So, you’ve received that dreaded letter from your regulator—the NMC, GDC, SWE, or GPhC—informing you that you’re under investigation. Maybe a patient has complained, a colleague has raised concerns, or a minor paperwork error has snowballed into a full-blown crisis. Either way, you’re now in the world of fitness to practise (FtP) investigations, where regulators scrutinise everything from your clinical decisions to whether you used the right tone in an email.
First, take a deep breath. Panicking won’t help, but planning like a prosecutor will. Let’s break down what’s coming, how regulators build their case, and—most importantly—how you can fight back effectively.
Step 1: Understand What They’re Looking At (AKA, the Snooping Begins)
Once a complaint reaches the Investigating Committee (IC) or Case Examiner (CE) stage, the regulator starts mapping out its case. Here’s what they’ll be looking at:
1) Your Fitness to Practise History
Think of this as your “permanent record” in the eyes of the regulator.
- Have you been investigated before? If so, is it relevant to this case?
- Are there pending complaints that could be lumped together for maximum disruption?
- Are they trying to establish a pattern of misconduct (even if the “pattern” is just two unrelated incidents years apart)?
2) The Allegations and Their Strengths (or Weaknesses)
This is where they play detective and try to assess the case’s strength. They’ll ask:
- Why was this referred by the IC/CE in the first place?
- Are there evidential gaps or questionable witnesses?
- Could there be an abuse of process—for example, a delay so long that it makes a fair hearing impossible?
- Are there any risks to the regulator (such as reputational damage if they lose the case)?
💡 Pro tip: If their case is weak, this is where you start poking holes in it.
3) Witness Problems (AKA, Will They Even Show Up?)
Witnesses are the wildcards of any investigation. The regulator will check:
- Has a key witness moved, disappeared, or changed their story?
- Was a witness reluctant from the start (and now even more so)?
- Could any health issues affect the registrant’s ability to engage in the process?
If their star witness is unreliable or contradicts themselves, that’s a big problem for the regulator—and a potential advantage for you.
4) Will This End Up in the News?
Regulators hate bad press, so if your case has media potential, they’ll be strategising. If you’re a high-profile professional, or the allegations are dramatic, they’ll want to manage how much information becomes public.
Your move? Control your own narrative—don’t let the regulator shape it for you.
5) Does This Need to Be Escalated to Other Agencies?
If there’s a serious allegation, the regulator might refer it to:
- The police (criminal matters)
- The CQC (Care Quality Commission)
- The DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service)
If they’re making referrals, it means they’re escalating—which means you need to be extra prepared.
Step 2: The Art of Out-Planning the Prosecutor
At this stage, the regulator is busy setting deadlines and planning hearings. They will:
- Request expert reports (which may or may not be entirely fair to you)
- Finalise the charges against you
- Set a timeline for disclosure and hearing dates
If you’re not proactively managing your defence, you’re already on the back foot.
💡 Key Tip: This is the moment to challenge weak evidence, request missing documents, and start building your counter-narrative.
Step 3: The Midpoint & Final Reviews (AKA, Are We Still on Track to Win?)
A well-prepared defence team will schedule midpoint and end-of-case reviews to make sure everything is on track. This includes:
✔ Checking if the regulator’s case is falling apart (always a satisfying moment)
✔ Ensuring key witnesses and experts are still lined up
✔ Preparing for the hearing itself
If the regulator is struggling, this is when negotiations for a better outcome can happen.
How to Fight Back Like a Pro
Regulators work systematically—so should you. The best defence is a well-structured, no-nonsense strategy. That means:
✔ Identifying weak spots in the regulator’s case early
✔ Knowing when to challenge their process (delays, evidence gaps, procedural errors)
✔ Preparing strong counter-evidence (expert reports, witness statements)
✔ Strategising how to approach settlement discussions (if appropriate)
At Regulation Resolution Solicitors we don’t do generic legal advice. We map cases like prosecutors so we can anticipate their moves and turn the tables in your favour.
Why Work With Us?
✔ Free, no-obligation consultation – get expert insight on your case
✔ Flexible pricing – fixed fees or hourly rates
✔ Senior-level representation only – no junior lawyers, only experts
✔ Limited caseload – ensuring high-quality, dedicated support
Final Thought: Don’t Let the Regulator Control the Process
If you take one thing from this article, let it be this: a regulatory investigation is not just about what you did—it’s about what the regulator can prove.
If they have gaps, weaknesses, or procedural missteps, you need to identify them early and use them to your advantage.
📞 Need expert help? Contact us today for a free consultation.