Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Robert P Dordan-Pike after indecent-image convictions
An HCPTS panel struck off chiropodist Robert P Dordan-Pike after proving three indecent-image convictions and finding no evidence of insight and a risk of repetition.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 9 September 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 Robert P Dordan-Pike, chiropodist / podiatrist (Health and Care Professions Council CH17504).
Decision date: 9 September 2024 · Hearing started 9 September 2024
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that Robert P Dordan-Pike's fitness to practise was impaired after three convictions for making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child. It found no evidence of insight, limited evidence of remorse and remediation, and a risk of repetition. The panel decided striking off was necessary to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.
Charges
Robert P Dordan-Pike was convicted at Portsmouth Magistrates' Court on 3 August 2023 of three counts of making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of a child. The HCPC alleged that his fitness to practise was impaired by reason of the convictions.
Findings
The panel proved the three convictions from the certificate of conviction and found Robert P Dordan-Pike's fitness to practise impaired. It found no evidence of insight, limited evidence of remorse and remediation, and a continuing risk of repetition after conduct over about seven years. It concluded that striking off was required to protect the public and maintain confidence.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
no previous regulatory findings and a previous unblemished career; an early guilty plea before the criminal courts.
Aggravating factors
the Registrant's conduct was deliberate, repeated and occurred over a prolonged period of time (approximately seven years); his conduct amounts to a breach of a fundamental tenet of the profession; he has failed to engage in the regulatory process in a meaningful way; and the Panel have no evidence of the Registrant demonstrating any insight, and only limited evidence before it of remorse and/or remediation.
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.