General Chiropractic Council GCC

On 10 September the Professional Conduct Committee will meet to review the Conditions of Practice Order currently imposed on Graeme Massey.

At the outset of the hearing, particulars 3(a)(i) and 3(a)(ii) of the allegation relating to Ms P were withdrawn by the GCC. Dr Massey admitted particulars 1, 2, 3(a)(iii), 4(a)(i), 4(a)(ii) in relation to the allegation concerning Ms P. Although Dr Massey denied the stem of particular 4(e) in relation to Ms P, he admitted particulars 4(e)(i), 4(e)(ii), 4(e)(iii), 4(e)(v), 5(a), 5(b), 9(a), 11(a), 12(a) and 12(b) of the allegation. The Committee found Dr Massey guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and determined that a Conditions of Practice Order is proportionate and the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and uphold standards of practice. The Committee imposed a Conditions of Practice Order for 12 months.

Allegations of unacceptable professional conduct and professional incompetence have been referred to the PCC for consideration. The allegations concern patient treatment and the particulars of the allegations include:

- Communication failures
- Failure to obtain valid consent
- Excessive treatment
- Inadequate record keeping
- Failure to review the working diagnosis
- Failure to modify treatment and/or plan of care

Note to the public:
This allegation is yet to be considered by the Professional Conduct Committee. It should not be assumed that this allegation has been, or will be, admitted by the respondent chiropractor or will be found proven by the Professional Conduct Committee.

Particulars 1, 2 and 5 of the Allegation were admitted. The GCC offered no evidence in support of the remainder of the Particulars of the Allegation. The Committee bore in mind that the burden of proof is on the GCC and in the absence of any evidence to prove the Particulars, and therefore the Allegation, that burden has not been discharged. The Committee dismissed the Allegation under Rule 6(7) of the General Chiropractic Council (Professional Conduct Committee) Rules 2000.

The Professional Conduct Committee dismissed the allegation against the registrant.

At the outset of the hearing, Particulars 1 and 2 of Allegation A and Particular 1 of Allegation B were admitted. The Committee, having considered the evidence in this case and the submissions made on behalf of Dr Stefan and the GCC, determined that the allegation of Unacceptable Professional Conduct (Allegation A) was well founded. Whilst it found the Unacceptable Professional Conduct to be serious, the Committee decided that it was not fundamentally incompatible with continuing to be a registered chiropractor. The Committee concluded that a two month Suspension Order is a sufficient and proportionate sanction and the minimum necessary to maintain confidence in the profession and to uphold the proper standards of conduct and behaviour.

On 29 July 2010 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order currently in force in relation to Dr Smith. The Committee decided to extend the Order by 12 months and varied the existing conditions. The Committee will review the Order before its expiry.

The PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order currently in force in relation to Dr Smith. The Committee decided to extend the Order by 12 months and varied the existing conditions. The Committee will review the Order before its expiry and at this time it wishes to hear direct evidence from Dr Smith about his practice. The Committee will need to be reassured that Dr Smith has an understanding of all relevant procedures and practices and at the Review Hearing the Committee expects to be satisfied that all aspects of his standard of practice about which there have been concerns comply with the GCC's Code of Practice & Standard of Proficiency.

On 17 February 2009 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order which it imposed upon Dr Smith in August 2008. The PCC varied the Conditions of Practice Order.

On 22 December 2008 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order imposed on Dr Smith by the PCC in August 2008. The PCC decided to amend the Order.

At the outset of the hearing, both parties agreed to amendments to the Particulars of the Notice of Allegation and Dr Smith admitted the facts and matters as set out in Particulars 1, 2 and 7. At the end of his evidence, Dr Smith admitted the stem of Particular 11 and parts (a), (b) and (f) of that Particular. During the course of the hearing the Committee did not find proved Particulars 8(a), (b) or (c). The Committee found Dr Smith guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and determined that a Conditions of Practice Order is the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public, uphold standards of practice and maintain confidence in the profession of chiropractic. The Committee imposed a Conditions of Practice Order for 12 months.

The PCC met to consider an allegation against the respondent of unacceptable professional conduct. The Committee found Mr Paull guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and was satisfied that a sanction of Admonishment is sufficient and the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.

