Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Matthew Lane over lab errors and workplace conduct
An HCPTS panel struck biomedical scientist Matthew Lane off the register after finding repeated laboratory failings and inappropriate workplace conduct amounted to misconduct and lack of competence.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 14 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 Matthew Lane, biomedical scientist (Health and Care Professions Council BS39266).
Decision date: 14 May 2025 · Hearing started 13 May 2025 and ended 14 May 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that biomedical scientist Matthew Lane committed misconduct and lacked competence after repeated failures to follow laboratory procedures, respond to management requests and behave appropriately towards colleagues. It reached mixed findings on individual allegations. The panel found current impairment on personal and public grounds and ordered him struck from the register, with an 18-month interim suspension during any appeal.
Charges
The amended allegation concerned failures to respond to management requests and complete competency work, inappropriate or aggressive conduct towards colleagues, unprofessional communications, comments and a lab coat referring to a colleague's sexuality, and numerous laboratory incidents between 2011 and 2018. The alleged conduct was said to amount to misconduct and the laboratory incidents to lack of competence and/or misconduct, causing impairment.
Findings
The Panel reached mixed findings on the individual particulars. It found proved repeated failures to follow laboratory procedures, inappropriate conduct and communications, and failures to respond appropriately to management requests, while finding some matters or aspects not proved. It found misconduct, lack of competence and current impairment on both personal and public grounds. It ordered striking off and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for any appeal.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Aggravating factors
The Registrant demonstrated a deep-seated attitude not to engage in reasonable efforts by his managers to get him to take steps that were designed to improve professional performance. The Registrant’s behaviour represented a failure to work in partnership, something necessary to secure optimal service user outcomes. The Registrant was aggressive and demonstrated hostility towards colleagues, and this had a negative effect on them. The Registrant deliberately failed to follow SOPs. The manner in which the Registrant chose to work resulted in errors. The HCPC’s case has not been advanced on the basis that tangible harm was caused to a service user, but it is obvious that if incorrect results are reported or communicated by a BMS, there is potential for service user harm. The behaviours described above were not only repeated, but continued over a long period of time. The Registrant showed no intention of addressing nor insight into any of these issues during the time he was employed, and there is no evidence that he has sought to do so since. There is an appreciable risk that the Registrant would repeat each of the quite different aspects of his behaviour.
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.