Pharmacist’s Suspension Lifted Following Review of Dishonesty Case Involving Falsified Gym Membership Letter

Date of Decision: March 28, 2019

Registrant's Role: Pharmacist

Allegations:

• The registrant provided a forged letter, purporting to be from the NHS, to a private Health Club in order to freeze his membership and suspend payment obligations.
• The act was dishonest, involving knowledge of the letter's falsehood and intent to gain personal financial benefit.

Outcome: Suspension lifted; fitness to practise no longer impaired

GPhC Standards Breached:

• Standard 6.1 – Act with honesty and integrity to maintain public trust and confidence in your profession
• Standard 6.5 – Meet accepted standards of personal and professional conduct

Case Summary

Allegations
This case concerned a pharmacist who was employed as an Advanced Clinical Pharmacist at the time of the incident. The key allegation arose from a personal matter involving a private Health Club. Following an injury around July 2015, the registrant sought to freeze his gym membership and provided the club with a letter dated 20 July 2015, purportedly from an NHS entity, to justify this request. The Fitness to Practise Committee found that the letter was falsified and had been submitted by the registrant to suspend the membership and avoid payment obligations.

Despite the registrant’s denial—claiming his email was “spoofed”—the Committee determined that he knowingly submitted a false document and did so with dishonest intent. These actions were found to constitute misconduct and breach of professional standards, especially those concerning honesty and integrity.

Findings
The original Fitness to Practise Committee, in its March 2018 hearing, concluded that the registrant’s conduct was dishonest and constituted a significant breach of the General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC) professional standards. It determined that while no patient harm occurred, the registrant’s actions damaged the reputation of the profession and were serious enough to warrant a suspension.

The panel highlighted breaches of:

• Standard 6.1 – relating to honesty and public confidence
• Standard 6.5 – relating to personal and professional conduct

The Committee emphasized that using an NHS letterhead for personal gain significantly undermined public trust and fell far below expected professional standards.

GPhC Determination on Impairment
The 2018 panel found the registrant’s fitness to practise impaired due to the dishonesty and lack of insight shown. The registrant did not demonstrate meaningful reflection or acknowledgment of wrongdoing. This, coupled with the gravity of the misconduct, led the panel to conclude that a 12-month suspension was necessary to uphold public confidence in the pharmacy profession.

A review of the suspension was mandated before its expiry, allowing the GPhC to reassess the registrant’s insight, remediation, and risk of repetition.

Sanction
At the 28 March 2019 Review Hearing, the Committee considered whether the registrant had made progress in addressing the concerns raised. While the registrant maintained his denial of having forged or submitted the letter, he accepted the panel’s findings and expressed a deeper understanding of the expectations placed on pharmacy professionals.

During the suspension period, the registrant:

• Attended a conference on preventing human trafficking and modern slavery
• Assisted with medical negligence claims in his sister’s law firm
• Supported clients in the care home sector and in establishing a charitable organization
• Maintained informal CPD through reading pharmacy journals and discussing updates with his pharmacist spouse

The Committee noted these efforts as credible and consistent with personal growth, even if not directly related to pharmacy. It was impressed by his oral testimony, finding his reflections to be sincere and unscripted.

The panel concluded:

“He has now seen at first hand what happens when pharmacy professionals fall short in their professional responsibilities.”

Despite the earlier lack of insight, the Review Committee found that the registrant had shown sufficient development and no longer posed a risk of future dishonesty. It thus determined that his fitness to practise was no longer impaired, and the suspension would expire on 4 April 2019, with no further action taken.

Key Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals

1. Honesty and Integrity Are Paramount: Even outside clinical settings, pharmacists are expected to maintain the highest standards of integrity. Misuse of professional identifiers, such as NHS letterheads, is a serious breach.
2. Reflection Must Be Demonstrable: Denials of misconduct must be accompanied by evidence of reflection and understanding of the seriousness of the allegations, especially in review hearings.
3. Insight Is Critical for Reinstatement: Fitness to practise is closely tied to a registrant’s ability to show they understand the impact of their actions. Even without direct admissions, an articulate demonstration of remorse and personal growth can influence decisions.
4. CPD and Professional Engagement Matter: Continued learning—even informally—helps reassure regulators that registrants remain committed to their professional development during suspension.
5. Character References and Support Activities Can Aid Rehabilitation: Volunteer or advisory work, particularly in related sectors like healthcare or law, may provide evidence of ethical engagement and personal reform.

This case is a valuable reminder that dishonesty—even in private matters—can have profound professional consequences. However, it also shows that genuine efforts toward personal growth and ethical reflection can enable rehabilitation and re-entry into professional practice.

Original Case Document

The full determination transcript is available to logged in users.

Log in or Register for free to access.