Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel cautions Jason Jordan over drink-driving conviction disclosure
An HCPTS panel imposed a two-year caution on physiotherapist Jason Jordan after finding misconduct over his delayed and later dishonest disclosure of a drink-driving conviction.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 18 August 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026
Warning (formally warned) — 2 years
Data last checked: 23 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 Jason Jordan, physiotherapist (Health and Care Professions Council PH100032).
Decision date: 18 August 2025 · Hearing started 18 August 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that Jason Jordan's drink-driving conviction and his later dishonest delay in telling the HCPC impaired his fitness to practise on public interest grounds. The panel found that he had good insight, genuine remorse and had remedied both matters, with a low risk of repetition. It imposed a two-year caution order.
Charges
Jason Jordan was convicted of driving with excess alcohol after a collision on 20 March 2020. The panel found that he did not tell the HCPC about the conviction in a timely manner and, from March 2021 until 22 March 2022, dishonestly withheld it to conceal the conviction and avoid the consequences.
Findings
The panel found misconduct and current impairment on the public component because of the conviction and delayed dishonest disclosure. It found no current personal impairment, accepting that Jason Jordan had good insight, genuine remorse, had remedied the conviction and misconduct, and presented a low risk of repetition. It imposed a two-year caution order.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
there are no previous regulatory findings against the Registrant; the Registrant made full admissions as to the facts at the hearing, and admitted the statutory grounds of conviction and misconduct; the Registrant had immediately reported crashing his car to the Hotel; the Registrant had developed good insight into his conviction and his misconduct for which he had apologised and shown genuine remorse; the Registrant had taken appropriate steps such that he had remedied his conviction and his misconduct.
Aggravating factors
in driving whilst twice over the legal drink-driving limit, the Registrant had put himself and other road users at risk of potential harm; the dishonesty (which was effectively by omission and at the lower end of the scale) had persisted for a period of around a year.
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.