Oxon Vet Restored to RCVS Register After "Salutary" Experience

In November 2007, the Committee decided that Mr John Williams, of the
Avonvale Veterinary Practice in Ratley, near Banbury, should have his name
removed from the RCVS Register, having found him guilty of disgraceful
professional conduct. Mr Williams had admitted signing export health
certificates for three horses in October 2006 to state that they had received
negative test results for the contagious equine metritis organism, before
these results were actually available.

At the time, Mr Williams was working in his capacity as an Official
Veterinarian (OV) for DEFRA and he had previously been suspended from his
official duties on three separate occasions, on the basis of export
certification irregularities. It was accepted that Mr Williams had not been
dishonest, but his approach to certification was described by the
Disciplinary Committee as "either irresponsible or cavalier or both".

In December 2007, Mr Williams appealed against this decision to the Privy
Council but this was dismissed at a Hearing the following June. He was then
removed from the Register in July 2008.

When the Committee met on Monday to consider Mr Williams' application,
they heard oral and written supporting evidence from veterinary surgeons and
equine clients, and oral evidence from Mr Williams himself. The Committee was
satisfied that Mr Williams accepted its previous findings and fully
understood their seriousness. He described his removal from the Register as a
"salutary experience" which had been highly significant for him and his
family, both financially and emotionally.

The Committee stated: "Although the decision of the Committee to remove
[Mr Williams] from the Register sent a clear message to the profession of the
importance of certification, it should be emphasised that his removal was the
consequence of his actions in signing certificates which he could not verify.
This followed three previous occasions on which he had similarly signed
certificates when he should not have done so."

However, the Committee was satisfied that Mr Williams would not in future
sign certificates when he should not do so, even under severe client
pressure. It was impressed with the continuing professional development he
had undertaken whilst off the Register and noted that no questions had been
raised over his conduct during this time.

It concluded that Mr Williams fully understood the importance of accurate
certification and that restoring his name to the Register therefore posed no
risk to animal welfare. Neither the public nor the profession would benefit
from Mr Williams staying off the Register for a further period.

Alison Bruce, Disciplinary Committee Chairman, said: "We would like to
make it clear that we always find it distressing to remove clinically
competent veterinary surgeons from the Register because of an irresponsible
and cavalier attitude towards certification. This would not be necessary if
veterinary surgeons were to follow the Twelve Principles of Certification
annexed to the RCVS Guide to Professional Conduct."

The Committee then approved Mr Williams' application and directed that
his name should be restored to the Register.

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. The RCVS is the regulatory body for veterinary surgeons in the UK and
deals with issues of professional misconduct, maintaining the register of
veterinary surgeons eligible to practise in the UK and assuring standards of
veterinary education.

2. RCVS disciplinary powers are exercised through the Preliminary
Investigation and Disciplinary Committees, established in accordance with
Schedule 2 to the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 (the 1966 Act). The RCVS has
authority to deal with three types of case:

a) Fraudulent registration b) Criminal convictions c) Allegations of
disgraceful professional conduct

3. The Disciplinary Committee is a constituted judicial tribunal under
the 1966 Act and follows rules of evidence similar to those used in a court
of law.

4. The burden of proving an allegation falls upon the RCVS, and the RCVS
must prove to the standard that the Committee is sure.

5. A respondent veterinary surgeon may appeal a Disciplinary Committee
decision to the Privy Council within 28 days of the date of the decision. If
no appeal is received, the Committee's judgment takes effect after this
period.

6. Further information, including the initial Inquiry into Mr Williams,
his appeal to the Privy Council and the DC's latest findings, can be viewed
via http://www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary.

Contact details:

    Ian Holloway
    Senior Communications Officer
    Belgravia House
    62-64 Horseferry Road
    London
    SW1P 2AF
    Tel: +44(0)20-7202-0727
    Fax: +44(0)20-7202-0740
    i.holloway@rcvs.org.uk

Contact details: Ian Holloway, Senior Communications Officer, Belgravia House,
62-64 Horseferry Road, London, SW1P 2AF, Tel: +44(0)20-7202-0727, Fax:
+44(0)20-7202-0740, i.holloway@rcvs.org.uk

For full details on (MJHN) MJHN. (MJHN) has Short Term PowerRatings at TradingMarkets. Details on (MJHN) Short Term PowerRatings is available at This Link.