Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Ian Neale for sex with vulnerable patient on duty
An HCPTS panel struck paramedic Ian Neale off after finding he had sexual intercourse with a vulnerable service user while attending her home on duty.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 8 July 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction
What does “struck off the register” mean?
The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.
Concerning Ian T Neale, paramedic (Health and Care Professions Council PA08512).
Decision date: 8 July 2025 · Hearing started 7 July 2025 and ended 8 July 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that paramedic Ian Neale had sexual intercourse with a vulnerable service user while attending her home on duty and did so for sexual gratification. It found serious misconduct, current impairment and a real risk of repetition, with no evidence of insight, remorse or remediation. The panel struck him off and imposed an interim suspension.
Charges
Mr Neale was alleged to have failed to maintain professional boundaries by having sexual intercourse with a vulnerable service user while attending her home as a paramedic on 24 October 2020. The conduct was alleged to be sexually motivated and to amount to misconduct. He had been acquitted of a separate criminal charge arising from the incident.
Findings
The panel found that Mr Neale had sexual intercourse with the vulnerable service user while attending in his professional capacity and did so for sexual gratification. It found an extremely serious abuse of professional position, misconduct and impairment on both personal and public components. With no evidence of insight, remorse or remediation, it found a real risk of repetition and continuing risk to service users.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The Registrant had no fitness to practise history and had provided brief information to the HCPC concerning his health in an undated communication.
Aggravating factors
The allegation involved a breach of trust and abuse of the Registrant's privileged professional position; the Registrant's behaviour was predatory and sexually motivated for the purpose of sexual gratification; the Registrant had not engaged with the HCPC proceedings and had provided no evidence of insight, remorse, apology or remediation.
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.