RCVS plan to extend DC process leads to ‘easier target’ fear

Fresh queries have been made about RCVS disciplinary procedures amid concerns it is now taking longer for case decisions to be reached.

Papers presented to the college’s first council meeting of 2025 revealed a review had deemed six months “an appropriate timeframe” for assessing performance in the initial phase of investigating complaints.

Senior figures defended the move at the 16 January session, citing greater complexity in many cases and the need for detailed scrutiny.

But one council member, Will Wilkinson, questioned whether the college was interested in “meeting an easier target or delivering best service”.

First phase

Although there have been recent calls for more radical reforms, including the establishment of an entirely separate body to oversee disciplinary matters, the current debate relates to the first phase of the college’s existing process for examining complaints.

Under that protocol, a preliminary investigation committee (PIC) has to determine whether there is a realistic prospect both of proving the concerns raised against an individual clinician and that they would amount to serious professional misconduct.

The report to council stated that the liaison committee overseeing the work of both the PICs and disciplinary panels had examined “detailed information” on the issue during a meeting in November.

‘New timeframe’

The panel was said to have “discussed a new KPI (key performance indicator) timeframe in light of the data provided and the steps involved in the process”, and deemed six months to be suitable.

The report added that a review of the cases that opened between October 2023 and May 2024 showed the monthly proportion that would have met the new KPI ranged between 84% and 94%. However, the equivalent figure for June fell to 75% – a shift the report attributed to the number of cases starting in that month being “markedly lower” than others.

The meeting was also told that the college was performing better than other regulators. But Mr Wilkinson said it had previously been achieving a 90% decision rate on such cases within four months, adding: “Historically, we were doing better than we are now.”

Reduce ‘backlog’

He argued the liaison system had initially been set up to reduce the “backlog” in cases and asked what point would have to be reached for the council to reconsider the issue.

Although she conceded the subject could be re-examined, college chief executive Lizzie Lockett rejected the backlog claim, saying the protocol had been established at a time when council members still sat on disciplinary panels.

She insisted the college recognised the “trauma” of being the subject of a disciplinary process and said it was seeking to manage a system officials knew was difficult for both respondents and complainants alike.

‘Robust process’

But she also maintained the time taken to reach decisions was not the only measurement of success and speed of resolution could not be prioritised over ensuring a “robust process”, warning that broader current scrutiny of the sector was making the process even more challenging.

She said: “They’re far more complicated than they ever were and I think other regulators would agree with that, not helped by the CMA.”

Another council member, Olivia Cook, also praised the support that the college facilitates for vets and nurses who are the subject of disciplinary procedures.

But she cautioned the organisation could not “rest on our laurels”, adding: “We have got to go on doing better.”