The Investigating Committee recently reviewed a case involving a chiropractor who failed to respond to repeated requests for patient records needed for court proceedings.
02.07.25 Fitness to Practice
By law all complaints received by the GCC must be considered by an Investigating Committee (consisting of both lay and registered members). Their role is not to decide on the details of the case, but decide whether there is a case to answer:
Would the conduct (if proven) be unacceptable professional conduct?
Where they find a case to answer, it is put forward to a full hearing of the Professional Conduct Committee (around 12 cases a year).
Read more about the investigation process
A solicitor requested the patient’s records from the chiropractor as they were required for court proceedings. The solicitor complained that the chiropractor failed to respond to their request for the records despite numerous chasers.
Following notification of the GCC’s complaint, the chiropractor provided the records which led the solicitor to withdraw their complaint.
The Code states that a chiropractor:
The Committee concluded that there was insufficient evidence presented which was capable of supporting findings of fact by a panel of the Professional Conduct Committee, properly directed, in respect of the alleged unacceptable professional conduct.
In forming this view, the Committee noted that the solicitor has now received the information she had previously requested on multiple occasions from the chiropractor and had, following provision of the requested material, indicated to the GCC that she wished to withdraw from the process and withdraw her complaint. Whilst the Committee noted that it had admissions from the chiropractor indicating that he accepted that he had failed to provide the requested information to the solicitor in a timely manner, the Committee considered that given the solicitor's withdrawal from the process, the remaining material before it was unlikely to support a finding of unacceptable professional conduct.
The Committee was mindful that it had the power to issue advice.
The Committee considered that it would be appropriate and proportionate in this case to offer the chiropractor advice. It considered that chiropractor would be well advised and reminded to reflect upon and fully comply with H7 of The Code.
Principle H7 of The Code states that you must give patients access to their personal health records as required by law. What this means in practice: Your patients have the right to ask you for a copy of the personal information you hold about them. This is called a subject access request. In most cases, you can’t charge a fee for responding to a subject access request.
Find out more in the Managing Patient Data Toolkit
The Information Commissioner’s Office has a useful step-by-step guide on how to deal with a request for information.