Manesi J T Chivhako
Please note that the decision can take up to 5 working days to be uploaded onto the HCPTS website. Please contact one of our Hearings Team Managers via tsteam@hcpts-uk.org or +44 (0)808 164 3084 if you require any further information.
Allegation
Allegation:
(as amended on day 1 of the hearing, namely, 19 April 2023)
As a registered Occupational Therapist (OT76547) your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of conviction and/or misconduct. In that:
1. On 4 May 2010, you were convicted of the following offences:
(i) On 10 June 2009, in the County Court Division of Belfast, being the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle and knowing that an accident had occurred owing to the presence of that vehicle on a road or other public place, namely Belfast, whereby injury was caused to a person other than yourself failed to keep the said vehicle standing at or near the place where the accident occurred for such a period as was reasonable in all the circumstances, contrary to Article 175 of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981.
(ii) On 10 June 2009, in the County Court Division of Belfast, being the driver of a vehicle and knowing that an accident had occurred owing to the presence of that vehicle on a road or other public place, namely Belfast, whereby injury was caused to a person other than yourself failed to forthwith report the accident and give particulars at a police station or to a member of the Police Service of Northern Ireland contrary to Article 176 of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981.
(iii) On 10 June 2009, in the County Court Division of Belfast, drove a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road, without due care and attention contrary to Article 12 of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1995.
2. On 18 January 2019, at Hamilton Sheriff Court, you were convicted of the following offences:
(i) On 25 September 2018, drove a motor vehicle on a road otherwise than in accordance with a licence authorising you to drive a motor vehicle of that class in respect that you were the holder of a provisional licence and not accompanied by a qualified driver and were not displaying ‘L’ plates on said motor vehicle contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 87(1) as amended.
(ii) On 25 September 2018, on a road or other public place did use a motor vehicle without there being in force in relation to the use of said motor vehicle by you such a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complied with the requirements of Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988; contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 143(1)&(2) as amended.
3. You did not declare your convictions set out in particulars 1(i) and/or (ii) and/or (iii) and/or 2(i) and/or 2(ii) to the Health and Care Profession Council (HCPC) in a timely manner.
4. On 30 November 2017, you signed the application form for registration with the HCPC and did not tick the box “yes” in response to the question:
“Have you been convicted of a criminal offence or received a police caution (other than a protected caution or protected conviction)?”.
5. Your conduct in relation to particulars 3 and/or 4 above was dishonest.
6. The matters set out in particulars 3 and/or 4 and/or 5 above constitute misconduct.
7. By reason of your conviction and/or misconduct your fitness to practise is impaired.
Finding
Decision
22. The Panel accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor and had regard to the HCPTS Practice Note ‘Review of Article 30 Sanction Orders.’ The Panel is carrying out a comprehensive reconsideration of the Conditions of Practice Order in light of the current circumstances. The Panel bore in mind that it must first decide if a finding of current impairment is necessary to protect the public from any risk of harm (assessing the
extent of that current or future risk), maintain public confidence in the profession, or to declare and uphold the proper standards of conduct or behaviour. This is a matter for the Panel’s independent judgment and is essentially a risk assessment in light of all the information before the Panel today.
23. The Legal Assessor advised that, in practical terms, there was a persuasive burden on the Registrant to demonstrate that her fitness to practise is no longer impaired and that the concerns that led to the original finding of impairment have now been overcome. The Panel was referred to the case of Abrahaem v GMC [2008] EWHC 183 (Admin) and the principle that it is for a registrant to fully acknowledge why past performance was deficient and demonstrate that they have, “through insight, application, education, supervision and other achievement… sufficiently addressed the past impairments.”
24. It is only if the Panel determines that the Registrant’s fitness to practise
remains impaired that the Panel should go on to consider sanction by
applying the guidance as set out in the HCPC Sanctions Policy. The
Panel must have regard to the principle of proportionality, which requires
that the Registrant’s interests be balanced against the interests of the
public.
25. The Panel first considered whether the Registrant’s fitness to practise is
currently impaired and it exercised its own professional judgement in this
regard. In undertaking this review, the Panel took into account all of the
documentation before it, including the determination from the Final
Hearing where the panel identified that there was an ongoing risk to the
public because of the Registrant’s lack of insight.
