Blog
Clarity, Consistency, Confidence: HCPC Unveils Key Updates to FTP Decision-Making
Tajmina Begum
For HCPC Registrants, it is important for them to stay informed about how the Regulators expectations have evolved and what this means in terms of any practical implications.
The HCPC has revised its sanctions policy with a view to providing clearer, more robust guidance for its independent FTP panels. This enhanced clarity aims at supporting fairer, more consistent decision making– especially in areas where risk, public trust and ethical considerations intersect. The updated policy comes into effect on 2 March 2026 and reflects extensive engagement and public consultation with registrants, professional bodies, unions, employers, panel members and members of the public.
The HCPC has looked to strengthen its approach across several critical areas:
Revised guidance to provide sharper definitions and expectations regarding:
The updated sanctions policy offers more detailed principles for determining appropriate outcomes in FTP cases, ensuring decisions are:
This alignment aims to strengthen the integrity of regulatory decision-making across the board.
Since the previous policy update, relevant case law has evolved. The HCPC has incorporated these developments, alongside existing HCPTS Practice Notes, for better consistency.
Executive Director of Fitness to Practise & Tribunal Services, Laura Coffey, explains:
“As part of our role to protect the public and maintain trust and confidence in health and care professions, we take actions when a registrant doesn’t meet the standards we set.
“These changes will help us to support independent panels, by providing more clarity and guidance when deciding on the appropriate sanction in HCPC fitness to practise tribunals, ensuring that decisions are consistent, informed, fair and proportionate.
“This enables us to improve the ways we protect the public and further support the healthcare professionals we regulate.”
These updates aim to support panels in making decisions that maintain public trust and ensure registrants meet HCPC standards.
For those working within HCPC-regulated professions, these changes:
Ultimately, the updated policy aims to strengthen both public protection and professional support, ensuring decisions are informed, consistent and aligned with current legal and ethical expectations.
As the revised sanctions policy comes into force on 2 March 2026, now is the ideal time for registrants and regulatory legal practitioners to familiarise themselves with the changes and reflect on how they influence the FTP process. By staying informed and engaged, everyone can work together to support fairer outcomes and contribute to a regulatory system that keeps the public safe.
Tajmina is a paralegal in the Regulatory Department at Kingsley Napley, where she assists the team in regulatory matters.
Sarah is a Senior Associate in the Regulatory team. Sarah is primarily responsible for investigating and preparing cases on behalf of various regulatory bodies. Sarah leads investigations on behalf of the Architects Registration Board (ARB), General Dental Council (GDC) and Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA). Sarah is ranked as a ‘Rising Star’ in Legal 500 2023.
The regulatory landscape for accountants is progressively evolving, driven by heightened public expectations, increased scrutiny of professional conduct, and a greater push for transparency across regulated professions.
The Joint Insolvency Committee, in collaboration with the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW), the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) and the Insolvency Practitioners Association (IPA), has approved and issued a revised Insolvency Code of Ethics. The updated Code took effect from 1 October 2025.
Pursuing a career in law is already a significant challenge without the added stress of worrying whether past mistakes could block your path to becoming a solicitor. Early-life convictions, cautions, academic disciplinary actions, or financial issues may all impact your eligibility for admission by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).
Private prosecutions provide an effective way to seek justice; and particularly in circumstances when the traditional prosecuting agencies are unable or unwilling to act. Conducted appropriately they can be a useful, efficient and cost-effective tool to secure punishment of the guilty. Conducted badly they can be an expensive mistake with far reaching consequences.
In this blog series we draw on our experience of both bringing and defending private prosecutions to help clarify some of the common myths and misunderstandings about private prosecutions. In this blog we look at whether having an ulterior motive in starting a private prosecution can lead to problems down the line.
Private prosecutions provide an effective way to seek justice; and particularly in circumstances when the traditional prosecuting agencies are unable or unwilling to act. Conducted appropriately they can be a useful, efficient and cost-effective tool to secure punishment of the guilty. Conducted badly they can be an expensive mistake with far reaching consequences.
In this blog series we draw on our experience of both bringing and defending private prosecutions to help clarify some of the common myths and misunderstandings about private prosecutions. In this blog we look at whether the private prosecutor is entitled to recover their full investigation and legal fees at the end of the case.
