Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Wesley Weathers over messages to vulnerable service user
A panel ordered paramedic Wesley Weathers's erasure after finding he sent more than 200 sexually motivated messages to a vulnerable former service user.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 28 November 2024 · 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 Wesley Weathers, paramedic (Health and Care Professions Council PA41809).
Decision date: 28 November 2024 · Hearing started 25 November 2024 and ended 28 November 2024
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that paramedic Wesley Weathers knowingly pursued a vulnerable former service user through more than 200 sexually motivated social-media messages. It found serious misconduct, current impairment and a significant repetition risk, ordered erasure and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Charges
It was alleged that the Registrant contacted a vulnerable former service user through social media, exchanged more than 200 messages with her over five weeks, sent inappropriate messages, knew she was vulnerable and acted with sexual motivation. The conduct was alleged to amount to misconduct and impairment.
Findings
The Panel accepted admissions to Particulars 1 and 2(a) and 2(b), and found Particulars 3 and 4 proved. It found a serious professional-boundary breach amounting to misconduct and current impairment on personal and public grounds, with a significant repetition risk. It ordered erasure and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
the fact that the Registrant had offered an apology for his actions, has fully engaged in the HCPC’s fitness to practice process and made admissions both of the fact of sending the messages and that they were inappropriate (but not that they were sexually motivated).
Aggravating factors
The Registrant’s actions gave rise to a risk of very serious harm; The Registrant’s actions amounted to a breach of trust; There was an element of predatory behaviour. The Panel accepts Mr Lee’s submission that the Registrant did not pursue Service User A because she was vulnerable, but it is nevertheless the fact that his actions were directed against a person who was vulnerable, and one he knew to be vulnerable and socially isolated, and in doing so, his actions were sexually focused and persistent; While accepting that the Registrant’s behaviour was confined to one individual, it was repeated. There were over 200 messages in a period of over five weeks; The Registrant has demonstrated very limited insight and remediation.
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.