Pharmacist Warned for Dishonest Bounce Back Loan Application

Date of Decision: July 22, 2025

Registrant's Role: Pharmacist

Allegations:

• Dishonestly overstating company turnover to obtain a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan that the company was not entitled to

Outcome: Warning issued

GPhC Standards Breached:

• Standard 6 – Pharmacy professionals must behave in a professional manner

Case Summary

Allegations

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) issued a warning to a registered pharmacist following dishonest conduct related to a government financial support scheme. In October 2020, the registrant, acting in her role as director of 1SR Limited, applied for and received a £50,000 Bounce Back Loan (BBL) under false pretences. The allegation centred on the fact that the company was not eligible for the loan and that its turnover had been dishonestly overstated to qualify.

The Bounce Back Loan Scheme, introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, was designed to support small businesses adversely affected by the economic impact of lockdowns and public health measures. Eligibility criteria required applicants to declare accurate turnover figures. In this case, the registrant breached these criteria by inflating the company’s financial details to receive funding unlawfully.

Findings

Upon investigation, the GPhC’s Investigating Committee determined that the registrant’s actions involved dishonesty. Despite the loan application being made in her capacity as company director, the Committee recognised the registrant’s professional identity and obligations as a pharmacist extended to all aspects of her conduct, including business dealings.

The Committee highlighted that dishonesty—particularly involving public funds—is a serious matter that risks damaging public trust in pharmacy professionals. The registrant’s conduct represented a clear failure to uphold professional standards, particularly with respect to integrity and lawful behaviour.

GPhC Determination on Impairment

While the Committee found the registrant’s actions to be dishonest, they concluded that the misconduct did not amount to current impairment of fitness to practise. This was based on several factors, including the isolated nature of the incident, the registrant’s cooperation during the investigation, and the absence of any similar conduct or ongoing risk to patient safety.

However, the seriousness of the conduct warranted regulatory action. The GPhC emphasised that dishonesty undermines the high level of trust the public places in pharmacy professionals. In their view, even in cases not involving patient harm or clinical negligence, the integrity of the profession must be protected through accountability.

Sanction

The GPhC issued a formal warning to the registrant, which will remain published on the public register for 12 months. The purpose of the warning is both corrective and deterrent—serving as a reminder to the registrant and others in the profession that such conduct is unacceptable and must not be repeated.

“This case relates to a registered pharmacist […] who obtained a government back bounce back loan (BBL) of £50,000 that the company was not entitled to by dishonestly overstating the company’s turnover. The pharmacy professional’s conduct calls into question their honesty and integrity and is likely to undermine confidence in the profession.”

The panel noted that a warning was appropriate and proportionate, given the context and the registrant’s professional standing.

Key Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals

1. Honesty and Integrity Extend Beyond Clinical Roles: Pharmacy professionals are expected to uphold high standards of honesty not only in patient-facing roles but also in any business or administrative capacity that intersects with their professional identity.
2. Financial Misconduct is Taken Seriously: Even if an incident of dishonesty does not involve patients or clinical work, the GPhC regards misuse of public funds and financial misconduct as serious breaches of professional standards.
3. Transparency is Crucial in Declarations: Pharmacists involved in any formal declarations—whether financial, regulatory, or professional—must ensure complete accuracy and honesty. Misrepresentation, especially in government schemes, can result in disciplinary action.
4. Professional Standards Apply in All Contexts: The expectation to behave professionally extends beyond the pharmacy premises. Pharmacy professionals must maintain ethical behaviour in their personal, financial, and business affairs to uphold the public’s trust.
5. Warnings Have Regulatory Weight: Even though a warning is not as severe as suspension or removal from the register, it is a formal sanction that remains on the public register and can influence future regulatory assessments.

This case serves as a reminder that the responsibilities of a pharmacist are not confined to clinical duties alone. Upholding integrity in all areas of conduct remains a core expectation, with regulatory consequences for breaches that compromise public trust.

Original Case Document

The full determination transcript is available to logged in users.

Log in or Register for free to access.