Health and Care Professions Council determination — review hearing
HCPTS review panel strikes off Christel Rogers after drink-driving conviction
An HCPTS review panel struck occupational therapist Christel Rogers off the register after finding she remained impaired following a drink-driving conviction and late disclosure to the regulator.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 27 May 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction
What does “struck off the register” mean?
The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.
Concerning Christel Rogers, occupational therapist (Health and Care Professions Council OT79372).
Decision date: 27 May 2025 · Hearing started 27 May 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that occupational therapist Christel Rogers remained impaired following a drink-driving conviction and misconduct for reporting the charge late to the HCPC. The review panel said she had not engaged with the hearing or provided evidence of insight or remediation, leaving a risk of repetition. It decided that extending her suspension had no merit and ordered her struck from the register.
Charges
The Registrant was charged with having been convicted on 30 January 2023 of driving on 17 June 2022 with alcohol in her breath above the prescribed limit, and with failing to inform the HCPC in a timely manner that she had been charged. The delayed notification was alleged to amount to misconduct, and the conviction and/or misconduct were alleged to impair her fitness to practise.
Findings
At the substantive hearing, the Registrant admitted the factual particulars. The Panel found that her late notification amounted to misconduct and that her fitness to practise was impaired by both conviction and misconduct. It imposed a six-month suspension. At review, the current Panel found impairment remained on personal and public grounds because she had not engaged or provided evidence of insight or remediation. It replaced suspension with a striking-off order.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.