Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Alga Mau after child image convictions
The hearing aid dispenser was struck off after convictions involving hundreds of indecent and prohibited images of children.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 22 July 2025 · 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 Alga Mau, hearing aid dispenser (Health and Care Professions Council HAD04097).
Decision date: 22 July 2025 · Hearing started 22 July 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel considered hearing aid dispenser Alga Mau's convictions for making hundreds of indecent and prohibited images of children. It found insufficient insight or remorse, no independent evidence of remediation and a continuing risk of repetition. Given the seriousness and duration of the offending and the ten-year sexual harm prevention order, the panel struck him off.
Charges
Mr Mau was convicted of making 93 Category A, 91 Category B and 52 Category C indecent images of children, together with 71 prohibited images of children. The HCPC alleged that his fitness to practise was impaired by reason of those convictions.
Findings
The panel accepted the convictions and found impairment on personal and public grounds. It found insufficient insight and remorse, no independent evidence of remediation and a continuing risk of repetition. Given the seriousness, duration and nature of the offending and the ten-year sexual harm prevention order, it concluded that no sanction short of striking off would protect the public and confidence.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
No previous disciplinary record in his career as a Hearing Aid Dispenser; the Registrant made early admissions before the Crown Court, avoiding the need for a criminal trial.
Aggravating factors
The Registrant's convictions are for extremely serious matters involving indecent photographs of children; the images included moving images and very young children; the Registrant repeatedly engaged in criminal conduct for approximately two years before being apprehended; the Registrant lacks insight and failed to express remorse to the Panel.
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.