Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Patrick F Ricketts over dishonesty and unsafe conduct
A panel ordered podiatrist Patrick F Ricketts's erasure after finding dishonesty, boundary breaches, inappropriate communications and out-of-scope treatment.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 25 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 Patrick F Ricketts, chiropodist / podiatrist (Health and Care Professions Council CH10458).
Decision date: 25 November 2024 · Hearing started 21 October 2024 and ended 25 November 2024
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that podiatrist Patrick F Ricketts misrepresented himself as an osteopath, breached professional boundaries, communicated inappropriately with service users and worked outside his registered scope. It found misconduct and current impairment, ordered erasure and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Charges
Matter A alleged that the Registrant misrepresented himself as an osteopath, provided unsafe or inappropriate treatment to Service User A, acted dishonestly and engaged in conduct of a sexual nature. Matter B alleged unprofessional communications with Service User B and treatment outside his registered scope of practice.
Findings
In Matter A the Panel found Particulars 1, 2(b), 3(b) and 4 proved, but found 2(a)(i), 2(a)(ii), 2(c), 3(a) and 5 not proved. In Matter B it found Particulars 1(a), 1(b), 1(c) and 2 proved. It found the proved conduct amounted to misconduct and current impairment, ordered erasure and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
there is an undated supportive testimonial in favour of the Registrant provided by one of his students.
Aggravating factors
The Registrant’s lack of insight, remorse, or apology. Lack of remediation. The Registrant’s actions caused harm to Service Users A and B although he declines to acknowledge that. Dishonesty.
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.