Disciplinary Committee declines to restore former Essex-based vet

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has refused an application for restoration to the Register from a veterinary surgeon who was removed in 2021.

The original hearing for Andrew Dobson took place in August 2021 with the Committee requesting that he be removed from the Register after it found that he had: carried out an act of veterinary certification while off the Register, after being removed from the Register for non-payment; had failed to have professional indemnity insurance in place between November 2018 and August 2020; and, failed to respond to reasonable requests from the RCVS about the same.

His restoration hearing took place on Thursday 20 July, although Mr Dobson, despite having submitted the restoration application, did not attend and did not contact the RCVS setting out his reasons for non-attendance, nor did he provide any detail supporting his application for restoration.

Having decided to proceed with the restoration hearing in his absence, the Committee had to consider whether Mr Dobson had proven himself fit to be restored to the Register and to be allowed to practise veterinary surgery once more.

“Having regard to the above criteria and its findings on them, the Committee considers that it remains the case that the protection of the public and the public interest requires that his name be not restored to the Register and therefore refuses this application.”

In its considerations, the Committee heard that the last contact with Mr Dobson had been made on 2 June 2023 and that, despite numerous attempts to contact him since that date, there had been no communication from Mr Dobson, including in support of his restoration application.

Although the Committee found that his email on 2 June 2023 did suggest that he accepted the original findings for which he was removed from the Register, it had insufficient evidence before it demonstrating that he had, for example, shown remorse and insight into the original failings, had attempted to keep his continuing professional development (CPD) up-to-date or that, if restored, he would pose no risk to animal health and welfare.

Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Disciplinary Committee will only restore the name of the applicant veterinary surgeon to the Register where the applicant has satisfied it that he or she is fit to return to unrestricted practice as a veterinary surgeon and that restoration is in the public interest.

“The Committee’s real concerns about this application and this applicant are that it has before it no evidence of any value or substance to satisfy either of these criteria. There is no basis on which the Committee could conclude that the applicant is fit to return to unrestricted practice. In turn, there is no basis on which the Committee could conclude that it is in the public interest that this applicant’s name be restored to the Register.

“It is of importance to the profession and to members of the public that restorations to the Register should only occur when the applicant has established by clear evidence that the criteria which are set out in the public documents produce by the College have been satisfied.”

He added: “Having regard to the above criteria and its findings on them, the Committee considers that it remains the case that the protection of the public and the public interest requires that his name be not restored to the Register and therefore refuses this application.”

The full findings of the Disciplinary Committee can be found on our disciplinary webpage.