Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Fazal Karim over radiation safety and dishonest job application
An HCPTS panel struck radiographer Fazal Karim from the register after finding misconduct over radiation-safety procedures, conduct towards colleagues and a dishonest job application.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 15 February 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 Fazal Karim, radiographer (Health and Care Professions Council RA25392).
Decision date: 15 February 2024 · Hearing started 7 February 2024 and ended 15 February 2024
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that radiographer Fazal Karim committed misconduct involving radiation-safety procedures, conduct towards colleagues and a dishonest job application. It found no meaningful insight or remediation and a high risk that the misconduct would be repeated. The panel found his fitness to practise impaired and ordered him struck from the register.
Charges
The allegations concerned radiation-safety incidents involving dosimeters, a gamma camera room and contamination; inappropriate or unprofessional behaviour towards colleagues; and misleading a prospective NHS employer about his most recent employer. It was alleged that the injection incident and employment application were dishonest.
Findings
The panel found misconduct proved over radiation-safety procedures, aggressive and inappropriate conduct towards colleagues, and a deliberately dishonest job application. It did not find the injection-concealment allegation proved, and found the shoe-contamination incident was not itself misconduct. It found current impairment, no meaningful insight or remediation, and a high risk of repetition, and imposed a striking-off order.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
No patient harm; An unfamiliar working environment, and the Registrant’s perceived lack of support; Some difficult personal circumstances at the time; Some limited apology and remorse
Aggravating factors
A serious lack of insight; The Registrant’s repeated reliance on others to direct him despite his experience and seniority; Failure to take personal responsibility and consistent deflection of responsibility onto colleagues; The previous Fitness to Practice findings in 2012.
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.