Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
MPTS tribunal suspends GP Dr Neel Chauhan for four months over dishonest double-shift claims
A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service panel has suspended GP Dr Neel Chauhan for four months after he admitted dishonestly working shifts for two telemedicine providers simultaneously between March and July 2023 and claiming payment from both, gaining around £8,500.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 8 June 2026 · Updated 7 July 2026
Suspension (suspended from practice) — 4 months
Added to MedicWatch: 7 July 2026Report a correction
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Neel Chauhan, doctor (General Medical Council 6167992).
Decision date: 8 June 2026 · Hearing started 1 June 2026 and ended 8 June 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Neel Chauhan, a GP, dishonestly worked shifts for two telemedicine providers at the same time between March and July 2023 and claimed payment from both, gaining around £8,500. The tribunal decided this was serious misconduct and that his fitness to practise was impaired, but accepted his insight and remediation were exceptional. It suspended his registration for four months.
Charges
The GMC alleged that on one or more dates between March and July 2023 Dr Chauhan undertook telemedicine work for both BrisDoc Healthcare Services and Doctor Care Anywhere at the same time and claimed payment from both providers for that simultaneous work; that he knew he should not have done so; and that his actions were dishonest. Dr Chauhan admitted the entirety of the allegation and accepted that his conduct amounted to serious misconduct.
Findings
The tribunal found the whole allegation proved on Dr Chauhan's admissions. Over 38 days he worked concurrent shifts for the two providers and claimed payment from each for the overlapping hours, gaining approximately £8,500, and gave a false explanation when first challenged. It found this dishonesty was a serious departure from Good Medical Practice, breaching the fundamental tenets of honesty and integrity, and placed it at the higher end of the spectrum of seriousness. Balancing the seriousness against his exceptional insight, remediation and low risk of repetition, the tribunal assessed the current and ongoing risk to public protection as medium, found his fitness to practise impaired on the public-confidence and professional-standards limbs, and imposed a four-month suspension with no review and no immediate order.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The tribunal found that Dr Chauhan had made full admissions from the outset, demonstrated exceptional insight and remediation and genuine remorse, and had a previously unblemished career with no prior fitness-to-practise concerns. It accepted that his misconduct occurred under significant personal, family and financial stress together with cultural inhibitions around seeking help, that he had put safeguards in place including quarterly professional monitoring, that there were no patient safety concerns, and that the risk of repetition was very low.
Aggravating factors
The tribunal found that Dr Chauhan's dishonesty was repeated and persistent, premeditated, showed a reckless disregard for professional standards, undermined collaborative working and put his own interests before those of patients, and that there was an attempt to hide or avoid taking responsibility for his behaviour when it was discovered.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service 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.