparing their case for a final hearing, which I did.  However, when it came to the final hearing, listed for 3 days, for financial reasons they did not instruct me to represent them.

I understand the financial imperatives we all operate under - however I look at it this way - if it costs £2000 to instruct me for a three day hearing, that is, on a salary of £29,000, one month's net wages.  If you get suspended, it is unlikely to be for less than 6 months, which means a cost of £12,000.  I see that as a no brainer.

This client represented themselves.  It was a dishonesty allegation and a case where the two witnesses needed to be vigorously cross examined, and then focussed submissions made as to misconduct and impairment.  Even though the panel were themselves able to pick up inconsistencies in the witnesses' evidence, the client was not able to make the most of this.  And even though the panel decided that there was no dishonesty, because of the lack of proper submissions and an ill advised decision not to give evidence at sanction stage, the registrant was suspended for 12 months!  This is a terrible result - and totally avoidable.  On reading the decision and reasons, it is clear that even a basic submission on sanction would have likely got at least conditions of practice rather than suspension.

Time and time again, HCPC representatives and legal assessors tell me that registrants do worse without representation than with.  It's something to be considered very carefully, when your right to practice is on the line.