MedicWatchAn independent record

Dental Professionals Hearings Service determination — registration appeal

Appeal against removal dismissed

The regulator’s term: appeal dismissed

What does “appeal against removal dismissed” mean?

The practitioner appealed against an administrative decision (typically removal from the register for non-compliance) and the regulator's appeal committee dismissed the appeal — the original decision stands.

Concerning Farrah Amber Pycroft, dental nurse (General Dental Council 247350).

Decision date: 2 April 2026 · Hearing started 2 April 2026

In plain English

The GDC tribunal decided to dismiss Ms Pycroft's appeal against removal from the dental care professionals register. She had been removed for failing to complete the required 10 hours of verifiable CPD during the period August 2023 to July 2025, having completed zero verifiable hours in the relevant period. The tribunal found her circumstances did not amount to exceptional circumstances and the Registrar's original decision was proportionate. Ms Pycroft may apply to restore her registration upon completing the required CPD.

Charges

Ms Pycroft appealed against the Registrar's decision to remove her from the dental care professionals register for non-compliance with CPD requirements. She had failed to complete the minimum 10 hours of verifiable CPD for the two-year period 1 August 2023 to 31 July 2025, having completed zero verifiable hours in the relevant period. Some certificates provided did not contain required aims, objectives and learning outcomes, and others were outside the relevant period.

Findings

The Registration Appeals Committee dismissed the appeal. It found that Ms Pycroft had not completed the minimum 10 hours of verifiable CPD required for the relevant two-year period. Even considering CPD certificates that partially met requirements, the total fell short of 10 hours. Her personal circumstances were not considered to amount to exceptional circumstances preventing compliance. The Committee found the Registrar's decision was proportionate.

Source

All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Dental Professionals Hearings Service 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If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.