Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel suspends Emma-Jo Montgomery over dishonest insurance concealment
A panel suspended podiatrist Emma-Jo Montgomery for six months after finding she dishonestly concealed a lapse in professional indemnity insurance.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 25 April 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026
Suspension (suspended from practice) — 6 months
Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
The regulator imposed a fixed-term suspension in this decision. Its start date, appeal provisions and any later review affect whether it is currently in force. Check the official register for the practitioner's current status.
Concerning Emma-Jo Montgomery, chiropodist / podiatrist (Health and Care Professions Council CH34590).
Decision date: 25 April 2025 · Hearing started 22 April 2025 and ended 25 April 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that podiatrist Emma-Jo Montgomery practised without professional indemnity insurance and dishonestly concealed the lapse from her employer. It found misconduct, current impairment and an ongoing repetition risk, imposed a six-month suspension and made an 18-month interim suspension order for the appeal period.
Charges
It was alleged that the Registrant practised without required professional indemnity insurance between July 2021 and April 2022, led her employer to believe she was insured in May 2022, failed to provide confirmation of insurance between May and July 2022, and dishonestly concealed that she did not have cover.
Findings
The Panel found Particulars 1, 2 and 3 proved and found dishonesty under Particular 4 in relation to both Particulars 2 and 3. It found misconduct, current impairment and an ongoing repetition risk. It imposed a six-month suspension and an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The Registrant’s misconduct represents an isolated incident that has not been repeated; The Registrant does not have any previous regulatory findings recorded against her; She has accepted the Panel’s findings and recognised that her actions amounted to misconduct; There has been a significant expression of remorse, regret and apology, albeit that this has come late in the day; and The Registrant has produced a number of positive references attesting to her character and professionalism.
Aggravating factors
That the Registrant repeated her dishonesty to conceal her wrongdoing and showed a lack of candour when confronted with alleged wrongdoing; She sought to discredit her employer and deflect responsibility for her actions; The Registrant has initially demonstrated little insight into her dishonest behaviour, although, as stated above, this had significantly improved having considered the Panel’s determination on impairment; and The Registrant has not meaningfully demonstrated that she has remediated her dishonest behaviour, although the Panel recognised that she has addressed the issue of ensuring that PII is in place.
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.