On 13 November 2009 the PCC met to review the Suspension Order which it imposed upon Mr Paull in July 2009. The Committee considered its duty to ensure the protection of the public and patients, to uphold standards and to maintain confidence in the profession, and it was satisfied that it was appropriate for Mr Paull to return to unrestricted practice at the termination of the current Suspension Order.

The Committee found Michael Paull guilty of unacceptable professional conduct in relation to the inappropriate injection of steroids, failure to prevent a person not registered as a chiropractor and without professional indemnity insurance cover, from taking decisions about the management and treatment of patients and failure to have in place a complaints procedure. The Committee was very concerned at Dr Paull's "lack of insight into the seriousness of administering steroid injections to another, both within the context of professional practice or at all". The Committee felt that Dr Paull displayed some evidence of attitudinal problems, though not deep-seated. Whilst it found the unacceptable professional conduct to be serious, the Committee decided that it was not fundamentally incompatible with being a chiropractor and therefore removal from the Register of Chiropractors was not necessary. The Committee concluded that suspension from the Register was proportionate and the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and uphold standards of chiropractic practice and conduct.

The GCC offered no evidence in support of the Allegations in this case. The Committee bore in mind that the burden of proof is on the GCC and in the absence of any evidence to prove the Particulars, and therefore the Allegations, that burden has not been discharged. The Committee dismissed the Allegations under Rule 6(7) of the General Chiropractic Council (Professional Conduct Committee) Rules 2000.

At the outset of the hearing, Particulars 3, 4, 8(b) and (e), 9(a) and 9(c), 10 and 13(b) were withdrawn. Particulars of the allegation were then amended with the agreement of both parties. The Committee, having considered the evidence in this case and the submissions made on behalf of Mr Cobb and the GCC, determined that the allegation of Unacceptable Professional Conduct and/or Professional Incompetence was well founded. The Committee considered Mr Cobb's previous disciplinary history and the sanction imposed by the PCC at an earlier hearing. The Committee determined that the sanction of Admonishment is sufficient and the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

On 10 June 2010 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order which it imposed upon Christopher Thomson in October 2009. The Committee considered its duty to ensure the protection of the public and patients, to uphold standards and to maintain confidence in the profession, and it was satisfied that it was appropriate for Dr Thomson to return to unrestricted practice at the expiry of the current Conditions of Practice Order.

Dr Thomson was found guilty of Unacceptable Professional Conduct by the Professional Conduct Committee in relation to inadequate patient records for two patients and a failure to carry out a re-examination of a patient. Dr Thomson admitted at the outset of the hearing the Particulars relating to a failure to keep adequate patient records. The Committee imposed a Conditions of Practice Order for 8 months. In its decision the Committee stated "a fundamental principle is that every chiropractor is responsible for ensuring that they document the treatment provided, reviews and reassessments undertaken and the subjective response of the patient to treatment. A patient's records should clearly demonstrate the thought processes of the health professional to ensure that anyone taking over management of the patient will understand. Records are also extremely important for the chiropractor to be able to refer back at any stage during the care of the patient to serve as an aide memoir when considering findings, treatment and decisions made at different stages."

The Professional Conduct Committee met to consider allegations of unacceptable professional conduct and/or professional incompetence. The Committee took into account the submissions on behalf of Dr Presseau, his oral evidence and the submissions on behalf of the GCC. The Committee found Dr Presseau guilty of professional incompetence and unacceptable professional conduct and determined that a Conditions of Practice Order is the proportionate sanction necessary to protect the public, uphold standards of practice and maintain confidence in the profession. The Committee imposed a Conditions of Practice Order for 24 months.

The Professional Conduct Committee met to consider an allegation of unacceptable professional conduct. The Committee took into account the submissions on behalf of Dr Pauc, his oral evidence and the submissions on behalf of the GCC, and was satisfied that there was no deliberate attempt to deceive the public. The Committee found Dr Pauc guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and was satisfied that the sanction of Admonishment is the proportionate sanction, and the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.

On 8 April 2010 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order, previously imposed upon Mr Harris. The Committee considered its duty to ensure the protection of the public and patients and to uphold standards and maintain confidence in the profession. The Committee concluded that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for Mr Harris to remain subject to Conditions on his practice. The Committee therefore revoked the Order.

