View all veterinary jobs
The Privy Council has overturned an RCVS Disciplinary Committee to strike Leeds-based Dr Gary Samuel MRCVS from the Register following his conviction for theft, common assault and a public order offence at Cardiff Magistrates' Court in November 2011.
The Disciplinary Committee had agreed the sanction following a hearing in February 2013, at which it decided that Dr Samuel's conviction made him unfit to practise veterinary surgery.
Dr Samuel appealed the decision and the Privy Council heard the case on 26th March.
Dr Samuel had been sentenced by Cardiff Magistrates' Court to concurrent terms of 28 days' imprisonment for theft and common assault and 12 weeks' imprisonment for the public order offence, all suspended for 12 months. He had also been ordered to carry out 140 hours' unpaid work and to pay compensation of £75 and costs of £625. The charges related to an incident involving Dr Samuel and his neighbour, described by the Privy Council as "a spontaneous outburst in the course of an angry quarrel between neighbours", for which it felt that the Disciplinary Committee's sanction of removal from the Register was "disproportionately severe."
The Privy Council felt that, in making its decision, the Disciplinary Committee followed too closely the verdict reached by the Magistrates' Court, and did not take mitigating circumstances sufficiently into account, including whether the attack by Dr Samuel on his neighbour had been provoked by racial abuse.
Delivering the Privy Council's judgment, Lord Toulson said: "It is apparent from the reasons given by the Committee, both on the question of fitness to practise and on the question of sanction, that it was considerably influenced by the fact that the magistrates imposed a suspended prison sentence.
"Although Dr Samuel pleaded guilty to the theft of the camera and he was not in entitled to go behind his plea, it is nevertheless difficult to understand on the evidence how the prosecution would have proved that there was an intent permanently to deprive [the victim] of it. In all the circumstances, it is hard to conceive that the court would have considered that the offences truly passed the custodial threshold for a person of good character, if it had not had the power to suspend the sentence... Dr Samuel's conduct was thoroughly reprehensible, but the Board [Privy Council] does not consider that its gravity was such that it would be in the interests of the public now to remit the case to the Committee".
Dr Gary Samuel will not now be removed from the Register
The Privy Council's judgment can be read in full at http://jcpc.uk/decided-cases/index.html
The RCVS has announced that nominations are now open for the Veterinary Nursing Golden Jubilee Award 2014, an an honour which recognises those who have made an outstanding contribution to the veterinary nursing profession.
Nominations can be made until 1 May 2014 and this year the College is looking for nominees who have made an exceptional contribution to the profession, animal welfare or patient care - whether in clinical practice, education, research or politics. Nominees can be registered or listed veterinary nurses, veterinary surgeons or lay people.
Kathy Kissick, Chair of VN Council, said: "With this award we are looking for someone who can be an excellent ambassador for the veterinary nursing profession; who has made a real and substantial difference to the profession; and who can raise its profile and fight its corner.
"I would urge all those who are passionate about the profession and its future to put forward someone who they think is deserving of this honour."
The award was launched in 2011 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the first RCVS veterinary nursing training scheme. The first recipient of the award was Jean Turner, while Sue Badger received the accolade in 2012.
The nomination form for the award can be downloaded from www.rcvs.org.uk/goldenjubilee which also features a video of Kathy Kissick talking about its importance. Alternatively, you can view the video on www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos
The nominators must be registered/listed veterinary nurses or veterinary surgeons but the two additional proposers can be lay people.
For further information about the award please contact Annette Amato, Deputy Head of Veterinary Nursing, on 020 7202 0713 or a.amato@rcvs.org.uk.
The RCVS is calling on veterinary surgeons and students, and listed or registered veterinary nurses to complete its Survey of the Professions 2014.
The four-yearly, confidential survey provides the College with data that helps it develop policy, plan its activities and respond to questions from stakeholders such as government and the media.
The survey aims to find out more about individuals' employment type and experiences, working patterns and professional development. It also asks about aspirations for the short- and long-term and current views on the veterinary profession.
Questions are also asked about mental health and well-being, using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale. The data will be used to track the mental well-being of the profession at a population level over successive years - a process that started with the 2010 survey - which will feed into other work being carried out across the profession.
Finally, the survey includes a set of questions about 24/7 emergency cover, the answers to which will feed into the RCVS Standards Committee's current evidence-gathering exercise.
This year the survey, which is being carried out by the Institute for Employment Studies, will only be available online. All those for whom the RCVS has a personal email address (ie not 'info@' or similar) have been sent a participation request. Others will be sent a letter, including the survey URL. Those who do not receive this letter by Monday 14 April should contact Lizzie Lockett, on l.lockett@rcvs.org.uk or 020 7202 0725.
The deadline for completion of the survey is 30 April.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has restored Joseph Lennox Holmes to the Register of Veterinary Surgeons, two years after he was originally struck off.
Mr Holmes was removed from the Register in February 2012 after the Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of multiple charges of serious professional conduct. Mr Holmes lodged an appeal against the decision, which was heard and dismissed by the Privy Council.
The original charges related to two separate complaints; the first involved numerous charges in respect of Mr Holmes' treatment of a King Charles Spaniel between October 2007 and March 2008; the second, several charges in relation to his treatment of three cats in 2008.
The Committee found that the majority of the charges amounted to serious professional misconduct. In removing Mr Holmes from the Register, the Committee found that "aggravating factors in both... cases included actual injuries to the animals... and a serious breach of the trust which Mr Holmes' clients had placed in him to make the welfare of the animals his primary consideration according to the standards to be expected of the profession". In addition, the Committee cited 10 further aggravating factors including lack of reference to continuing professional development (CPD) in clinical policies and practices; lack of reference to accepted practice; lack of appreciation of the importance of adequate pain relief when performing painful surgical procedures; reluctance to consider referral as an option; and lack of understanding about what information is required by a client to enable fully informed consent to be given.
