Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS imposes one-year caution on Siddiq Khanporia
The HCPTS panel found misconduct but no lack of competence, and recognised insight and remediation. It found impairment on public-interest grounds only.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 18 June 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026
Warning (formally warned) — 1 year
Data last checked: 22 September 2026Report a correction
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 Siddiq Khanporia, biomedical scientist (Health and Care Professions Council BS50035).
Decision date: 18 June 2026 · Hearing started 15 June 2026 and ended 18 June 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel imposed a one-year caution on Siddiq Khanporia after finding misconduct in blood-testing work and in processing a family member's specimen while off duty. It did not prove an allegation about a Kleihauer test, and found that a date-of-birth error did not amount to misconduct. No lack of competence was established. The panel found impairment on public-interest grounds only, recognising his insight and remediation and finding no ongoing risk to patients.
Charges
Allegations concerned issuing unsuitable red-cell units, erroneous full blood count results, an insufficient sample for a Kleihauer test, processing a family member's specimen while off duty, and failing to detect a date-of-birth discrepancy.
Findings
The panel proved particulars 1, 2(a), 2(b), 4 and 5. The Kleihauer-test allegation (3) was not proved. Particulars 1, 2(a), 2(b) and 4 amounted to misconduct; the date-of-birth discrepancy (5) was an honest mistake which did not amount to misconduct. No lack of competence was established. The panel found impairment on public-interest grounds only, with insight, remediation, a low risk of repetition and no ongoing risk to patients. It imposed a one-year caution, which does not restrict practice.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
• No ongoing risk of harm; • Low risk of repetition; • Recognition of his failings and admitted his errors at an early stage; • Demonstrated insight, remorse, and apologised for his mistakes; • Remediation – he undertook training to address concerns.
Aggravating factors
• Potential for patient harm to be caused and the impact on public confidence in the profession.
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.