Every solicitor knows that an undertaking is serious stuff. Arguably it is the greatest power available to a solicitor. A promise, if broken, that will lead to immediate and serious consequences for the giver. As such it can be relied upon to the ends of the earth. The power of undertakings has meant that they sit at the heart of every property transaction, bridging the time gap between the sending of money and the receiving of title. They are also used in other areas of commercial life and as part of litigation. The “brand” of a solicitor’s undertaking is so powerful that little thought is given as to where their power comes from.
Gone are the days of computer gaming being viewed as a secluded activity; gaming is now a thoroughly social experience that attracts a global audience of millions and players can compete for large sums of money and celebrity. This burgeoning industry is largely in a virtual world and has developed in a blockchain, decentralised fashion. Often the UK government talks up the UK gaming industry and how keen the government is to support this sector, and there have been instances that show support, but when it comes to playing games competitively, law and regulations have not yet caught up.
In this 3-part tech blog series, we’ve explored how legal and accountancy regulators are driving and responding to changes in technology and innovation in their respective professions. We’ve also considered the commercial perspective, looking at interesting developments in these sectors , particularly around the use of artificial intelligence (AI).
In this second blog in our technology and innovation series, we look at some recent developments in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the legal and accountancy sectors.
On 18 November 2020, the government confirmed that it is proceeding with planned changes to the Victims' Code, following a consultation that began on 5 March 2020. The changes mean that when the revised Code comes into force, it will be based on a clearly defined set of rights that set out a minimum level of service that can be expected from criminal justice agencies. It is hoped that the changes will mean victims have a greater awareness of their rights, receive the information and support when then need it and have a greater level of satisfaction with the treatment they receive in the criminal justice system.
On 19 November 2020, the High Court handed down judgment in the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care’s (“PSA”) challenge to a decision of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal (“MPT”) to suspend a doctor from practice. In her judgment, Mrs Justice Farbey emphasises the significance of lack of insight to the question of sanction.
All providers registered with the Care Quality Commission (“CQC) must assure themselves that all directors who are responsible for delivering care to service users are fit and proper – in other words, they must be able to diligently carry out their responsibility to ensure the quality and safety of care. This forms part of the providers’ duty to ensure the service is well-led, which is one of the focus points during an inspection. Not only does the CQC monitor compliance at the point of registration, but it is an on-going duty and can lead to enforcement action where it is not met.
The House of Commons Justice Committee has made a series of recommendations in its report published today which are likely to have a significant impact on the future of private prosecutions in England and Wales.
Although everyone hopes the now much enhanced critical care capacity in the UK will meet the demand from patients, there is a growing concern that the time will come during the COVID-19 pandemic when the NHS will be overwhelmed and the need for lifesaving interventions will exceed available resources.
The Charities Commission has recently warned that fraudsters are exploiting the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) in order to carry out fraud and cybercrime against charities. Unfortunately, in our experience, the likelihood of the police taking action against these individuals is low. In the current climate it is easy to understand why the use of private prosecutions is firmly on the rise. In the past, some charities have been criticised for having an overzealous approach to the conduct of their private prosecutions. In this blog, we highlight the importance of taking a few simple steps to ensure that charities who conduct private prosecutions are beyond reproach.
With BBC reports that there have been 178,000 incidents of anti-social behaviour in the last four weeks across England and Wales alone, if a solicitor receives a fixed penalty notice for a non-essential journey away from home - do they have to inform the SRA?
With the COVID-19 lockdown extended in the UK until at least early-May, primary care practitioners and consultants, who have been increasingly turning to remote consultations or telemedicine to treat their patients, will inevitably see an increase in their use to address more complex medical issues.
In our previous blog, we discussed the introduction of the Coronavirus Act and how the emergency legislation impacts healthcare professionals. Understandably however, the situation is constantly evolving and the position must be regularly reassessed. With this in mind, we discuss below some of the recent, key updates impacting the healthcare workforce.
Last week we provided you with detail on the guidance to be aware of as a manager or owner of a care/domiciliary home in light of the current pandemic. The guidance is of course changing given the nature of the outbreak, so please read on for the key updates:
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has recently issued guidance to athletes in which acknowledges the difficulties that the Covid-19 pandemic will cause, not just for athletes, but for the entire sporting community who are committed to protecting clean sport
Or call +44 (0)20 7814 1200
Tajmina Begum
Sophie Tang
Christopher Perrin
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print