Remediation in HCPC cases
The HCPTS practice note on fitness to practise impairment, dated August 2025, splits the question into two parts. The personal component asks whether the acts or omissions behind the allegation are remediable, and whether you have taken remedial action. The public component asks whether public confidence in your profession, and in how it is regulated, would be undermined if there were no finding of impairment.
That second part matters. The practice note says a finding of impairment may still be required where there has been adequate remediation and adequate reduction of future risk. Remediation is essential, but it is not a switch that turns a case off. It works best when it is relevant, evidenced and paired with genuine insight.
The HCPC’s Sanctions policy, updated in March 2026, lists insight, remorse, apology and remediation as relevant to mitigation, and describes remediation as including courses to address behavioural and attitudinal issues, training to address competence, and coaching, mentoring and supervision.
Before you start
We are an independent CPD provider, not part of the HCPC. No regulator approves remediation courses, and no course can guarantee an outcome. Take advice from your defence organisation, union or solicitor, and agree with them which learning is relevant to your case.
Which course fits your HCPC concern
The revised standards of conduct, performance and ethics have ten headings. Most allegations engage one or two of them. Start with the standard engaged, then choose learning that fits.
Dishonesty (standard 9: be honest and trustworthy)
Dishonesty is one of the concerns the Sanctions policy says is less amenable to remediation. Panels look for a clear understanding of why the conduct was dishonest and its effect on trust. Typical cases involve falsified records, timesheets or claims, and misleading statements to employers or the HCPC. Your reflection must avoid minimising.
Records (standard 10: keep records of your work)
Record keeping concerns are often well suited to targeted remediation. Show you understand what accurate, timely and complete records look like in your profession, and why they matter to service users and colleagues. Recent audits of your records and feedback from a supervisor are strong supporting evidence. Describe the habits you have changed.
Confidentiality (standard 5: respect confidentiality)
Accessing or sharing service user information without a proper reason breaches standard 5. Remediation should show you understand when information can and cannot be shared, the legal framework, and the checks you now make before accessing records. Local information governance training adds to the picture. Explain how you now think before you look.
Openness (standard 8: be open when things go wrong)
Failing to tell a service user about an error, or failing to report it, can become a more serious concern than the error itself. Show that you understand your duty of candour, how to apologise and explain, and how to cooperate with investigations and learn from incidents. Reflect on what made openness difficult.
Communication (standard 2: communicate appropriately and effectively)
Complaints about tone, consent conversations or communication with colleagues fall here. Show that you understand how your communication affected others, the techniques you now use, and how you respond when a service user or carer is unhappy. Colleague feedback adds weight. Ask colleagues to confirm the change in a reference.
Boundaries (standard 1: promote and protect the interests of service users and carers)
Boundary concerns range from over-familiarity to sexual misconduct, which the Sanctions policy names as less amenable to remediation. Learning about power, trust and boundary drift can support insight in less serious cases, but serious cases need far more than a course. Panels will expect independent evidence of changed behaviour over time.
Discrimination and workplace conduct
Discrimination is also named in the Sanctions policy as less amenable to remediation. Remediation needs to show real understanding of the harm caused, and evidence over time that your behaviour towards service users and colleagues has changed. Feedback from managers and colleagues is important. Show what you now do to challenge it.
Competence and risk (standards 3 and 6)
Working outside your knowledge and skills, or failing to manage risk, are competence concerns that targeted training and supervised practice can often address. Show the specific gap, the training you completed, and evidence of safe practice since, signed off by a supervisor who knows the concern. Keep the evidence dated.
How the HCPC fitness to practise process works
The HCPC investigates and the HCPTS adjudicates. HCPTS panels hear cases on behalf of the HCPC’s Investigating Committee, Conduct and Competence Committee and Health Committee, at arm’s length from the HCPC.
- 1
Threshold assessment
When a concern is received, a senior decision maker decides whether it meets the HCPC’s threshold policy for fitness to practise investigations. Concerns that do not meet the threshold are not investigated as fitness to practise cases. If you learn that a concern has been raised, start reflecting now, and contact your professional body, union or a regulatory solicitor before you respond to anything.
- 2
Investigation and your response
If the threshold is met, a case manager plans and runs the investigation and the HCPC drafts formal allegations. You have 28 days to respond to the allegations. This is your first real chance to put insight and remediation forward: a measured response, a reflective statement, and evidence of relevant training and supervised practice, all agreed with your representative.
- 3
Investigating Committee Panel
A panel of three, a Chair, a registrant from your profession and a lay member, meets in private to consider the allegations and your written representations. It decides whether there is a realistic prospect that the HCPC will be able to prove the allegations at a final hearing. It can find a case to answer, find no case to answer, or ask for more information.
- 4
Interim orders (at any point)
If the concern is serious enough that public safety could be at risk while the case continues, a panel can make an interim conditions of practice order or an interim suspension order. An interim order lasts up to 18 months and is reviewed six months after it is made, then every three months. The HCPC must apply to the High Court to extend it.