Following the dismissal of Mr Holmes' appeal by the Privy Council, his first application for restoration was heard by the Disciplinary Committee in February 2013. The Committee was not satisfied that he was fit to be restored to the Register, citing the fact that his application was "premature" and that he had failed to truly appreciate the seriousness of the findings against him. The Committee was also unimpressed with the efforts he had made to keep up-to-date with skills and developments in practice and with his CPD, noting in particular that he had made very limited attempts to observe the function and experience the culture of a modern first opinion practice.
However, in this week's two-day hearing, the Committee was satisfied that Mr Holmes was now fit to be restored to the Register. It heard that Mr Holmes had made a concerted effort to engage in CPD and bring his skills and knowledge up-to-date. During a period of observation at a veterinary practice, he had gained insight into modern practice and the need for veterinary general practitioners to be aware of the advantages in referring patients to specialists.
Professor Noreen Burrows, who chaired and spoke on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, said: "The Committee has concluded that, in the course of genuine efforts to do what was necessary to address the deficiencies identified during the original Inquiry and at the last restoration hearing, the Applicant has at last understood the seriousness of his previous misconduct and has learned new skills and, most importantly, to recognise his limitations from the extensive course of study, reflection, and other training that he has undertaken."
Furthermore, the Committee was satisfied that Mr Holmes had gained a proper understanding of the importance of securing the informed consent of his clients and building a relationship of trust with them and, in addition, recognising the importance of maintaining close relations with fellow professionals and engaging with CPD opportunities.
Additional factors considered when making the decision included: that he had been off the Register for two years; that, through self-improvement, he had equipped himself to treat animals appropriately; the impact that being removed from the Register had in both personal and financial terms; his conduct since being removed from the Register; and, a number of positive testimonials from previous clients and professional colleagues.
The Committee's full findings and decision are available on the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).
The RCVS has announced that its current Treasurer, Dr Bradley Viner, will be the College's next Vice-President after he was elected to the post at RCVS Council last Thursday.
Dr Viner has been an elected member of Council since 2005 and Treasurer since 2010 and will take up his latest position at RCVS Day - the College's Annual General Meeting - on 11 July. He replaces Professor Stuart Reid, who Council confirmed as President for 2014-15, and will take up his new role in July.
During his time on Council Dr Viner has served on all of the major committees with the exception of the Disciplinary Committee. Outside of Council he runs a group of practices in North West London and is Vice-Chairman of Battersea Dogs and Cats Home.
In his manifesto he set out the nature of his Vice-Presidency, stating: "My personal ethos is very much based upon continual improvement. It is only by having the confidence to discuss openly how things could have been done better that an organisation can learn how to improve.
"I also recognise the vital importance of good communications: with Council; the profession at large; Government; and with other interested organisations. I intend to do my utmost to communicate with them as effectively as possible."
At the same meeting of RCVS Council, Colonel Neil Smith, the current President, was confirmed as Vice-President from July, subject to his re-election in this year's RCVS Council elections.
In addition, Chris Tufnell was re-elected as Chairman of the Education Committee, while David Catlow was elected Chairman of Standards Committee, also subject to his re-election in this year's RCVS Council elections.
The RCVS) has announced that 5 candidates are standing in this year's RCVS VN Council elections - an increase of one from last year.
The candidates are:
Kathy Kissick, Chairman of VN Council, said: "I'm really pleased there is an increase in VN candidates this year, especially on the back of the marked increase in VN turnout that we saw in last year's elections. With all the changes continuing to face the VN profession, I can't stress enough how important it is for all veterinary nurses to get involved in our Council elections and I'd like to wish all five candidates the best of luck!"
In a slightly later start to the voting period this year, ballot papers and candidate details for the elections will be posted on 19 March 2014, and all votes must be cast, either online or by post, by 5pm on Friday, 25 April 2014.
In the meantime, the College is inviting all voters to think about the one question they would like to put to the candidates and submit it in time for this year's 'Quiz the Candidates', to be broadcast by the Webinar Vet at 8:00pm on the evening of 20 March. All questions received will be put to the candidates, who will each then answer two questions of their choice, as well as explaining what they consider sets them apart as a potential Council member.
Questions (one per person) for RCVS VN Council candidates should be submitted to the RCVS by 12 March via its dedicated election websites, available soon at www.votebyinternet.com/VNvote14, on twitter using the hashtag #VNvote14, or by email to VNvote14@rcvs.org.uk.
Surrey vet Matthew Morgan has been struck off by the RCVS Disciplinary Committee after being convicted and imprisoned for four counts of pet insurance fraud.
Mr Morgan was convicted, upon his own confession, of dishonestly making false representations to make gain for himself/another or to cause loss to other/ expose other to risk on 22 July 2013 at the Central Criminal Court and, on 23 August 2013, was sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
The Disciplinary Committee heard that Mr Morgan, who was not present at the hearing but represented by Mr Laurence Imrie, Solicitor Advocate, had, between 13 November 2009 and 21 December 2012, taken out 18 insurance policies for veterinary cover with four separate insurance providers - Direct Line, Pet Plan, Pet Protect and Sainsbury's - in relation to a number of pets. Of these pets, only one, namely his pet cat, actually existed - the rest were fictitious.
During this period, the respondent made 50 claims on the insurance policies, seeking payment to reimburse him for the cost of veterinary treatment for the fictitious animals and also making false claims for treatment for his own pet cat, including for invented injuries 'sustained' during a non-existent car accident. As a result of the claims, the insurance companies made 54 payments to Mr Morgan to which he was not entitled, totalling £198,295.
