Former vet has eleventh attempt at restoration rejected

A former veterinary surgeon who was removed from the Register in June 1994 after his Kent practice was found to have unhygienic and unsterile conditions as well as poor record keeping, has had his eleventh application to be restored to the Register of Veterinary Surgeons rejected.

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee considered the application from Warwick Seymour-Hamilton, which was opposed by the RCVS from the outset, at a hearing on Thursday 29 and Friday 30 June.

Mr Seymour-Hamilton made an application for restoration on the basis that he did not want to be restored to the Register in order to practise veterinary surgery, but so that he could more easily achieve recognition from academics and drug companies for his work on herbal and natural remedies. Mr Seymour-Hamilton also disputed the original findings of the 1994 case for which he was removed from the Register, although was told that this was inadmissible.

In considering his application, the Committee took into account the fact that he had not accepted the original findings from 1994 nor had he, over the course of his various applications for restoration, shown any insight into his original conduct or the serious concerns about his fitness to practice raised in previous restoration hearings.

It also considered that Mr Seymour-Hamilton had been off the Register for 29 years and would need to have demonstrated prolonged, intensive and formal training to ensure he met the Day One Competences required of a veterinary surgeon. The College submitted that he had made no such attempts and so would pose a significant risk to animal health and welfare if he were allowed to practice again.

The Committee also considered that Mr Seymour-Hamilton had indicated that he had practised veterinary surgery while off the Register – including conducting two spay procedures in Calais, France – and had used his own animals to try out new and untested ‘herbal remedies’. The College submitted that this indicated someone who didn’t have due regard to the importance of the current level of skills, experience and qualifications required in order to undertake veterinary surgery competently, and therefore posed a risk to animal health and welfare.

Dr Kathryn Peaty MRCVS, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The College invited the Committee to consider that where, as here, some 29 years have passed since this veterinary surgeon has practised, there has been no intensive, and prolonged re-training, no acceptance of the original findings and no insight into concerns about his fitness to practise, there will inevitably be a serious risk to the welfare of animals and the wider public interest if the applicant is restored to the Register. The Committee agrees, and considers that the applicant has not shown the required insight as to the steps he needs to take to return to safe veterinary practice.”

Accordingly, the Committee decided that it would not be in the public interest to restore Mr Seymour-Hamilton to the Register.

The full findings of the Disciplinary Committee can be found at on our dedicated Disciplinary Hearings webpage.  

Please note: this is a summary of the hearing to assist in understanding the case and the Committee's decision. The full, authoritative decision is available to download.