Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS orders Allan James McRoberts to be struck off following conviction
The HCPTS panel found impairment following a sexual-assault conviction and misconduct involving a student. It ordered striking off with interim suspension during the appeal process.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 28 August 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 22 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 Allan James Mcroberts, physiotherapist (Health and Care Professions Council PH116825).
Decision date: 28 August 2026 · Hearing started 27 August 2026 and ended 28 August 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel ordered physiotherapist Allan James McRoberts to be struck off following a sexual-assault conviction and findings about a sexual message to a student. The panel found an abuse of his position as a lecturer, harm to the student and continuing impairment, with limited insight and insufficient evidence of remediation. A separate interim suspension applies during the appeal process before the final order takes effect.
Charges
The case concerned a sexual-assault conviction involving a student and a separate social-media message to that student which the panel found sexually motivated and sexual in nature. The registrant admitted the factual particulars.
Findings
The panel found impairment by reason of conviction and misconduct on both personal and public grounds. It found an abuse of the lecturer-student relationship, harm to the student, limited insight and insufficient evidence of remediation. It ordered striking off, effective after the appeal period or disposal of an appeal. A separate interim suspension of up to 18 months protects the public during that process.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
• The Registrant had demonstrated limited insight into his conduct, although it balanced this against the fact that the insight was incomplete as there was no evidence of reflections and learning; • The Registrant expressed remorse for his actions;
Aggravating factors
• There was a significant breach of trust; • The Registrant engaged in a pattern of unacceptable behaviour; • Harm was caused to Student A;
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.