At the time he began committing the offences Mr Morgan was working as a veterinary surgeon at a practice in Kent and, in order to support his fraudulent claims, used the practice's official stationery and stamps to fabricate invoices, clinical records and insurance claims. He continued to make fraudulent claims after leaving the practice, having taken the practice's headed paper and stamp with him.
Mr Morgan's actions came to light in December 2012 after submitting a claim to Direct Line for an operation on the spine of his own cat. The insurance company became suspicious and contacted the Kent practice which confirmed he had not treated the cat. An investigation by the insurers and, subsequently, the police began.
On 31 December 2012 Mr Morgan voluntarily attended a police station where he admitted fraudulently claiming £5,534.52 from Pet Plan and £7,610.03 from Direct Line, citing financial pressure caused by divorce, but failed to admit to the rest of his fraudulent activities. He was arrested on 25 January 2013 and, upon searching his home, police found the stamp and headed paper along with documents relating to the insurance claims.
The Disciplinary Committee, in considering the conduct of Mr Morgan, took into account a number of serious aggravating factors. This included the very high degree of financial gain from the fraudulent activities, the fact that there were 50 separate premeditated acts of dishonesty over a three-year period, the betrayal of trust of his former employer and the insurance companies, the potential reputational risk for his former employer, the abuse of his position as a veterinary surgeon and the fact that completion of insurance claims is an act of veterinary certification.
The Committee also considered, in mitigation, a letter from Mr Morgan to the Committee, three testimonials and representation from his legal representative. These cited the fact that Mr Morgan, when he committed the fraudulent activities, was heavily in debt, had serious domestic difficulties and was suffering from depression, although no medical evidence was submitted to the Committee.
However, it was the Committee's decision that the sanction of removing Mr Morgan from the Register had to be taken, in order to protect animal welfare and maintain public confidence in the profession.
Chairing and speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee its Vice-Chairman, Ms Judith Webb, said: "The Committee is of the view that the Respondent's conduct in this case was deplorable ... Such conduct can only undermine public confidence in the profession. The Respondent abused his position as a veterinary surgeon to perpetrate a deliberate long-term fraud on insurers for personal gain.
"The Committee is conscious that its role is not to punish but to protect animal welfare and maintain public confidence in the profession. Due to the serious nature of the matters before it...the Committee has no doubt that the only suitable sanction is to direct the Registrar to remove the Respondent's name from the Register."
Nick Stace, CEO of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), has issued a swift and robust response to the call by Unite for a shake up for the profession's regulatory system.
"Unite's suggestion that veterinary regulation should be under the scrutiny of the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) is misguided, because the PSA is there to oversee regulation in the human healthcare sector and the RCVS already has Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Privy Council oversight.
"Its further thoughts around the RCVS disciplinary process are out of date and missing the point. We would be very happy to help put them right and to hear any legitimate concerns they may have.
"Unite is calling for the College to no longer 'set the rules and hand down judgments', when in fact last year we successfully achieved a Legislative Reform Order, backed by the profession, to ensure that our Disciplinary and Preliminary Investigation Committees will become independent from Council.
"Unite also talks about the profession's disquiet about last year's Disciplinary Hearing into Mr Chikosi, something we are well aware of and are currently responding to by looking at the biggest area of concern, the provision of 24/7 emergency cover. Our fact-finding mission is seeking views from the profession and the public.
"More broadly, though, feedback from our First Rate Regulator initiative has shown that the profession does have confidence in our disciplinary procedures and that they are certainly not subject to 'long-standing discontent'.
"The First Rate Regulator initiative is also leading to significant improvements in the way that complaints are handled, including speed to resolution.
"Unite is seeking to recruit members of the veterinary team as members of its union and it may be more successful in that pursuit if it was to start to understand the profession better, perhaps beginning with getting its facts right.
"We would be delighted to meet with Unite to put them right where they are factually wrong, and hear what they have to say."
RCVS President Neil Smith has issued a statement in response to the petition by Devon vet Jo Dyer which called for the removal of mandatory house visits from the Code of Professional Conduct and received just shy of 1300 signatures over the past 48 hours.
The statement reads:
"I am delighted to see that so many veterinary surgeons are taking seriously our call for views and evidence on all aspects of the provision of 24-hour emergency cover, including those who have signed up to veterinary surgeon Jo Dyer's petition calling for the removal of 'mandatory house visits' from the Code of Professional Conduct.
"However, I am concerned that the petition is working on a misunderstanding. Veterinary surgeons are not mandated to attend away from the practice just because an owner has requested a visit. It is a professional decision based on a range of factors.
"In fact, paragraph 3.13 of the Supporting Guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct states 'Clients may request attendance on a sick or injured animal away from the practice premises and, in some circumstances, it may be desirable to do so. On rare occasions, it may be necessary on clinical or welfare grounds. The decision to attend away from the practice is for the veterinary surgeon, having carefully balanced the needs of the animal against the safety implications of making the visit; a veterinary surgeon is not expected to risk 'life or limb', or that of anyone else, to provide the service.'
"I appreciate that recent disciplinary hearings, especially that of Mr Chikosi, have increased concerns in the profession that vets will be disciplined for not turning out to every single request for a home visit. This is not the case. In order for someone to be taken to a disciplinary hearing for refusing to attend away from the practice, first there needs to be a complaint, and second, the Preliminary Investigation Committee needs to be convinced that the veterinary surgeon could not justify their decision. Such cases are rare. In fact, last year, only 3% of the complaints we received were about 24-hour cover, and not all of those related to home visits.
