What this means
Start with the exact decision in front of you.
A Professional Conduct Committee case may allege unacceptable professional conduct, professional incompetence or a material criminal conviction. The factual case and statutory threshold should be addressed separately.
Immediate priorities
Organise the position before responding.
Identify the precise statutory allegation
Preserve treatment records, consent evidence and practice policies
Prepare evidence of current standards and any remediation
Detailed guidance
The procedure, evidence and possible route from here.
01
Identify the pleaded statutory allegation
The Professional Conduct Committee can determine allegations of unacceptable professional conduct, professional incompetence and a material criminal conviction. These are statutory concepts, not interchangeable descriptions of poor treatment or dissatisfaction. Read the formal allegation for the precise acts, dates and ground. Create separate columns for factual particulars, evidence and the legal threshold so an admission to an event does not unintentionally concede the professional conclusion.
Professional incompetence may require evidence about a standard of practice and can involve expert material. Unacceptable professional conduct concerns a serious departure from expected standards, assessed in context. The Osteopathic Practice Standards relevant at the time can inform the case, but a departure from a standard does not by itself dictate the statutory result. Check which version governed the conduct because the standards are subject to review and change.
- Separate facts from the statutory threshold
- Identify any expert competence issue
- Use the standards applicable at the time
02
Prepare the evidential case
Audit clinical records, consent discussions, witness accounts, policies and expert reports. Preserve originals and document provenance. Where records conflict, identify whether the issue is memory, timing, authorship or interpretation. Do not fill a gap with a confident reconstruction. If expert evidence is relied upon, test the instructions, factual assumptions, specialty and whether the opinion addresses the committee's actual competence question.
Current-practice evidence may include audit, peer review, training, supervision and reflection tied to the concern. A course certificate alone rarely demonstrates changed practice. Explain what was learned, what behaviour changed and how this has been verified over time. Where facts are contested, reflection can address risk and patient impact without repeating an inaccurate admission. Keep mitigation ready for the proper stage rather than using it to blur the fact-finding case.
- Index records and witnesses to each particular
- Test expert assumptions and scope
- Evidence changed practice over time
03
Follow the hearing stages
The PCC hears evidence and decides facts before determining whether the established facts amount to the statutory allegation. If an allegation is well founded, it then considers sanction. Prepare separate submissions and evidence for each stage. Referral by the Investigating Committee is not evidence that the allegation should succeed, and the burden remains on the case presented under the governing procedure.
Possible PCC outcomes include admonishment, conditions, suspension and removal. The Hearings and Sanctions Guidance assists but does not replace individual judgment. Address public protection, standards, confidence, insight and risk of repetition with evidence. If conditions are proposed, show that they can operate in real osteopathic practice and be monitored. Any decision may carry publication and appeal consequences that require separate review after reasons are issued.
- Prepare separately for facts, threshold and sanction
- Use current sanctions guidance
- Test conditions for practical monitoring
Key questions
Keep the analysis tied to this stage.
Which facts are proved
Whether they meet the statutory threshold
Whether a sanction is required
Advice is provided only by the regulated firm that accepts a matter.
Common questions
Clarifying the route without assuming the outcome.
Is a breach of an Osteopathic Practice Standard automatically unacceptable professional conduct?
No. Standards are relevant, but the PCC must determine the facts and apply the statutory threshold in context.
Can remediation be shown while facts are disputed?
Yes. Reflection and risk reduction can be evidenced without making an inaccurate admission, provided the position is explained clearly.
Connected guidance
Continue through the topic map.
Use the hub for the full sequence or choose the connected route that matches the notice.
Official sources
Check the material for this question.
Sources checked 19 September 2026. Rules change, so compare the current notice and linked official material and tell the operator if a citation or summary needs correction.