- 5
Disposal by consent
After a case to answer decision, you and the HCPC can seek to end the case without a contested hearing. You must be willing to admit the substance of the allegations and that your fitness to practise is impaired. The agreed outcome, either a voluntary removal agreement or consent to a caution, conditions of practice or suspension, must be approved by a panel.
- 6
Final hearing
A panel of the Conduct and Competence Committee or the Health Committee, again a Chair, a registrant from your profession and a lay member, hears the case. It decides whether the allegations are proved and whether your fitness to practise is currently impaired. If it is, the panel hears submissions on sanction, and you can make a statement at that stage.
- 7
Sanctions and reviews
Under the Sanctions policy, outcomes are no action, mediation, a caution order of one to five years, a conditions of practice order of up to three years, a suspension order of up to one year, or a striking off order. Conditions and suspension orders must be reviewed by a panel before they expire, so remediation continues to matter after the hearing.
What HCPTS panels look for
The impairment practice note and the Sanctions policy shape how panels read your evidence. These are the points they come back to.
Insight, not just remorse
The practice note is direct: insight is concerned with future risk of repetition, and it is different to remorse for past misconduct. You need to show that you accept your behaviour fell below professional standards, and that you understand how and why it happened and what its consequences were. Saying sorry is important, but on its own it does not show the panel that the risk has reduced. Your statement should make the link between understanding and future risk explicit.
Remediable conduct
Panels ask whether the acts or omissions that led to the allegation are remediable at all. The Sanctions policy names some conduct as less amenable to remediation, including dishonesty, failure to raise concerns, failure to work in partnership, discrimination, and conduct that is sexual in nature or sexually motivated. For these, panels look for deep and lasting change, and remediation may carry less weight. Be realistic about where your case sits, and say so in your reflection.
Remedial action taken
The second personal question is whether you have actually taken remedial action. The Sanctions policy mentions courses to address behavioural and attitudinal issues, training to address competence deficiencies, and coaching, mentoring and supervision. Choose what fits the allegation. A competence concern calls for training and supervised practice, while an attitudinal concern calls for reflective learning and evidence of changed behaviour over time. Explain in your statement why each step was chosen and what it addressed.
Changes in practice
The practice note says that where insight, regret or remorse has been reflected and evidenced in modifications to your practice, it is relevant to current impairment. That means showing the change, not just describing it. Concrete examples, workplace evidence, and a supervisor or manager who can confirm what has changed all help the panel see that learning has been applied. Dated, specific evidence from your workplace is far more persuasive than general promises about the future.
The public component
Even with good remediation, the panel must ask whether public confidence would be undermined without a finding of impairment. In serious cases it may find impairment on this ground alone. Your evidence should therefore show that you understand the effect of the conduct on service users, colleagues and trust in your profession, not only that the personal risk has reduced. Show that you see the bigger picture, and that you value the trust the public places in your profession.
Recommended HCPC remediation courses
All 19Each course is self-paced and online. You get scenario-based questions with an 80% pass mark, a structured reflective account and a CPD certificate showing your name, the course title and the CPD hours.
Fitness to Practise for Healthcare Professionals
A Core Course on Regulation, Current Impairment and Professional Response in the United Kingdom
Professionalism and Professional Standards for HCPC Regulated Health and Care Professionals
Registration, CPD, Standards of Proficiency and Professional Conduct
Ethics and Ethical Standards for HCPC Regulated Health and Care Professionals
Principles, Standards and Professional Conduct in Health and Care
Probity for Healthcare Professionals
Honesty, Integrity, and Trust in Professional Practice
Professionalism in Documentation for Healthcare Professionals
Accuracy, Integrity and Accountability in Clinical and Non-Clinical Records
Ethical Boundaries with Patients and Colleagues
Recognising, Maintaining and Restoring Professional Limits
Duty of Candour in Healthcare Practice
Being Open and Honest When Things Go Wrong
Ensuring Effective Communication as Healthcare Professionals
Clear, Respectful and Patient-Centred Communication in Practice
Ensuring Clinical Competence and Patient Safety for Healthcare Professionals
Competence, Safety, and Continuous Development in Practice
Building your HCPC remediation bundle
Build the bundle around the two parts of the impairment test: evidence that the personal risk has reduced, and evidence that you understand the wider impact on public confidence.
What to put in your bundle
- Certificates for courses that match the standard engaged, with dates and CPD hours.
- A reflective statement that names the standard, explains what went wrong and shows how your practice has changed.
- A reference from a manager or clinical supervisor who has read the allegations, signed and dated.
- Supervision records or a supervised practice log covering the area of concern.
- Audits or case reviews showing safe practice since the concern was raised.
- Your CPD record showing learning that continues, not just a burst of activity before a hearing.
- Evidence of changes to how you work, such as checklists, templates or protocols you now follow.
- If you are not working, evidence of how you keep your knowledge and skills current.
Writing your reflection
- Refer to the specific standard of conduct, performance and ethics you fell short of, by name.
