HCPC determination — substantive hearing
Formally warned
The regulator’s term: warning
What does “formally warned” mean?
A formal warning is a note on the practitioner's record. It does not restrict practice but tells the public that the regulator considered the conduct to have fallen below expected standards.
Concerning Maria Jarvis, radiographer (HCPC RA56111).
Decision date: 11 February 2026 · Hearing started 9 February 2026 and ended 11 February 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel decided that Maria Jarvis should be subject to the published outcome from a final hearing. The panel issued a caution or warning. The public page records the profession, registration number, allegation, finding, order, notes and hearing history for source verification.
Charges
The HCPTS allegation section states: is made against a registrant to the effect that: (a) his fitness to practise is impaired by reason of— (i) …., (ii) …., (iii) a conviction or caution in the United Kingdom for a criminal offence, or a conviction elsewhere for an offence which, if committed in England and Wales, would constitute a criminal offence, 50. Because this is a conviction case in part, and the Panel has found the fact of the convictions proved, the Panel found this statutory ground is made out in relation to Particulars 1 and 2. Decision on Misconduct and Impairment 51. The Panel then went on to consider whether those matters found proved at Particular 3 amounted to misconduct, and if so, whether the Registrant’s fitness to practise is currently impaired by reason of her misconduct and convictions. HCPC Submissions 52. Ms Molyneux submitted that the facts found proved at Particular 3 were sufficiently serious to amount to misconduct. Furthermore, she submitted that the Registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired by reason of both the Registrant’s convictions and her misconduct. She conceded that there were no public protection concerns and she invited the Panel to conclude that that the Registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired on public interest grounds alone. 53. In relation to the Registrant’s convictions, Ms Molyneux submitted that even though the Registrant’s criminal conduct may appear anodyne, the Registrant had nevertheless broken the law and had then failed to notify the HCPC of her convictions for over a year after the date of her convictions. She recognised however that the convictions date back approximately six years and that the Registrant is otherwise of good character and had not reoffended. However she submitted that the Registrant had not provided evidence of having...
Findings
The HCPTS page records a final hearing for Maria Jarvis by the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel issued a caution or warning. The allegation section states: is made against a registrant to the effect that: (a) his fitness to practise is impaired by reason of— (i) …., (ii) …., (iii) a conviction or caution in the United Kingdom for a criminal offence, or a conviction.... The order section states: comes into effect..
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published HCPC 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.