Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — substantive hearing

NMC panel strikes off nurse Lorna Carey over dishonest use of staff reward funds

A Nursing and Midwifery Council panel has struck mental health nurse Lorna Carey off the register, finding she dishonestly used her employer's staff reward funds for her own personal use between January 2022 and April 2023 and failed to cooperate with its enquiries about her health.

MedicWatch editorial · Published 30 July 2026 · Updated 18 August 2026

Erasure (struck off the register)

Added to MedicWatch: 17 August 2026Report a correction

What does “struck off the register” mean?

Being struck off (the regulator calls this "erasure") removes the practitioner from the register. They are no longer permitted to practise this profession in the UK. Erasure can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but is otherwise indefinite.

Concerning Lorna Margaret Carey, nurse (Nursing and Midwifery Council 05I1992S).

Decision date: 30 July 2026 · Hearing started 28 July 2026 and ended 30 July 2026

In plain English

The NMC found that Lorna Margaret Carey, a mental health nurse, used her employer's staff reward funds for her own personal use between January 2022 and April 2023, and that she acted dishonestly. The panel also found she failed to cooperate with the NMC's enquiries about her health, and that her fitness to practise was impaired by misconduct and ill health. It made a striking-off order and an 18-month interim suspension.

Charges

That you, a registered nurse; 1. On various dates between 14 January 2022 and 01 April 2023 used funds belonging to your employer, designated for formal 'rewards' for your colleagues, for your own personal use. 2. Your conduct at charge 1 above was dishonest as you knew that you were not entitled to use the money as your own. 3. Failed to cooperate with the NMC fitness to practise investigation in that you did not engage with requested enquiries about your health. 4. Have or have had a health condition as listed in Schedule 1. And, in light of the above your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of your misconduct in respect of charge 1, charge 2 and charge 3 above and in light of your health in respect of charge 4.

Findings

Charges 1, 2, 3 and 4 were found proved; no charges were found not proved. The panel found that Ms Carey used employer 'Prosper' reward funds, held by her as a line manager for distribution to staff, for her own personal use, and that applying the test in Ivey v Genting Casinos her conduct was dishonest. It found she failed to cooperate with the NMC's enquiries about her health, contrary to paragraph 23 of the Code. The panel determined that Charges 1, 2 and 3 amounted to misconduct that fell significantly short of the standards expected of a registered nurse, and that all four limbs of the Smith test in Grant were engaged. It found her fitness to practise currently impaired by reason of misconduct and, separately, on the grounds of ill health. The panel imposed a striking-off order, noting that striking-off is not available for health cases and that it therefore considered that sanction only in respect of the misconduct charges. An interim suspension order of 18 months was imposed to cover the 28-day appeal period.

Mitigating factors

The panel took into account the following mitigating features: [PRIVATE]; and she has previously expressed remorse for her actions.

Aggravating factors

The panel took into account the following aggravating features: Ms Carey has demonstrated very limited insight; she misused employer funds in breach of trust; she misused employer funds repetitively and over an extended period of time; she attempted to cover up the misuse of funds; her actions caused harm to her employer's finances and reputation; her actions caused harm to employee motivation and trust; she has failed to engage with the NMC's investigation; and she has failed to engage in the Fitness to Practise process without reason.

Source

All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Nursing and Midwifery 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.