Mrs Melanie E Hood

Preliminary matters

Service

1. The Panel determined that the Registrant had been served with the Notice of Hearing by an email dated 15 December 2021 in accordance with the emergency COVID-19 measures instigated by the HCPC for service of Notices of Hearing during this time. These related to the service by email only to the last known registered email address of the Registrant and the fact that the hearing would be by video remote means. In addition, the date, time and nature of the hearing was also set out in the Notice email. The Panel also took into account the fact that the email had not been returned. The Panel took into account that the HCPC only has to prove service, and not receipt, of that Notice. Thus, the Panel concluded that there had been good service of the Notice of Hearing.

Proceeding in Absence of the Registrant

2. In reaching its conclusion on this, the Panel considered the HCPTS's Practice Note relating to Proceeding in the Absence of the Registrant and Rule 11 of the HCPC (Health Committee) (Procedure) Rules 2003 (the Rules). The Panel also accepted the Legal Assessor's advice. The Panel also took into account the submissions of Ms Sampson who set out the steps she had taken to contact the Registrant via telephone and email.

3. The Panel concluded that the Registrant has not engaged with this hearing process and had not attended either the substantive hearing or the previous review hearing. The Panel noted that the Registrant has had no contact with the HCPC following the review hearing and has not applied for an adjournment.

4. Therefore, the Panel considered that it would be highly unlikely that if the Panel decided to adjourn the hearing today, the Registrant would attend on the next occasion. The Panel concluded that, as this was a time-driven mandatory review, it was in the public interest for there to be an expeditious and timely disposal of the hearing. The Panel further concluded that the HCPC had made all reasonable efforts to contact the Registrant and invite her to participate.

5. Thus, the Panel determined, having exercised the principle of proportionality, that the public interest in the expeditious disposal of the hearing outweighed any interests of the Registrant, where there has been good service of the Notice of Hearing. The Panel concluded that the Registrant has voluntarily absented herself and, thus, the only fair and proportionate action is that the hearing should proceed in the Registrant's absence.

Proceeding in Private

6. The Panel heard a submission from Ms Sampson on the hearing being held in private. The Panel accepted the Legal Assessor's advice. In reaching its conclusion, the Panel also took into account the HCPTS's Practice Note on Hearings in Private. The Panel noted that the case concerned the health of the Registrant and, hence, any references to her health fall within matters that should be treated confidentially. Therefore, the Panel determined that this hearing should be heard wholly in private to preserve the Registrant's private and family life under caselaw and under Rule 10(1)(a) of the Rules.

Order: The Registrar is directed to suspend the registration of Mrs Melanie Hood for a further period of 12 months on the expiry of the existing order.

This Order will be reviewed again before its expiry.

No notes available

History of Hearings for Mrs Melanie E Hood