HCPC determination — substantive hearing
Struck off the register
The regulator’s term: erasure
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 Chris Smith, operating department practitioner (HCPC ODP16189).
Decision date: 15 December 2025 · Hearing started 8 December 2025 and ended 15 December 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel decided that Chris Smith should be subject to the published outcome from a final hearing. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The public page records the profession, registration number, allegation, finding, order, notes and hearing history for source verification.
Charges
The HCPTS allegation section states: in turn, applying the appropriate legal definition of sexual motivation. In respect of sexual motivation, the Panel found the following: 67. Particular 1 - The Panel found that it was obvious from the sexual nature of the text communications from the Registrant that these were sexually motivated. The Panel found the messages to be overtly sexual, not banter and explicit sexual references to what the Registrant hoped to do with Person A. It found that the texts were sent in pursuit of a sexual relationship with Person A. 68. Particular 2- It was the Panel’s view that the meaning of the words on the Trust Value Card were clear. It found that ‘a date’, on the balance of probabilities, referred to a romantic date. There was no suggestion from the Registrant to the HCPC that this had an alternative meaning, and the Panel found that inviting Person A on a date was sexually motivated because the Registrant was seeking to pursue a sexual relationship with her. 69. Particular 4- The Panel found the language ‘I want you’ was a reference to ‘wanting’ Person A in a sexual way. There was no alternative explanation provided by Person A or the Registrant. The Panel also found that ‘Baby Cakes’ was a nickname or term of affection that was not professional language to use towards a person who was a professional colleague. The Panel found that this Particular was part of a course of conduct which was sexually motivated and that it formed part of the Registrant pursuing a sexual relationship with Person A. 70. Particular 5 – the Panel found that the kiss given by the Registrant to Person A was not a greeting, as they had been working together at the time and had not just met. It noted that no alternative explanation had been provided by either Person A or the Registrant, and that the...
Findings
The HCPTS page records a final hearing for Chris Smith by the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The allegation section states: in turn, applying the appropriate legal definition of sexual motivation. In respect of sexual motivation, the Panel found the following: 67. Particular 1 - The Panel found that it was obvious from the sexual nature of.... The order section states: comes into effect..
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published HCPC 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.