- Separate remorse from insight: say you are sorry, then explain how and why it happened.
- Show you understand the effect on service users and on public confidence in your profession.
- Give real examples of changed practice, with dates and settings.
- Keep it honest and in your own words; the panel will notice a template.
When to start remediation
Start once you know the allegations, and ideally before your 28-day response. The Investigating Committee Panel reads your written representations when deciding whether there is a case to answer, so early evidence of insight and remediation can be considered at that stage. Leaving everything until the final hearing gives the panel little evidence that change has lasted.
Plan for the long haul. If an interim order is made, it is reviewed after six months and then every three months, and each review is a chance to show progress. After a hearing, conditions and suspension orders are reviewed before they expire, so keep building evidence.
Disposal by consent: what it asks of you
Disposal by consent lets you and the HCPC conclude a case without a contested hearing. It is only available after a case to answer decision, and you must be willing to admit both the substance of the allegations and that your fitness to practise is impaired. The outcome is either a voluntary removal agreement, which has the same effect as a striking off order, or consent to a caution, conditions of practice or suspension.
A panel must approve the agreement, and the HCPC is clear that it may not. Insight and remediation evidence helps the panel see that the proposed outcome protects the public. Never agree to disposal by consent without advice from your professional body, union or a solicitor.
Common mistakes HCPC registrants make
- Treating remorse as insight. The practice note says they are different.
- Choosing generic courses that do not map to the standard engaged.
- Assuming good remediation means no finding of impairment, when the public component may still require one.
- Missing the 28-day window to respond with considered evidence.
- Submitting references from people unaware of the allegations.
- Agreeing to disposal by consent without independent advice on what admitting impairment means.
Core course
Fitness to Practise for Healthcare Professionals
Our most complete remediation course: 4 CPD hours and 40 scenario questions on impairment, insight, remediation and reflection, with a certificate when you pass.
HCPC remediation: common questions
Are these courses approved by the HCPC?
No. The HCPC does not approve, accredit or endorse remediation courses, and HCPTS panels do not recommend providers. Panels judge the evidence you provide on its relevance and quality. Our courses give you an assessment, a structured reflective account and a CPD certificate, which can form part of your evidence if they match the concern and you show how you applied the learning.
Will completing a course guarantee a good outcome?
No. No course can guarantee an outcome. HCPTS panels consider the seriousness of the allegations, your insight, your remediation and the public component of impairment. The practice note says a finding of impairment may still be needed even where remediation is adequate, particularly to maintain public confidence. A relevant course is one part of the evidence.
Which HCPC professions are these courses for?
All HCPC registered professions, including arts therapists, biomedical scientists, chiropodists and podiatrists, clinical scientists, dietitians, hearing aid dispensers, occupational therapists, operating department practitioners, orthoptists, paramedics, physiotherapists, practitioner psychologists, prosthetists and orthotists, radiographers, and speech and language therapists. The HCPC courses are built on the shared standards of conduct, performance and ethics.
What is the difference between insight and remorse?
The HCPTS practice note says insight is concerned with future risk of repetition, while remorse is about past misconduct. Remorse is saying you are sorry. Insight is showing you understand how and why it happened, its consequences, and what you now do differently so it will not happen again. Panels look for both, but insight carries the weight on risk.
How long do I have to respond to the HCPC?
The HCPC’s fact sheet says you have 28 days to respond to the allegations. Use that time to take advice, reflect and gather evidence. The Investigating Committee Panel will read your written representations when it decides whether there is a case to answer. Agree what you send with your representative before the deadline.
Can I be found impaired even if I have remediated?
Yes. The impairment practice note says a finding of impairment may still be required where there has been adequate remediation and adequate reduction of future risk, if public confidence would otherwise be undermined. Remediation still matters, because it affects both the impairment decision and the sanction. Strong evidence can still make a real difference.
What do I get when I buy a course?
Immediate access to a self-paced online course. Each course carries 2 CPD hours and 15 multiple choice questions, except the Fitness to Practise course, which carries 4 CPD hours and 40 questions. The pass mark is 80%. You then complete a structured reflective account and receive a CPD certificate PDF with your name, the course title and CPD hours.
Should I get advice before responding?
Yes. Speak to your professional body, union, defence organisation or a regulatory solicitor before you respond to the HCPC. They can advise on what to submit and when. Our courses support your learning and reflection, but they are not legal advice. Your representative can also help you decide which of our courses are most relevant.
Official sources
This page was checked against Health and Care Professions Council guidance in October 2026. Processes and guidance change, so always confirm the current position with the regulator and your adviser. This page is general information, not legal advice.
- HCPC: Investigating concerns, fitness to practise fact sheet
- HCPC: Investigating Committee Panel decision and notice of allegation
- HCPC: Interim orders
- HCPC: Disposal by consent fact sheet
- HCPC: Sanctions policy
- HCPTS: Practice note, Fitness to Practise Impairment (August 2025)
- HCPC: Standards of conduct, performance and ethics
- HCPTS: Role of the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service