The PCC found Mr Harris guilty of unacceptable professional conduct in relation to an inappropriate communication with one patient and inadequate record keeping and ongoing assessment. Mr Harris showed "insight" into his shortcomings from the outset of the hearing and informed the Committee he would be "willing to respond to conditions imposed by the Committee". The Committee imposed a one year Conditions of Practice Order as it was "satisfied that an appropriate and workable set of conditions can be formulated which are sufficient to protect patients and safeguard the wider public interest."

On 8 April 2010 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order which it previously imposed upon Dr Haslam. The Committee considered its duty to ensure the protection of the public and patients and to uphold standards and maintain confidence in the profession. The Committee was satisfied that Dr Haslam's practice now complies with the requirements of the GCC's Code of Practice and Standard of Proficiency. The Committee therefore revoked the Order.

On 27 October 2009 the PCC met to review the Conditions of Practice Order which it imposed upon Dr Haslam in December 2008. The PCC varied the Conditions of Practice Order and reduced it to six months.

At the outset of the hearing, both parties agreed to amendments to the Particulars of the Notice of Allegation. Dr Haslam admitted the facts and matters as set out in Particulars 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10(a) of the Allegation. The Committee found Dr Haslam guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and determined that a Conditions of Practice Order is the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public, uphold standards of practice and maintain confidence in the profession of chiropractic. The Committee imposed a Conditions of Practice Order for 24 months.

The PCC met to consider an allegation of conviction in the United Kingdom of a criminal offence and an allegation of unacceptable professional conduct. At the outset of the hearing, with the agreement of both parties, the stems of Particulars of Allegation A and B were amended by deleting the words 'That, whilst a registered chiropractor'. Particulars 1 and 2 of Allegation A and Particulars 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c)(i) of Allegation B were admitted and found proved. Particular 1(c)(ii) of Allegation B was found not proved. The Committee found Dr Hobbs guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and was satisfied that a sanction of Admonishment is sufficient and the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.

On 15 January 2010 the PCC reviewed the Conditions of Practice Order. It was satisfied Mr Penfold had met the revised Order imposed at the previous Review on 31st July 2010. The period that the Order has effect remains unchanged and will expire on 16 february 2010.

The PCC reviewed the Conditions of Practice Order and varied the existing order, in relation to Condition 3 & 4. The period that the Order has effect remains unchanged.

The Committee considered an allegation that Mr Penfold had been convicted in the UK of a criminal offence. Having determined that Mr Penfold's conviction for the unlawful possession of a controlled drug was materially relevant to his fitness to practise chiropractic, the Committee imposed a 12 month Conditions of Practice Order. The Committee concluded that it is very serious for any person, let alone a registered healthcare professional, to be in possession of a Class A drug. The Committee is satisfied that, in Mr Penfold's case, a Conditions of Practice Order is the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and uphold standards of chiropractic practice and conduct.

An allegation of unacceptable professional conduct has been referred to the Professional Conduct Committee. The allegation relates to one patient and the Particulars of the Allegation concern:

- failure to obtain appropriate and/or valid consent
- treatment recommendation that was not clinically justified and was excessive
- recommendation of a pre-payment plan that was inappropriate
- misleading chiropractic records
- acted dishonestly in completing the patient's records
- failure to act in the patient's best interests
- misled the patient regarding the number of treatments she needed
- took x-rays without adequate clinical justification

The hearing has been postponed and will be relisted shortly

Note to the public:
This allegation is yet to be considered by the Professional Conduct Committee. It should not be assumed that this allegation has been, or will be, admitted by the respondent chiropractor or will be found proven by the Professional Conduct Committee.

The PCC met to consider an allegation against the respondent of unacceptable professional conduct. The particulars of the allegation included failure to comply with The General Chiropractic Council (Professional Indemnity Insurance) Rules Order 1999. The Committee found Mr Morley guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and was satisfied that a sanction of Admonishment is sufficient and the minimum necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.

On 16 December 2009 the PCC met to review the Suspension Order imposed on Mr Vatsadze by the PCC in March 2007, and initially reviewed in January 2008. The PCC extended the Order for a further three years.

On 10 January 2008 the PCC reviewed the Suspension Order it had imposed on Mr Vatsadze in March 2007. The PCC extended the Suspension Order for a period of two years. 

