Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel suspends Daniel Davis over sexual conduct towards junior colleague
An HCPTS panel suspended paramedic Daniel Davis for six months after finding sexual comments and sexually motivated touching towards a junior colleague amounted to misconduct.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 21 November 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 Daniel Davis, paramedic (Health and Care Professions Council PA060598).
Decision date: 21 November 2025 · Hearing started 17 November 2025 and ended 21 November 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that paramedic Daniel Davis made sexual comments and engaged in sexually motivated touching towards a junior colleague during two shifts. It found misconduct and current impairment on personal and public grounds, noting developing insight but an ongoing risk of repetition. The panel suspended him for six months and imposed an interim suspension for the appeal period.
Charges
Mr Davis was alleged to have breached professional boundaries with a student paramedic during two shifts by making inappropriate and sexual comments, drawing a penis on her laptop, grabbing her waist, and placing his hands on her thighs without consent. Much of the conduct was alleged to be sexual in nature or sexually motivated.
Findings
The panel found most of the alleged comments and touching proved, while finding one alleged comment not proved. It found that the proven sexual comments, drawing and touching were sexual and sexually motivated, amounted to misconduct, and caused emotional harm. It found current impairment on both the personal and public components because his insight was still developing and a risk of repetition remained.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Developing insight; early partial admissions and remorse in respect of admitted conduct.
Aggravating factors
Conduct took place over 2 shifts; emotional harm to Colleague A who was his junior; risk of harm to patients in the event that Colleague A did not seek assistance from the Registrant and/or breakdown in teamworking.
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.