"Having said this, the number of signatures received on Jo Dyer's petition, and the comments of the signatories, will be fed into the material reviewed by the Standards Committee, alongside formal responses to our call for evidence, and views gathered from animal-owner research. Clearly if so many veterinary surgeons believe that house visits are mandatory in all circumstances, the wording of our guidance needs to be reviewed, at the very least.
"It is likely that any recommendations for change in our 24/7 policy would go to the June meeting of Council, although this timetable is subject to change, depending on the nature of the report from the Standards Committee."
The RCVS is inviting responses from veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and animal owners to a call for evidence on the provision of 24-hour emergency veterinary care, in order to understand how best to meet the expectations of all those involved.
In an open letter to the profession and the public published on the RCVS website, the Chairman of the RCVS Standards Committee, Clare Tapsfield-Wright, said:
"Over the past two years, lay people working with the RCVS have raised questions about the veterinary profession's ability to provide 24/7 to the extent required by the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct, and said there is a disconnect between the public's expectations and the profession's capacity to meet those expectations."
Clare also refers to an RCVS Disciplinary Committee Inquiry in June 2013, which raised a number of issues on home visits by veterinary surgeons, including: speed of response; travelling time and distance; daytime versus out-of-hours obligations; individual versus corporate responsibility; and, staffing levels and contingency plans.
The letter is accompanied by a range of background information, including the reports of Lay Observers to the RCVS Preliminary Investigation Committee; Working Party reports from the College's 2009 consultation on 24-hour emergency cover; and, further details about the June 2013 DC Inquiry.
The College says additional feedback will be sought through next year's RCVS Survey of the Professions, and via focus group research for animal owners. Once all responses have been collated, a number of individuals and organisations will be invited to a Standards Committee meeting to present and discuss their views.
Responses in writing are invited by 5pm on Monday, 17 February 2014, and should be emailed to 24-7@rcvs.org.uk or posted to the Professional Conduct Department, Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, Belgravia House, 62-64 Horseferry Road, London SW1P 2AF.
The RCVS is seeking the views of veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and members of the public about proposals for a new Royal Charter which would clarify and underpin the role of the College and give it formal recognition as regulator of the veterinary nursing profession.
The new Charter, approved at a meeting of RCVS Council in November, would replace the 1967 Supplemental Charter, with the most far reaching change being a proposal to make veterinary nursing a formally regulated profession on a similar footing to veterinary surgeons. Veterinary nurses would become associates of the College and have the post-nominal letters RVN. The List and the Register of Veterinary Nurses would also be effectively combined, meaning that the 1,100 listed veterinary nurses would join the 10,500 already on the Register.
Under the proposals registered veterinary nurses would continue to need to fulfil certain responsibilities, including abiding by the Code of Professional Conduct and completing an average of 15 hours a year of continuing professional development, and would be subject to RCVS disciplinary procedures.
What's new is that individuals struck off from the Register for serious professional misconduct would no longer be able to give medical treatment or carry out minor surgery under veterinary direction.
As well as changes to the regulation of veterinary nursing, the proposed Charter would also more clearly state the role and remit of the RCVS, for example, in advancing standards through the promotion of continuing professional development and the Practice Standards Scheme.
Professor Stephen May, a member of RCVS Council who led the Legislation Working Party that developed the new Charter proposals, said: "The proposed new Charter represents an historic opportunity to affirm the role of the RCVS, and to provide a modern framework for the future regulation of the professions. I call on veterinary surgeons and nurses, together with other interested stakeholders, to read the consultation documents and support our proposals."
Speaking about the need for change, RCVS President Neil Smith added: "The consultation paper explains why it is time to replace the 1967 Charter with a new version which sets out the role of the College. The present Charter doesn't explain what objects the RCVS should set out to achieve, and it is silent about veterinary nurses. The remit of the College should include being the regulator for the veterinary nursing profession, and we want a new Charter to recognise registered veterinary nurses.
"We hope that the new Charter will provide a solid basis for the work of the College for years to come. We would urge members of the professions and the public to let us know what they think and help us to make sure that we have got it right."
The consultation paper, which contains further details about the proposed Charter, is available to download at www.rcvs.org.uk/consultations. Those who wish to have their say must respond to b.myring@rcvs.org.uk with their comments by Friday 7 February 2014.
The RCVS will also be organising a meeting and a webinar during the consultation period for those who wish to ask questions about the proposals. Those interested in attending a meeting should email b.myring@rcvs.org.uk. The webinar will be held early in 2014 - further details will be on www.rcvs.org.uk in due course.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a Southampton veterinary surgeon after finding him not guilty of serious professional misconduct, saying at all times that he acted in the best interests of a dog under his care.
At the start of the five-day hearing, the charges against Edward Gillams MRCVS were that, whilst in practice at Vets Now in Southampton in 2011, he discharged a dog that he knew or ought to have known was in no fit state to be discharged, and, at the same time, failed to provide adequate advice and information to the dog's owners, particularly with regard to an alternative plan to discharge and treatment options.
The dog, an Italian Spinone called Zola, had first been taken to the Vets4Pets veterinary clinic in Southampton at 4.30pm on 2 November 2011, where gastric torsion was diagnosed. During a subsequent gastrotomy, 3kg of sausages and plastic wrappings were removed. Zola was discharged three days later, with a guarded prognosis from the operating veterinary surgeon. Zola's condition deteriorated that same evening, so his owners called the Vets4Pets practice and were referred to their out-of-hours provider, Vets Now, where Mr Gillams was on duty. On admitting Zola, the only information available to Mr Gillams was what the dog's owners were able to tell him.
