Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS strikes Lucy Peo Powell-Nateghy off for dishonesty
The occupational therapist improperly shared a colleague's work, misled an investigation and failed to report her suspension.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 22 November 2023 · 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 Lucy Peo Powell-Nateghy, occupational therapist (Health and Care Professions Council OT64038).
Decision date: 22 November 2023 · Hearing started 6 November 2023 and ended 22 November 2023
In plain English
The HCPTS panel struck occupational therapist Lucy Peo Powell-Nateghy off for repeated dishonesty. She improperly shared a colleague's career-progression portfolio, misled an employer investigation and failed to report her suspension to the HCPC. Her lack of insight or remediation and the continuing repetition risk made a lesser sanction insufficient.
Charges
Ms Powell-Nateghy improperly shared a colleague's career-progression portfolio to give another colleague an unfair advantage, concealed the disclosure during an employer investigation and failed to tell the HCPC that her employer had suspended her.
Findings
The panel found repeated dishonesty and lack of integrity in sharing the portfolio, misleading the disciplinary investigation and failing to report her suspension. With no meaningful insight, remorse or remediation and a continuing repetition risk, the misconduct was incompatible with continued registration. The panel therefore ordered striking off.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Previous good character with no other fitness to practise concerns; events occurred three to four years earlier; no evidence of direct harm to service users; some partial engagement with the HCPC process; stated that she did not intend to return to occupational therapy practice because of her health.
Aggravating factors
Attempted to conceal the portfolio disclosure during an investigation; misused her senior position and cast suspicion on others; suggested a colleague had committed computer misuse, causing him to be interviewed about a criminal offence; adversely affected colleagues and intended an unfair advantage; created potential service-user risk by undermining competence-based career progression; her suspension burdened an already busy team; undermined team trust; dishonestly failed to report her suspension to the HCPC; lacked regulatory engagement and made no early dishonesty admission; took an active role in multiple serious dishonest acts between March 2019 and August 2021.
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.