Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
MPTS tribunal suspends Dr Preethi Suresh for 12 months over dishonest training certificate
A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service panel has suspended Dr Preethi Suresh for 12 months after she admitted dishonestly scanning QR codes to falsely record attendance at a cardiology training day she did not attend and uploading a resulting certificate to her training portfolio.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 15 May 2026 · Updated 8 July 2026
Suspension (suspended from practice) — 1 year
Added to MedicWatch: 8 July 2026Report a correction
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Preethi Suresh, doctor (General Medical Council 7558757).
Decision date: 15 May 2026 · Hearing started 11 May 2026 and ended 15 May 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Preethi Suresh's fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct. She admitted that in February 2024 she dishonestly scanned QR codes to falsely register attendance at a cardiology training day she had not attended, generating a certificate she uploaded to her e-portfolio. Noting a previous 2021 warning for dishonesty, the tribunal suspended her registration for 12 months, directed a review, and imposed an immediate order of suspension.
Charges
The Allegation, admitted in full and found proved, was that on or around 29 February 2024 Dr Suresh scanned a QR code to confirm her registration at a face-to-face East of England cardiology training day she had not attended, scanned a second QR code and completed feedback which automatically generated a certificate of attendance, and uploaded that certificate to her training e-portfolio. She knew she had not attended and that uploading the certificate would allow her to falsely claim attendance and the corresponding Continuing Professional Development hours. The Tribunal found these actions were dishonest.
Findings
The Tribunal found Dr Suresh's admitted dishonesty amounted to serious misconduct falling at the higher end of the spectrum of seriousness, involving several separate dishonest acts within a professional context. It concluded her insight remained limited and developing and that, given a previous 2021 warning for dishonesty arising in similar circumstances, there remained a real and continuing risk of repetition. It determined that her fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct, engaging all three limbs of public protection. The Tribunal suspended her registration for 12 months, directed a review hearing before the end of that period, and imposed an immediate order of suspension.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The Tribunal acknowledged that Dr Suresh admitted the allegations from the outset and accepted her conduct was dishonest, had demonstrated remorse and undertaken reflective work and courses on ethics, probity and professionalism. It accepted she remained clinically competent with no concerns about patient care, was regarded as a good doctor whose positive feedback raised no probity concerns, that she derived no actual benefit from her conduct and that there was no actual harm to patients.
Aggravating factors
The Tribunal identified features increasing seriousness: Dr Suresh's relevant fitness to practise history involving previous dishonesty (a 2021 warning); an element of premeditation, in that having scanned the first QR code she must have planned to scan the second and upload the certificate; and that her conduct undermined a system designed to protect the public by monitoring professional training and competence. It also noted the dishonesty involved several separate acts over a period of time and arose squarely within a professional context.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal 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.