The Committee heard differing witness accounts from the dog's owners and from Mr Gillams regarding what tests and examinations were to be performed, and what advice and options were suggested. Ultimately, Zola was hospitalised overnight (despite some reluctance for this from one of his owners), given pain relief and antibiotics and placed on a drip; he was then to be collected by his owners first thing for transfer back to Vets4Pets. The next morning, Zola was described as 'sternally recumbent but responsive', holding his head up but not moving and not making any attempt to get up. Mr Gillams carried Zola to his owner's car for transport back to the Vets4Pets practice. He considered that he had discharged his duty to provide advice, as this was given the night before and in the circumstances prevailing in the morning there was no obligation to repeat this. Zola died on the journey between the two practices.
Before reaching a decision, the Committee considered, in detail, the expert evidence of witnesses for both the College and Mr Gillams, which provided some conflicting views on Mr Gillams' actions. It also referred to the RCVS guidance available to Mr Gillams at the time through the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct 2010.
The Committee noted that both experts agreed that Mr Gillams could not have known Zola was about to die when he discharged him and that it was a difficult decision for Mr Gillams to make, but expressed differing views about the fitness of the dog to be discharged and whether it was in its best interests to be discharged. The Committee rejected the contention that Mr Gillams ought to have known that Zola was not fit to be discharged, and instead considered appropriate his decision to discharge him into the care of his original veterinary surgeon. It felt that continuity of care would actually be better maintained in this manner, rather than a third veterinary surgeon taking over the case.
Regarding provision of adequate advice, the Committee accepted Mr Gillams' evidence that he was frustrated that the owners refused him permission to undertake the diagnostic work necessary to treat Zola effectively, and that he had no other clinical information to work with.
Chairing and speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Vice-Chairman, Ms Judith Webb, said: "The Committee expresses its sincere condolences to [the owners] for the loss of their much loved family pet Zola and recognises that this loss caused the family great distress."
Ms Webb added: "The Committee accepts that [Mr Gillams] discharged his obligations to Zola and to [his owners] in a manner wholly consistent with the standards of a competent veterinary surgeon in difficult circumstances. He leaves with no stain on his character or professional ability."
The full detail of the Committee's decision is available on the RCVS website (www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary).
The RCVS is reminding veterinary nurses that their renewal fees need to be paid to the College by 31 December 2013 or they will be removed from the List/Register.
According to the College, 7,180 veterinary nurses paid their fees by the annual deadline date of 1 November 2013. Another 2,161 have made payments since then and the remaining 1,468 veterinary nurses who have still not paid their fees have been sent a letter reminding them that their fees need to be paid - and cleared - by the end of the year.
The renewal fee can be paid online via www.rcvs.org.uk/login, using the individual log-in numbers on the fee renewal letters sent in September and the overdue payment letters sent in December. Veterinary nurses who have mislaid their log-in numbers can email webadmin@rcvs.org.uk with their full name, date of birth, address on the Register or List and the badge number engraved on the back of their VN badge. Payment can also be made by bank transfer - details are on the renewal letter.
For payments made by cheque, the name of the veterinary nurse and their List/Register number needs to be written on the back. Cheques need to be received by the RCVS before Friday 20 December and the payment to have cleared by 31 December.
For any queries about registration or annual renewals, veterinary nurses should contact the RCVS Registration Department on 020 7202 0707 or email membership@rcvs.org.uk
The RCVS is calling for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses to supply up-to-date email addresses for its Survey of the Professions, which will take place early next year.
The survey is carried out every four years and, for the first time, next year's will be online only. It will ask questions about how vets and veterinary nurses are using their qualifications, how they carry out continuing professional development, what kind of practices they work in and their views on the profession, amongs other things.
The surveys will be sent via email so correct addresses are needed to make sure that veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses can have their say. Email addresses should also be unique, rather than being a generic practice email address, for example, so that the survey is sent to an individual rather than a whole team. This is also important for other emails from the College, such as personal fee or deadline reminders.
The RCVS also needs up-to-date contact details in order to offer members a better range of online services, such as the ability to better manage their Register details.
In order to check and update their contact details veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses should visit the log in area at www.rcvs.org.uk/login. Alternatively, they can contact the College's Registration Department on 020 7202 0707 or membership@rcvs.org.uk
The RCVS has announced that nominations are now open for the RCVS VN Council Elections and launched a new video which explains why you should consider putting your name forward.
Two seats are available on VN Council, each for a four-year tenure. Suzanne May and Hilary Orpet will be retiring from VN Council, but will be eligible to stand again in 2014.
To help veterinary nurses learn more about what's involved in being a Council Member, the benefits it can bring and the amount of time it requires, the College has produced a short video featuring the experiences of some existing members of Council and their reasons for standing.
Gordon Hockey, RCVS Registrar, said: "We have chosen the theme 'People like you' for these videos because people on the Councils really are no different to their colleagues across all aspects of the veterinary and veterinary nursing professions. The thoughts and experiences they describe on camera will sound very familiar to many of their colleagues and peers! We need people of all ages and of varying experiences and professional backgrounds to ensure there is a healthy and diverse range of views available."
The College will also be hosting a special 'Meet the RCVS' day on Tuesday, 10 December for anyone considering standing for election but wanting to find out more first. Further information and bookings are available from Fiona Harcourt, Communications Officer (020 7202 0773 / f.harcourt@rcvs.org.uk).
Nominations are open until 5pm on Friday, 31 January 2014, allowing plenty of time to find out more about what's involved and to find two proposers.
Details about how to stand in the election are available at www.rcvs.org.uk/vncouncil14.
The RCVS Council has approved the new Strategic Plan designed to bring the College closer to its vision of enhancing society through improved animal health and welfare, over the next three years.
