'Justice delayed in Justice denied'

The request was successful.

Philip J Measures

Dear Health and Care Professions Council,

Please advise over the past 5 years (year endings to suit your convenience) for each Category of Registrants you are responsible for the number of Registrants in each Category and:

a) How long has been the average time from initial investigation through to final outcome related to Fitness to Practise issues

b) How many Cases have exceeded 12 months

c) How many Cases have exceeded 2 years

d) How many Cases have exceeded 3 years.

In the case of Social Workers please also indicate separately how many of such Cases were inherited from the GSCC (as opposed to how many were new Referrals to the HCPC) and how many of those fall into any of the above Categories.

Yours faithfully,

Philip J Measures

Health and Care Professions Council

Dear Philip

Thank you for your request for information about investigation time scale
for Fitness to Practice Cases which was received on 14 October 2014. We are
treating this as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

We will deal with your request as promptly as possible and, at the latest,
within 20 working days. If you have any queries about your request please
contact us using this email address, or the address below.

The reference number for your request is FR03777.

Yours sincerely

Giba Begum
Freedom of Information
Health and Care Professions Council
Park House, 184 Kennington Park Road, London SE11 4BU
www.hcpc-uk.org

tel +44 (0)20 7840 3486 (direct dial) or +44 (0)845 3004472 (Main
switchboard)
[HCPC request email]

To sign up to our e-newsletter, please email [email address]

Please consider the environment before printing this email

HCPC E-mail Disclaimer:
The material transmitted in this email is intended only for the person or legal entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and privileged information. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the addressee or have received this email in error please notify the sender and do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on the material in this email.

show quoted sections

Charles Bell left an annotation ()

I think you may have concerns ab out HCPC as I do specifically in relation to registering (or not) international social workers and their general attitude of being aloof and above the law. I am currently making representations to three gov. depts about this incompetence.

Would you be interested in sharing notes? My best e mail is internationalsocialworkers at gmail dot com

Philip J Measures left an annotation ()

I think that it not so much the HCPC being above the law - they aren't - but rather that the legal safeguards are not in place to regard it as being 'fit for purpose.'

There are 2 'arms' - the 'Investigatory' and the 'Prosecution' - the latter being the 'Fitness to Practise' (FTP) arm which is 'independent of the Regulatory / investigatory side of the organisation.

As far as Registrants are concerned there only right of Appeal against a FTP Hearing Decision is to the High Court and within 28 days of the Finding - the HCPC make clear that it will seek to recover any of their costs (circa £40k) and so there are huge financial dis-incentives against appealing.

The HCPC itself has no rights of Appeal - so it can prosecute but not appeal any decisions regardless of whether they feel that the FTP Hearing was in error by either being too harsh or too lenient.

The Professional Standards Authorrity (PSA) however 'oversee' HCPC FTP decisions and THEY can appeal to the High Court but very few appeals are made by them as the Links below to their website demonstrates:

http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/...

http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/...

There are also instances of undue delays with the Investigatory 'arm' as well as no sanctions, it appears, against employers who do not refer staff. Equally, where there are clear findings where mitigation has been accepted regarding high Caseloads; poor Supervision; illness Procedures not being followed by employers no action seems to be taken against senior managers or employers.

So Registrants - beware of this dangerous organisation which is extremely powerful but lacks the right sort of accountability.There are clearly legal 'firewalls' in place which, sadly, seem to leave the individual practitioner at enormous risk and, with social workers, there is no longer a 'second tier' Tribunal - it is the High Court or nothing.

Now is this fair and commensurate? I, for one, think not.

Dear Health and Care Professions Council,

When may I expect a response to this over-due request please?

Yours faithfully,

Philip J Measures

Health and Care Professions Council

3 Attachments

Dear Mr Measures,

Thank you for your recent information request regarding case investigation
timeframes. Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) (2000).

The number of HCPC registrants broken down by profession is available on
our website at the following links;

http://www.hcpc-uk.org/aboutregistration...

http://www.hcpc-uk.org/aboutregistration...

I have provided the data the HCPC holds on the duration of cases below. The
received date is not recorded on our reporting system for 2012-13.
Therefore I have provided the dates from the case meeting the standards of
acceptance to closure. The FOIA does not require us to carry out
calculations which were not already held, however the data provided will
enable you to make the calculations yourself. The HCPC assumed
responsibility for the regulation of social workers in England on 1 August
2012. any cases received before this where the profession is listed as
social worker, were GSCC transfer cases.

'Pre ICP closure' is where a case did not meet the standards of acceptance
and so was not reviewed by a Panel to decide if there was a case to answer.

(See attached file: Time taken no case to answer.xls)(See attached file:
Time taken pre ICP closure.xls)(See attached file: Time taken case to
answer.xlsx)

Internal review

If you are unhappy with the way your request for information has been
handled, you can request a review by writing to:

Louise Lake
Director of Council and Committee Services
Health and Care Professions Council
Park House
184 Kennington Park Road
London
SE11 4BU

Email: [email address]

If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your request or complaint,
you have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at:

The Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Telephone: 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45 Website: www.ico.gov.uk

There is no charge for making an appeal.

Kind regards,

Claire Amor

Freedom of Information
Health and Care Professions Council
Park House, 184 Kennington Park Road, London SE11 4BU
www.hcpc-uk.org

tel +44 (0)20 7840 9710 (direct dial) or +44 (0)845 3004472 (Main
switchboard)
[HCPC request email]

To sign up to our e-newsletter, please email [email address]

Please consider the environment before printing this email

HCPC E-mail Disclaimer:
The material transmitted in this email is intended only for the person or legal entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and privileged information. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the addressee or have received this email in error please notify the sender and do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on the material in this email.

show quoted sections

Dear Health and Care Professions Council,

This is now overdue your response.

Yours faithfully,

Philip J Measures

Philip J Measures left an annotation ()

I now urge Registrants and others to look at the timescales involved.

The 'sword of Damocles' can hang over people for many months and even years.

The processes are not fair and the HCPC has enormous power and precious little accountability.