Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Kevel Gumbs over repeated dishonest timesheet claims
An HCPTS panel struck off occupational therapist Kevel Gumbs after finding repeated dishonest claims for overlapping work at two councils.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 13 August 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 Kevel Gumbs, occupational therapist (Health and Care Professions Council OT66458).
Decision date: 13 August 2025 · Hearing started 11 August 2025 and ended 13 August 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that Kevel Gumbs dishonestly claimed payment from two councils for overlapping full-time hours over several months. It found serious misconduct, current impairment, limited insight and insufficient remediation, and struck him off the register.
Charges
Between September 2020 and January 2021, while working full time at the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Council, Kevel Gumbs knowingly submitted timesheets for payment at Brent Council for the same hours and made further overlapping claims on 30 November and 4 December 2020. The conduct was alleged to be dishonest misconduct impairing his fitness to practise.
Findings
The panel accepted Kevel Gumbs's admissions, found the particulars proved, and found serious misconduct and current impairment on both personal and public grounds. It found a continuing risk of repetition, limited insight and insufficient remediation. The panel directed that his name be struck off the register when the order takes effect and imposed an interim suspension order for up to 18 months pending the appeal period.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The Registrant’s unblemished record before the misconduct in this case; No evidence that the misconduct in this case has been repeated; The Registrant has developed limited insight, demonstrated in part by his full admissions to the Allegation.
Aggravating factors
The dishonesty in this case amounted to a pattern of behaviour, repeated over several months, until he was discovered; The misconduct represented a significant breach of trust by an experienced Occupational Therapist; The Registrant’s dishonesty took place during his professional practice and involved putting his own interests ahead of his duty to his employers and service users.; The Registrant used a company of which he was the sole director to facilitate the misconduct.
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.