The Strategic Plan is founded on feedback from the profession and the public about what the College does well and where it could do better, and an analysis of how other leading regulators operate. It includes 35 actions, clustered under five themes, all centred on the purpose of setting, upholding and advancing veterinary standards.
For example, the College aims to introduce a service charter - for the public and the profession - of rights, expectations and responsibilities for each of its functions.
Nick Stace, RCVS CEO said: "This drive for excellent service lies at the heart of our focus on improvement.
"The concept of veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses, as well as the public, being our 'customers', was one that unsettled the profession when it was first mooted. But I believe that only by ensuring that we focus relentlessly on improving how we interact with our customers will we deliver a service for the profession, the public, and, ultimately, the UK's animals, which is worthy of the name first-rate regulator."
Amongst other things, the Plan also commits to:
The Strategic Plan can be downloaded from www.rcvs.org.uk/strategy.
Also at its November meeting, Council approved:
More information on all of these topics will be available in the November issue of RCVS News, online shortly at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications.
You can also hear direct from the CEO via his post-Council video update: www.youtube.com/rcvsvideos.
The RCVS has launched a new College honour, the RCVS Queen's Medal.
RCVS President Col Neil Smith said: "The Queen's Medal will be the most prestigious honour that the RCVS can bestow upon a veterinary surgeon and will be reserved for those whose distinguished careers and outstanding lifetime achievements deserve wider recognition."
The honour was created following a review of the RCVS honours system, which demonstrated the need for a new aspirational award.
The RCVS wrote to the Cabinet Office last year, together with letters of support from Peers and MPs, many of whom attended the reception, to request permission to name this new honour after Her Majesty the Queen.
Col Smith said: "We are honoured that Her Majesty has supported the proposal and allowed the College to name the award after her, and express our sincere thanks to those Parliamentarians who supported our endeavour."
The first RCVS Queen's Medal will be presented at RCVS Day in July 2014. The nomination form for the Queen's Medal can be found at www.rcvs.org.uk/Queensmedal.
The RCVS has clarified its role concerning new UK veterinary schools, saying that it has no mandate to control student or graduate numbers.
Responding to calls from the profession that it should comment on the desirability of any change in the number of schools or graduates, the College has confirmed that whilst it is committed to setting, upholding and advancing the standards that any new UK veterinary degrees would need to meet in order to be approved by the Privy Council, it has no role in capping student numbers.
The College also points out that the free market and mobility of workers in the EU makes any control at the level of a sovereign state effectively meaningless with respect to workforce management. However, the College says it is committed to ensuring that standards are maintained, and to continue working with bodies such as the European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education, which evaluates veterinary degrees across Europe.
The College also seeks to support healthy debate through providing information on the state of the profession - an example of which is the survey that it recently commissioned from the Institute for Employment Studies on job availability for veterinary graduates over the last five years.
The headline results from that survey were released in the summer, and showed that increasing graduate numbers over the last five years have so far appeared to have had little impact on veterinary job prospects, with 94% of graduate respondents seeking a role in clinical practice obtaining work within six months of starting to look.
The full RCVS Survey of Recent Graduates report is now available, and also shows that, of the 43% of veterinary surgeons who graduated in the last five years who responded:
The answers were analysed by year of graduation, veterinary school, age and gender, and the full report is available online at www.rcvs.org.uk/publications.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has agreed to adjourn multiple charges against a County Durham-based veterinary surgeon following her undertakings to request removal from the RCVS Register and never to apply to be restored to it.
At the hearing held yesterday, Silke Birgitt Lindridge was charged with disgraceful conduct in a professional respect in regard to four separate allegations, spanning the period of June 2011 to September 2012 whilst in practice at the Safe Hands Veterinary Group. Two of the allegations related to failures to euthanase or arrange the euthanasia of a cat and a dog and being dishonest and/or misleading about these failures, with their respective owners. The other two allegations related to administering a vaccine (Fevaxyn) which was more than two years past its expiry date to a cat, and failure to provide or take adequate steps to provide promptly all the relevant clinical information to a veterinary practice taking over the responsibility for the treatment of a Labrador Cross.
However, before the Disciplinary Committee had heard evidence in respect of these charges, Mrs Lindridge, who did not attend the hearing, had lodged her application for adjournment on the basis that she would request that the Registrar remove her name from the Register with immediate effect and undertake never to apply to be restored to it. The Disciplinary Committee made no enquiry into the facts of the four charges and emphasised that they had neither been proved against, nor admitted by, the respondent.
Removal from the RCVS Register removes a veterinary surgeon's right to practise in the UK. The respondent informed the RCVS that she had no wish to return to the practice of veterinary surgery in this country. Should she subsequently apply to be restored to the Register, the Disciplinary Committee would resume its consideration of the charges, along with the breach of her undertaking.
The Disciplinary Committee was advised that the views of the animal owners involved had been sought and that all had agreed with the proposed course of action.
Speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Chairman, Professor Peter Lees, said: "Having considered the information before it, the Committee has decided it would not be in the public interest to proceed to a full hearing. It is satisfied that the undertakings offered by the respondent [Mrs Lindridge] protect the welfare of animals and uphold the reputation of the profession."
Professor Lees added: "The undertakings offered by the respondent to request the Registrar to remove her name from the Register with immediate effect and never to make an application for restoration to the Register, go beyond any sanction that this Committee could impose at the conclusion of a contested hearing. It does not consider that it would be proportionate for either party to incur the substantial costs of a contested hearing."
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has suspended a London-based veterinary surgeon from the Register for six months, having found that her falsification of clinical records amounted to serious professional misconduct.
At the two-day hearing, Dr Nicola Ersilova was charged with, and admitted to, three separate incidences of false and dishonest clinical record keeping following her treatment of a collapsed cat, whilst working at Vets Now in Thamesmead, London.
