Locum Pharmacist Struck Off for Repeated Theft of Methadone, Oramorph and Codeine from Boots
Date of Decision: August 6, 2026
Registrant's Role: Pharmacist
Allegations:
- On 5 May 2024, the registrant removed medication from the pharmacy without permission and without a valid prescription, namely: a bottle of patient-returned medication; and a bottle of Oramorph.
- On 12 May 2024, the registrant removed medication from the pharmacy without permission and/or without a valid prescription, namely: one or more boxes of Oramorph; and liquid Oramorph that had been decanted into a bottle.
- On 19 May 2024, the registrant removed medication from the pharmacy without permission and without a valid prescription, including: co-codamol; codeine; and Oramorph.
- On 5 May 2024, the registrant consumed Methadone or Oramorph while working in the pharmacy.
Outcome: Removal from the Register
GPhC Standards Breached:
- Standard 1 – Pharmacy professionals must provide person-centred care
- Standard 2 – Pharmacy professionals must work in partnership with others
- Standard 3 – Pharmacy professionals must communicate effectively
- Standard 4 – Pharmacy professionals must maintain, develop and use their professional knowledge and skills
- Standard 5 – Pharmacy professionals must use their professional judgement
- Standard 6 – Pharmacy professionals must behave in a professional manner
- Standard 8 – Pharmacy professionals must speak up when they have concerns or when things go wrong
- Standard 9 – Pharmacy professionals must demonstrate leadership
Case Summary
Allegations
This case concerned repeated dishonest conduct by a pharmacist who, at the relevant time, was working as a locum Responsible Pharmacist. The incidents took place across three Sunday shifts on 5, 12 and 19 May 2024. As Responsible Pharmacist, the registrant was the most senior professional in the pharmacy and had access to the keys for the controlled drugs cupboard. The pharmacy operated a controlled drug key-signing process and carried out weekly controlled drug balance checks, with Methadone and sugar-free Methadone recorded separately because of the volume being supplied.
The investigation began after staff identified discrepancies in the Methadone stock. On 28 May 2024, an investigation found a 160 ml difference between the Methadone balance recorded in the controlled drugs register and the physical stock. The product concerned was Methadone 1 mg/ml: the recorded balance was 10,505 ml, compared with a physical balance of 10,345 ml. The pharmacy initially considered whether the discrepancy could have arisen from dispensing or equipment error. Methadone was supplied in 2,500 ml bulk bottles and dispensed using a Varispenser, which required calibration. CCTV was therefore reviewed in part to exclude calibration, tubing or operator-related explanations for the discrepancy.
Continue Reading the Full Case
Create a free account or log in to access the complete case summary.
- Full allegations considered by the GPhC
- Panel findings and reasoning
- Outcome of the investigation
- Sanctions considered and imposed on the Pharmacist
- Key professional learning points
Original Case Document
View the Full Determination Document
The original determination transcript is available to registered users.
- Download the official GPhC determination
- Full hearing transcript
- Detailed findings of fact
- Sanction reasoning
- Details of the pharmacy professionals involved