26. The Registrant did not give evidence, but the Panel had regard to the
documents submitted on her behalf. The Panel took into account the
Registrant’s written reflections, her two written references from her
employer up until October 2023 (dated 28 March 2024) and the Agency
that current employs her (dated 22 April 2024) and her training/CPD
certificate. The Panel also took account of what the Registrant had stated
at the hearing.
27. The Panel noted the reference from her previous employer, PG,
Occupational Therapist/Head of Therapy, whose reference of 28 March
2024 stated “She was trustworthy. She was patient focused. She followed
guidance and direction as needed. She would seek support from me, and
senior clinicians as required.”
28. The Panel also noted the reference from her current employer, JW,
Director of Social Care from Pertemps, dated 22 April 2024. JW
described the Registrant as “open and forthcoming about her referral to
HCPC and fitness to practise…. she has been a diligent and trustworthy
member of our team since she started”.
29. The Panel noted the training/CPD certificate dated 20 July 2023
confirming that the Registrant has completed a module on insight through
Probity and Ethics, an online course provider.
30. The Panel was satisfied that the Registrant had secured her driving
licence in 2019 and accepted that she had motor insurance policy in
place. The Panel considered the risk of repetition of the conviction as
being low.
31. With respect to the misconduct, the Registrant had demonstrated insight
into her failings and had accepted her responsibility as a HCPC registrant
and apologised. The Panel were satisfied that the Registrant had
reflected appropriately on the impact of her conduct on her colleagues,
patients and how the public may perceive the profession. The Panel was
satisfied that the Registrant had learned from her errors, had undertaken
the course and that her remorse was genuine. The Registrant’s
reflections following the course, and the references from the employers, emonstrated the insight that had developed since the substantive
hearing. There were no concerns about her current practice. No further
issues had arisen.
32. The Panel was satisfied that the Registrant was no longer impaired on
the personal component given the misconduct and conviction had been
remedied. The Registrant had provided genuine and convincing insight,
understood how her behaviour had fallen short of the standards,
understood how it occurred and demonstrated action having been taken
to avoid future repetition. The Panel was satisfied the risk of repetition
was low.
33. The Panel did not consider there was any impairment on the public component as the risk of repetition was low, the standards of behaviour were upheld by the sanction that had been in place and thus the public’s confidence in the profession had been maintained.
34. In accordance with the HCPTS Practice Note, the Panel considered whether the Registrant has complied with the existing order and has practised safely and effectively within the terms of that order. Since the substantive hearing, the Registrant has been employed as an Occupational Therapist, changing roles in September/October 2023.
35. The Panel considered the following conditions imposed and noted full compliance, as follows:
Within 4 months of the Operative Date, you must:
Satisfactorily complete the course in Ethics and Ethical Standards for HCPC professionals or similar course; and B. Forward documentary proof of completion of the same to the HCPC.
- Provided a certificate relating to an insight module course.
You must, before this Conditions of Practice Order is reviewed, provide a written reflective piece addressing the concerns identified by the Panel regarding your insight relating to the misconduct and the 2019 convictions.
- Reflective piece provided.
You must, before this Conditions of Practice Order is reviewed, provide a report from your workplace supervisor, who must be a registered professional, outlining how you have put into practice your learning regarding the importance of professional regulation.
- Provided a reference from PG.
36. The Panel have therefore concluded there is no current impairment.
37. Given the Registrant was no longer impaired, the Conditions of Practice Order will therefore end on 19 May 2024.
Order
ORDER: The Registrar is directed to allow the current Conditions of Practice Order against the registration of Miss Manesi J T Chivhako to lapse upon its expiry, namely 19 May 2024.
Notes
Right of Appeal
You may appeal to the High Court in England and Wales the Panel’s decision and the order it has made against you.
Under Articles 30(10) and 38 of the Health Professions Order 2001, any appeal must be made to the court not more than 28 days after the date when this notice is served on you.
Hearing History
History of Hearings for Manesi J T Chivhako
| Date | Panel | Hearing type | Outcomes / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24/04/2024 | Conduct and Competence Committee | Review Hearing | No further action |
| 19/04/2023 | Conduct and Competence Committee | Final Hearing | Conditions of Practice |