The Committee heard how Dr Ersilova had suspected that Lafite the cat, belonging to Mr Yingzhan Xiao, had been poisoned, so administered fluids and treated her with Lidocaine. A lay colleague, who was assisting with the treatment, subsequently observed Dr Ersilova standing staring at the cat, which had stopped breathing, then leaving the room to go and speak to Mr Xiao. The lay colleague's evidence confirmed to the Committee that Lafite's heart was still beating at this point, and that Dr Ersilova was then heard telling Mr Xiao that Lafite had died while being treated. The lay colleague later discovered that Dr Ersilova had listed calcium gluconate on Mr Xiao's bill and not Lidocaine and, when she questioned the entry, Dr Ersilova told her she was worried about getting into trouble if she had listed Lidocaine.
Whilst reporting these irregularities to the senior veterinary surgeon at Vets Now, the lay colleague noticed that Dr Ersilova had also written "CPR unsuccessful" in the notes, although she was certain CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) had not been attempted.
During a subsequent Vets Now investigation, Dr Ersilova admitted adding this false information concerning Lidocaine, calcium gluconate and CPR, saying during interview that she was aware it was serious professional misconduct and that she was prepared to take the consequences. Vets Now reported the matter to the RCVS.
The Committee considered that all evidence before it fully supported the charges against Dr Ersilova, that her conduct was clearly dishonest, and that her actions were inexcusable, especially for someone as experienced as she was. It stated that a veterinary surgeon's duty to make only truthful and accurate records was so manifest and well known to veterinary surgeons that there could be no real excuse to make such false, misleading and dishonest entries.
The Committee highlighted the comment by Dr Ersilova that she knew she had done something wrong but did not expect her colleague to report her, as providing no explanation, or excuse, for doing something which she knew to be wrong.
A number of submissions were made to the Committee in mitigation, including that Dr Ersilova had admitted her dishonesty to both her employers and the Committee; had an otherwise unblemished record over 22 years of practice; had received no immediate financial gain by her actions; and, did not cause any animal suffering.
Accepting these submissions, the Committee nevertheless felt it needed to balance them against other factors. Dr Ersilova's decision to falsify the records was premeditated and had not been taken without an opportunity for full reflection. There were numerous entries in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct that highlighted the importance of professional integrity and accuracy, and, given the importance which the Code attached to the duty of veterinary surgeons to be truthful and honest in all their dealings with their clients, the Committee found Dr Ersilova's conduct to be "most reprehensible".
Speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Vice-Chairman, Professor Sheila Crispin, said: "It is of great importance that the public should be able to retain confidence in the honesty and integrity of members of the profession. Both the public and other members of the profession must be entitled to rely on the truthfulness of what a veterinary surgeon has written in the clinical records of any animal [they have] treated.
"It is [our] decision that the sanction of suspension adequately reflects the seriousness of the [Dr Ersilova's] conduct. The sanction imposed is ... the most appropriate to inform the profession how seriously such dishonest conduct will be taken, because such conduct clearly brings the profession into disrepute and ... cannot and will not be tolerated."
The Committee then concluded that the least period of suspension that could be justified was one of six months.
The RCVS needs veterinary nurses to help trial some new practical examination tasks at BVNA Congress (11-13 October, Telford).
On the Friday and Saturday of the event, the College will have a stand in the exhibition area where the team will be testing some new OSCE (practical examination) stations, and gathering the feedback of attendees.
Julie Dugmore, RCVS Head of Veterinary Nursing said: "The new tasks have primarily been developed for the pre-registration examinations but may also be used by RCVS Awards for students completing the RCVS Level 3 Diploma in veterinary nursing.
"Please come along and give us your feedback, as it will help us to ensure that the tasks are as relevant as possible."
Visitors to the stand will also have the opportunity to enter a 'Refresh your Code knowledge' quiz by correctly answering three questions about the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses, to be in with a chance of winning a £50 iTunes or Google Play giftcard.
Meanwhile, Vice-President and Chairman of the Practice Standards Group, Jacqui Molyneux, will be giving a presentation on the future of the Practice Standards Scheme at 15.15 to 16.15 on Saturday 12 October. The Scheme is due to be relaunched in 2015, so this will be an important update for accredited practices and those thinking of joining the Scheme.
The RCVS team will also be on hand to answer any questions delegates may have about VN training and education.
The RCVS has launched a mobile version of the Code of Professional Conduct for veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses: an app for Android devices and a web app for Apple users.
Once installed, the app provides smartphone and tablet users with a mobile-friendly version of the Code and all 27 chapters of supporting guidance in their pockets, even when there is no network connection. Whenever the Code is updated, the latest version will be available to download the next time the device is online.
Head of Communications, Lizzie Lockett, said: "Our new app provides easy access to the Code, so busy veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses can now keep our guidance to hand, even when out and about. It's never been easier to ensure that you're always working to the Code's principles of veterinary practice and professional responsibilities."
The app also offers a keyword search of the whole Code and supporting guidance, links to other sources of information and contact details for further advice over the phone or email.
To install the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct app on your android device, visit Google Play and search for 'RCVS code'. To install it on an Apple device, visit the RCVS Code web pages in the device's internet browser, click on the app link in the Code tool box on the right hand side, and follow the instructions.
Alternatively, a copy of the full Code and all supporting guidance can now be downloaded in PDF format from the RCVS website, date-stamped so that you know when it was last amended.
Visit www.rcvs.org.uk/code or www.rcvs.org.uk/vncode and see the 'Code tools' box for both the PDF and the web app.
The College says it would very much like feedback about the app, or suggestions for future apps - email Christine James in the Communications Department, on christinej@rcvs.org.uk.