Mr Vatsadze was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct.  The PCC was satisfied that in order to justify public trust and confidence and to uphold the good name and standing of the profession, a 12 month period of suspension is the appropriate and proportionate sanction.

On 10 December 2009 the Professional Conduct Committee determined that it was necessary to impose an Interim Suspension Order on Dr Lawrence in order to protect members of the public. The effect of this Order is that Dr Lawrence will not be able to describe himself as a chiropractor, whether expressly or by implication, for the period the Order is in effect.

At the Review Hearing the Committee decided to revoke the Conditions of Practice Order in force against Mr Voth. The Committee heard evidence from Mr Voth regarding how his practice has changed to ensure that he achieves the required standards of practice in the areas in which he was previously found to be deficient. The Committee is satisfied the Mr Voth is now meeting the standards required of a reasonable chiropractor. The Committee was pleased to hear the ways in which Mr Voth has benefited from the audits and how these have improved his practice. It considered that Mr Voth has made substantial improvements in his standards of practice and demonstrated compliance with the Code of Practice & Standard of Proficiency. The Committee was satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public for Mr Voth to remain subject to conditions on his practice.

The Committee met to review the Conditions of Practice Order in force. The Committee varied the Conditions of Practice Order, which is currently in force for a period of two years, expiring in June 2010. The Committee consider that the Conditions of Practice Order will provide a framework to ensure that Mr Voth achieves the "required standards of practice in the areas in which he has previously been deficient and it will enable the Professional Conduct Committee to monitor his progress.

The PCC found Mr Voth guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and decided to impose a 2 year Conditions of Practice Order, deciding that this sanction was the minimum necessary to protect the public and uphold standards of practice. The PCC was satisfied that there are identifiable areas of Mr Voth's practice which are in need of retraining and assessment and that it is possible to formulate practical and assessable conditions to impose on his registration.

The PCC considered a patient complaint against Mr Hall that involved serious matters including abuse of the practitioner/patient relationship, breach of a patient's trust and inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature. After hearing evidence from the patient and Mr Hall, the PCC found the allegation of unacceptable professional conduct proved.

The PCC concluded that Mr Hall's conduct was fundamentally incompatible with being a chiropractor and further considered that his "flagrant violation of sexual boundaries" and abuse of his patient represented a "serious departure from the relevant professional standards outlined in the Code of Practice and Standard of Proficiency". The Committee concluded that the minimum sanction necessary to protect patients is to remove Mr Hall from the Register of Chiropractors. The order for removal will come into effect on 12 August 2009 unless Mr Hall exercises his right of appeal before this date. In which case, it will come into effect only if and when the appeal is withdrawn or dismissed. The PCC considered it necessary for the protection of the public to impose an Interim Suspension Order which comes into immediate effect to cover the period within which an appeal can be made and the consideration of any appeal.

The Professional Conduct Committee has concluded that it is necessary in order to protect members of the public, to impose an Interim Suspension Order on Mr Hall. The Order has been imposed for an indefinite period. The Order imposed by the PCC replaces the Interim Suspension Order imposed by the Investigating Committee on 20 February 2009. Whilst the Order is in force, Mr Hall is not permitted to describe himself as a chiropractor, whether expressly or by implication.

The Investigating Committee has concluded that it is necessary in order to protect members of the public, to impose an Interim Suspension Order on Mr Hall. The Order has been imposed for the maximum period of two months.

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The PCC considered an allegation that Mr Farthing advertised as a chiropractor whilst suspended from the Register of Chiropractors. The PCC found Mr Farthing guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. The PCC determined that Mr Farthing's behaviour is "fundamentally incompatible with continuing to be a registered chiropractor. There was an abuse of trust of patients and serious harm to the reputation of the profession and confidence of the public in the profession. There was also a persistent lack of insight."

The PCC determined that the findings against Mr Farthing are so serious that a sanction of suspension would not be sufficient to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and uphold standards of practice. The PCC concluded that the minimum sanction necessary to protect patients and to maintain public confidence in the profession is to remove Mr Farthing from the Register of Chiropractors.

The order for removal came into effect on 11 June 2009.

The Professional Conduct Committee extended the period of suspension for a period of three years with effect from 16 April 2007.

Please Note:
The Suspension Order will be reviewed by the PCC prior to its expiry.

