AC-2023-LON-002171 - [2024] EWHC 132 (Admin)

The PCC’s conclusion in respect of charge 5(c) is also of note, as the Committee found that dishonesty was not proven because they accepted that the data could be erroneous in respect of this allegation. It was another instance where it was said that the Appellant had not provided any Band 3 treatment during the period for which she had claimed for Band 3 on the FP17. The PCC noted that the data indicated that there was no TCD on the form, Dr Imani’s explanation that it must have been submitted in error and Mr Lee’s suggestion that either the FP17 was sent without a date or the data inputters may have failed to enter the TCD that was in fact shown on the form. The PCC considered that this may have been “an isolated example” where the “form may have been submitted without a date or that the data inputters may have failed to input the [TCD]”.