Utter folly.........

The GSCC have had another bashing from the Care Standards Tribunal (CST) in this case: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1092/ND%20Final%20Approved%20draft%20_3_.pdf

This is very similar to an earlier case where, in Wilt’s opinion, the GSCC are using the suspension procedure used by the Preliminary Proceedings Committee (PPC) to cover for delays in their investigation teams. Although the CST have not expressed in that way it is fairly obvious what message they are sending to the GSCC – get your act together.

Community Care reported on the outcome of the GSCC final hearing of its Conduct Committee here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/08/12/115083/Cocaine-user-allowed-to-remain-on-social-care-register.htm although they appear not have linked it to the CST finding (link above). Community Care appear not to report on CST hearings, or at least not routinely – here at Regulator Watch (http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/) we do.

In essence the CST finding that issuing a suspension whilst investigations were made, in this case, was perverse is supported by the GSCC Conduct Committee who issued the Registrant with a two year admonishment – a low level disposal.

So what was the miraculous change that caused the GSCC at one time to suspend the social worker and then issue an admonishment? Might it be they fucked up again at the PPC?

This social worker was represented (at the CST) by the Celtic Knot law firm based in Birmingham http://www.celticknot.org.uk/ and Allan Norman has a blog here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=Allan%20Norman&blog_id=276

And tweets here: http://twitter.com/CelticKnotTweet

We still think he needs a ‘proper’ hair cut – only joking!

Allan Norman and a former student Registrant was not so lucky in this CST appeal: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1091/sass2%20decision.pdf

This is the first time it seems that a former Registrant has complained that the GSCC did not go through the conduct process and arrive at the process – the man must be on something!

This is a most mind boggling and stupid case to bring before the CST. The arguments for bringing it presented by Norman were very carefully constructed and eloquent but nonetheless, in Wilt’s opinion, utter fucking folly.

This is a must read case – I laughed so much I fell of my chair.

Wilt