The RCVS is now accepting disclosures from veterinary surgeons about any criminal cautions, convictions or adverse findings they may have against them, as part of a voluntary period before the requirement to disclose commences in 2014.
The requirement that veterinary surgeons notify the College about criminal cautions, convictions or adverse findings on registration, and on an annual basis as part of their registration renewal each March, was introduced as part of the Code of Professional Conduct in 2012 (section 5.3, see Notes to Editors). However, the College has allowed a bedding-in period for the Code before enforcing the requirement.
From 2014, new registrants will have to disclose any criminal cautions, convictions or adverse findings that may affect registration (for example, those from university fitness to practise procedures).
Veterinary surgeons already on the Register (including overseas and non-practising categories, as well as UK-practising) will only be required to disclose criminal cautions, convictions or adverse findings that have occurred since April 2006. Fixed-penalty motoring offences are excluded.
The veterinary profession has fallen under the Notifiable Occupations Scheme since April 2006, which means that serious convictions are already passed to the College from the police.
If a veterinary surgeon declares a criminal conviction, this will be initially considered by the Registrar, and, if necessary, referred to the Preliminary Investigation Committee. In some cases, the matter will be referred on to the Disciplinary Committee to decide if the nature of the caution or conviction affects the veterinary surgeon's fitness to practise - in which case the usual sanctions of removal or suspension from the Register could apply.
Eleanor Ferguson, Head of Professional Conduct said: "We hope, through this new requirement, to increase the public's confidence in the veterinary profession, and to safeguard animal health and welfare. The move brings the veterinary profession into line with many others - including registered veterinary nurses, who have made such a disclosure since their Register was introduced, in 2007."
The RCVS has launched a dedicated advice line to assist affected veterinary surgeons, on 07818 113 056, open Monday to Friday, 11am-4pm.
Callers will speak to one of three RCVS solicitors who can advise on the process and the possible outcomes of disclosure. Alternatively, veterinary surgeons can contact disclosure@rcvs.org.uk.
Detailed information regarding the requirement, including examples of the kinds of convictions that may be referred to the Preliminary Investigation Committee, and a disclosure form, can be found on www.rcvs.org.uk/convictions.
The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has agreed to adjourn multiple charges against an Essex-based veterinary surgeon who qualified in 1969, following his undertakings firstly to request removal from the RCVS Register and secondly never apply to be restored to it.
At the hearing, which had originally been listed for seven days, Geoffrey Raymond Oliver, 68, was charged with serious professional misconduct over allegations of his inadequate treatment of two dogs and a cat (belonging to three different clients) between 2010 and 2012; inadequate record keeping; failures to deal honestly or properly with his clients; and, failure to heed advice from the RCVS Preliminary Investigation Committee about the importance of proper communication between veterinary surgeons and their clients.
However, before the Committee heard evidence on any aspect of these charges, Mr Oliver lodged his application for adjournment. The Committee therefore made no findings on the charges, and emphasised they had neither been proved against, nor admitted by, him.
The Committee noted that there had been no adverse findings against Mr Oliver during his professional career, that his practice was now closed and that he had no intention of returning to practise in the future. Should he subsequently apply to be restored to the Register, the Committee would resume its consideration of the charges, along with his breach of the undertaking.
The Committee was advised that none of the complainants in the case - which could have incurred considerable time and costs - dissented from the proposed course of action.
Speaking on behalf of the Disciplinary Committee, its Chairman, Professor Peter Lees, said: "The Committee has concluded that no useful purpose would be served were it to insist on a full hearing [and it] would be a disproportionate waste of...resources [to do so]. The Committee is satisfied that [granting the adjournment application] protects the welfare of animals and...is in the public interest."
The Committee then accepted Mr Oliver's undertakings, including the removal of his name from the Register with immediate effect.
Professor Lees added: "So that he is in no doubt about the matter, the Committee reminds [Mr Oliver] that, when referring clients of his former practice elsewhere, he should be careful to avoid giving them any advice about the diagnosis or treatment of their animals."
The RCVS is seeking nominations for its 2014 Honours and Awards Round, and wants to hear about any individuals, of whatever age or experience, who have made an outstanding contribution to the profession.
The annual Honours scheme comprises two distinct and prestigious types of award: Honorary Fellowships for RCVS-registered veterinary surgeons and Honorary Associateships for non-veterinary surgeons. Both sets of awards are presented each year at RCVS Day - the College's AGM and award ceremony in London.
The College says it is keen for the Fellowship nominations net to be cast as widely as possible in order to offer recognition of veterinary achievements not only in more traditional fields like academia and clinical practice, but also in science, education, industry and politics.
In addition, Honorary Fellowship nominees no longer need to have been an RCVS member for 30 years, meaning that younger veterinary surgeons who have gone significantly above and beyond the call of duty will also be eligible for consideration.
Honorary Associateships are intended to celebrate the achievements of those who have contributed to the health and welfare of animals by working in fields related to the veterinary profession, and could be from a similarly wide range of backgrounds, for example, veterinary nurses, scientists, lecturers, farriers, charity workers, farmers, conservationists or those in industry and commerce.
Nick Stace, RCVS Chief Executive, said: "At my first RCVS Day this summer, I was hugely impressed with the calibre of candidates who received our awards, and delighted we were able to formally mark their achievements. The veterinary profession has a lot of talented people who deserve to be recognised for the contribution they have made, whether in science and academia, or in politics and clinical practice. Everyone knows someone who is worthy of this kind of recognition and I urge you to take the next step and nominate them for an award."
There are no restrictions on who can make a nomination, although the closing deadline is 13 September 2013. Full details on how to make a nomination are available at www.rcvs.org.uk/honours.