The Professional Conduct Committee extended the period of suspension for a period of three years with effect from 16 April 2004.

Dr Farthing was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and a 9 month suspension order was imposed, with effect from 16 July 2003.

The PCC reviewed the Suspension Order imposed on Ms Lismonde in May 2008. Having reviewed the Order, the Committee determined that it was necessary to extend the Order for a period of 2 years. In deciding to extend the Order the Committee took account of the fact that "Ms Lismonde has ignored the comments and advice of the Committee at the last hearing... in order to uphold confidence in the profession and its regulatory process it is necessary to extend the suspension by a substantial period. This is to reflect the concern that arises from Ms Lismonde's apparent disregard of the regulatory process." The findings against Ms Lismonde in May 2008 related to her treating patients as a chiropractor at a time when she was registered as non-practising and was not appropriately insured.

The PCC found Mrs Lismonde guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. The PCC concluded that the minimum sanction necessary to protect the public was a Suspension Order for a period of 9 months. The PCC stated that "the integrity of the regulatory system for chiropractors depends on the cooperation and support of individual members of the profession, including payment of an appropriate prescribed annual registration fee to the GCC. Adequate protection of the public requires that chiropractors should have appropriate insurance in place when providing treatment to patients. Mrs Lismonde disregarded both these considerations in failing to register as a practising chiropractor and then providing treatment without having professional indemnity insurance cover. The GCC is bound to take a serious view of such conduct, particularly when it is associated with a lack of insight on the part of the chiropractor concerned."

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The PCC found Mr McAviney guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and decided to impose a 2 year Conditions of Practice Order, concluding that a Conditions of Practice Order is proportionate and the minimum necessary to protect the public, maintain confidence in the profession and uphold standards of practice. The Committee considered that Mr McAviney's failings can be satisfactorily addressed through retraining and that it is possible to formulate conditions which would protect patients whilst they are in force. Taking all of this into account, the overall public interest would be best served by allowing Mr McAviney to continue to practise, subject to conditions on his registration.

The PCC considered an allegation that Ms Fox practised as a chiropractor when registered with non-practising status, and practised as a chiropractor without professional indemnity insurance in relation to chiropractic. The PCC found Ms Fox guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and it determined that her behaviour was inappropriate in that she held herself out as a practising chiropractor while she was registered as non-practising. The PCC concluded that the minimum sanction necessary to protect patients and to maintain public confidence in the profession is to remove Ms Fox from the Register of Chiropractors.

The order for removal came into effect on 29 September 2008.

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The PCC considered a patient complaint against Mr Stewart that involved serious matters including abuse of the practitioner/patient relationship, breach of a patient's trust and inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature. After hearing evidence from the patient and Mr Stewart, the PCC found Mr Stewart guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. The PCC concluded that Mr Stewart's behaviour is fundamentally incompatible with being a chiropractor and further considered that his "flagrant violation of sexual boundaries" and abuse of his patient "represent a serious departure from the relevant professional standards outlined in the Code of Practice and Standard of Proficiency." The Committee concluded that the minimum sanction necessary to protect patients is to remove Mr Stewart from the Register of Chiropractors.

The order for removal came into effect on 11 August 2008.

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The PCC considered five complaints against Mr Proud, four of which were received from patients.  After a five day hearing, during which the PCC heard evidence from three patients and an independent expert witness, the PCC found all the allegations proved.  The PCC concluded that Mr Proud's conduct is fundamentally incompatible with continued registration as a chiropractor.  The Committee determined therefore that the only appropriate sanction sufficient to protect the public, uphold high standards and maintain confidence in the profession is to remove Mr Proud's name from the Register of Chiropractors.

Mr Proud was found guilty of Unacceptable Professional Conduct and a Suspension Order was imposed for a period of 18 months.  Subject to any appeal, the Suspension Order will have effect from 18 February 2006.
In order to protect public safety, the Professional Conduct Committee imposed an Interim Suspension Order in accordance with Section 24 of the Chiropractors Act 1994.  This Order has immediate effect.

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org

The named Chiropractor has been subject to a PCC hearing and action by the PCC has concluded. In accordance with our disclosure policy, information relating to this matter is no longer available on our website. This information can be obtained by contacting the Regulation Section on 020 7713 5155 or at regulation@gcc-uk.org