Frequently Asked Questions

No. We do not have legal powers which allow us to investigate concerns about the regulators. We are not a complaints handling organisation, and we do not have the powers to intervene in the regulator’s registration processes or review or overturn their registration decisions.

You might wish to contact the regulator and ask for information about any option you may have to appeal the registration decision in your case.

Solicitors and barristers presenting the case on behalf of the regulator at fitness to practise hearings are not there to represent the health professional – they have the right to represent themselves or to instruct someone to represent them.

No. We cannot represent registrants. You may wish to contact your professional association if you are a member of one or seek independent legal advice about your concerns. Your local Citizens Advice Bureau will be able to provide you with assistance on how to access legal advice. You can find your local branch.

No. Under Section 29 of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002, we review all final stage fitness to practise decisions made by the committees and panels of the regulatory bodies that we oversee. We can refer such decisions to court if we consider that they are insufficient to protect the public and that referral is necessary in order to protect the public.

As this power to review all such decisions is part of our normal work, we are unable to get involved with concerns about ongoing investigations in order to prevent any conflict of interest or prejudicing the outcome of any investigation or hearing. You might wish to contact your professional association if you are a member of one or seek independent legal advice about your concerns.

Each regulator has its own whistleblowing policy and you should first consult this before making a decision to approach us with your concerns. We also would advise that before contacting us, that you seek advice as to the implications for you of making your disclosure. You might consider contacting Public Concern at Work, an organisation which provides free and confidential advice for those considering making a disclosure about their workplace. Public Concern at Work can be contacted at:
Website: www.pcaw.co.uk
Email: helpline@pcaw.co.uk
Telephone: 0207 404 6609

We have produced the guidance below on how we handle a disclosure made by a whistleblower about a regulator:

The purpose of the fitness to practise procedures is about protecting the public rather than a general complaints resolution process. The procedures are designed to protect the public from those who are not fit to practise. If a regulator finds a registrant’s fitness to practise is ‘impaired’, it means that there are concerns about their ability to practise safely and effectively. As such, the actions the regulators can take if it finds a registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct, poor performance or ill health are:

• Reprimand
• Conditions
• Suspension with or without a review
• Erasure
• Immediate suspension
• Immediate conditional registration.

No. We do not have any powers, under the law that governs our work (The National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002) , to look at decisions made by a staff member, case examiner or an investigating committee in the initial stages of the regulators fitness to practise process. We do not have the power to review or challenge these decisions, nor do we have the power to ask the regulator open the case again or to provide an explanation for their decision.

For concerns about the General Medical Council (the GMC), the Nursing and Midwifery Council (the NMC) and the General Dental Council (the GDC). You can ask the GMC/NMC/GDC to review the decision that it made on your complaint. You can apply for a review under their fitness to practise rules. You should contact your caseworker with such a request.

You could (also) seek a judicial review of the decision made by regulator. However, we are unable to give you advice about this course of action and you should seek independent legal advice before taking this step.

We are aware that judicial review can be a costly process and is also one which is bound by strict time limits: the normal time limit is three months from the date of the initial decision being challenged. Your local Citizens Advice Bureau might be able to provide you with information.

When we talk about decisions made in the initial stages of the fitness to practise process we are talking about decisions made by the regulators to close a case without holding a formal hearing in front of a fitness to practise committee or panel: this includes decisions not to investigate a registrant. When we refer to final decisions, we are talking about decisions made by a fitness to practise committee at a formal hearing following a full investigation into the fitness to practise of a registrant.

The General Medical Council (the GMC) has guidance on what is called voluntary erasure. This explains how the GMC handles requests for voluntary erasure from registrants, including doctors and surgeons, who are under its fitness to practise process. The following passage might be of particular interest, where the GMC address the issue of doctors needing to be fit to practise before they leave the register:

‘We have to guard against the remote possibility that a doctor might try to leave the register to evade our fitness to practise procedures. We also have to be able to certify that a doctor who is no longer registered was still in good standing up to the point when they left the register. Doctors often need to be able to demonstrate this to other regulators and employers.’

Whilst we oversee the performance of the regulators, as an organisation they are accountable to Parliament. The Health Select Committee holds regular accountability hearings and if you wish to submit your comments about the regulators to the Health Select Committee for the purpose of its next accountability hearing, it is open to you do so.

Our powers in relation to fitness to practise decisions are limited to:

• Reviewing all final fitness to practise committee decisions to assess whether they are insufficient to protect the public. If we consider that is the case we can refer the matter to Court but have only a limited legal timeframe in which to do so
• Auditing a random sample of fitness to practise cases closed by investigating committees/case examiners and staff at the initial stages of the fitness to practise process. In carrying out the audit we consider whether the decisions made by the regulator protect the public and if the regulator has followed its own processes.  In this instance we are limited to feeding back any concerns to the regulatory body by way of audit reports.

Whilst we cannot investigate your concerns or act as your advocate, we have prepared a one stop complaint guide that we hope you find useful. It includes information about NHS and non NHS care and provides contact details for organisations which can help you make your complaint. Visit our Health and Care Information page.