[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	First-tier Tribunal (Health Education and Social Care Chamber)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (Health Education and Social Care Chamber) >> Joseph v General Social Care Council [2009] UKFTT 27 (HESC) (16 April 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/HESC/2009/27.html Cite as: [2009] UKFTT 27 (HESC)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Joseph v General Social Care Council [2009] UKFTT 27 (HESC) (16 April 2009)
Schedule 6: Social workers/social care workers
Cancellation of registration

Eulyn Sheila Joseph

-v-

THE GENERAL SOCIAL CARE COUNCIL

[2009] 1465.SW

-Before-

Melanie Lewis

(Nominated Tribunal Judge)

Dr. Jill Low

(Specialist Member)

Paul Thompson

(Specialist Member)

Decision

Heard on 3 April 2009

Care Standards Tribunal Service

18 Pocock Street

London SE1 0BW

Representation

In accordance with an order of the Tribunal dated 27 March 2009 this appeal will be determined on the basis of the papers submitted by the parties before 31 March 2009.

Appeal

The Appellant appeals under Section 68 of the Care Standards Act 2000 against the decision of the Respondent to remove the Appellant from the Social Care Registration as her registration has lapsed.

The burden of proof is upon the Appellant to a balance of probabilities.

The Law

1. The Rules on Registration of Social Workers are now set out in the General Social Care Council (Registration Rules) 2008, which in relevant part state as follows. Rule 6 sets out the duration of the registration, which is for three years.

2. Rule 7 sets out the requirements for the renewal of registration, which states as follows.

7. (1) This rule shall not apply to students.

(2) Where an application for renewal of registration is granted by the Council, the Registrant's entry in the Register will be effective for a further period of three years, subject to removal in accordance with the provisions of these Rules or of the Council's Conduct Rules.

(3) Applications for renewal of registration shall be made on the form approved by the Council for the purpose.

(4) The Council shall only grant an application to renew registration where:

(a) it is satisfied that the Applicant has satisfactorily fulfilled any condition or conditions attached to the Applicant's registration; and

(b) it has received satisfactory evidence, as set out in rule 4(3)(a) above, of an

Applicant's -

(i) good character;

(ii) good conduct;

(iii) physical and mental fitness to perform the whole or part of the work of a social worker; and

(iv) competence;

(c) it has received satisfactory evidence that an Applicant has completed the post

registration training and learning requirements set out in SCHEDULE 3; and subject to rule 25, it has received payment of the renewal of registration fee specified by the Council and any annual fee specified in SCHEDULE 2 to these Rules due from the previous period of registration.

2. Rule 9 sets out the conditions for Removal from the register for other reasons

9.

(1) Notwithstanding -

(a) any other provision in these Rules; or

(b) any provisions in the Council's Conduct Rules for the removal of a Registrant's

entry from the Register, where the Council receives written notification of the death of a Registrant, evidenced by the original or certified true copy of a death certificate or such other evidence of death that is acceptable to the Council, it shall remove the Registrant's entry from the Register.

(2) Where -

(a) the Registrant has failed to make any application for renewal of registration or to pay the renewal fee set out in SCHEDULE 2 to these Rules before the expiry of the three year period specified in rule 6(1)(a) above, the Council may remove the Registrant's entry from the Register;

(b) the Registration Committee has considered an application for renewal of registration and directed that the Registrant's entry should be removed from the Register, the Council shall remove the Registrant's entry from the Register; or

(c) the Registrant has made an application, in writing, for voluntary removal from the

Register, the Council may remove the Registrant's entry from the Register, unless that Registrant is the subject of a Complaint.

(3) The Council may at its discretion remove a Registrant's entry from the Register, at the request of that Registrant, where the Council is satisfied that the Registrant is registered with another Care Council.

The Evidence before the Tribunal

3. The Council registered the Appellant on 23 March 2005 and her registration was due to be renewed on 23 March 2005. The Respondent states that on 17 January 2008, a 'renewal pack' was sent to the Appellant, advising her of the date upon which her registration was due to expire, advising her that she should send her completed renewal application before that date. The Appellant took no action. The Appellant was sent as a letter on 14 October advising her that her registration had lapsed but giving her a further 14 days in which to send in her application.
4. This letter prompted an e-mail response from the Appellant on 22 October 2008, claiming that she had not been sent the renewal pack. On the same day she was directed to the forms and guidance notes on the GSCC web site.
5. The Appellant was removed from the Social Care Register on 4 December 2008, pursuant to Rule 9(2) (a) set out above.

Conclusions

6. We have undertaken our decision-making on the basis that we should consider whether or not given the evidence at the date of the hearing it was right for the Respondent to exercise his discretion and remove the Appellant from the Register. It is the Appellant's personal responsibility to ensure that the registration is renewed. The process calls into play a number of the core competences a social worker is expected to demonstrate: time management, an understanding of the statutory scheme, taking personal responsibility for ensuring registration and record keeping.
7. By her own admission the Appellant did not start the process of applying for re-registration until after 23 March 2008. In her reasons for appeal, she accepts that there was delay on her part and apologises for not submitting her application in a timely fashion. She gives no specific reason for this save to say that she was not given a timescale. We do not accept that. The 'renewal pack' and information on the GSCC web site clearly set out the time limits. It was her responsibility to comply with the requirements.
8. We consider this was a proportionate response by the Respondent. The Appellant has the opportunity to apply for restoration to the Register under Rule 10.

Accordingly, our Unanimous decision is that the appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED

Melanie Lewis

(Nominated First Tier Tribunal Judge)

Dr. Jill Low

(Specialist Member)

Paul Thompson

(Specialist Member)

Date: 16 April 2009