Independent news and professional analysis for SAS and locally employed doctors
SASSAS Doctors ReviewNews · Analysis · Professional perspectiveSearch
Browser-readable workbook

Local Investigation and Hearing Workbook

HTML edition updated 9 September 2026. This is an educational planning aid, not an official application form or individual advice.

Download the print-layout PDF · Accessibility information

Your entries stay in this open page.

Use brief, non-identifiable notes only. Do not enter patient, colleague, employer-confidential, legal-case or personal financial details. Nothing entered here is sent to the publication or saved automatically. Closing or reloading the page clears entries. Use a trusted device and print only material you can store safely.

GMC & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION | PRACTICAL WORKBOOK

Local Investigation and Hearing Workbook

Map allegations, governing policy, evidence, interim controls and preparation for an employer meeting or hearing.

What this resource contains

Six structured preparation stages

Private writing space and review prompts

Process, deadline and confidentiality safeguards

Important

Independent general guidance. It does not replace clinical, employment, regulatory, immigration or legal advice. Do not include patient-identifiable or unnecessary colleague-identifiable information in worksheets.

Author: Dr N Aziz

Published and reviewed: 7 September 2026

Before you write

Use this on a trusted device or paper copy. Record references rather than copying patient-identifiable or privileged material. Nothing in this workbook is sent to SAS Doctors Review.

1. Procedural map

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Employer and employing entity

Policy and national framework

Investigation, capability, conduct, grievance or other route

Decision-maker and investigator

My status and representation rights

2. Allegation table

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Exact allegation

Date or period

Standard or rule said to apply

Evidence identified

Facts accepted, disputed or not known

3. Interim action

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Restriction or exclusion wording

Purpose and review date

Pay, access and communication arrangements

Impact on other work or revalidation

Challenge or review route advised

4. Evidence and witnesses

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Contemporaneous sources

Relevant context

Potential witness and scope

Missing or inaccessible material

Disclosure and confidentiality issue

5. Meeting preparation

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Questions likely to be asked

Concise evidence-based answer

Points requiring clarification

Document references

Questions for the panel or manager

6. Outcome and review

Complete only what is relevant. Use neutral, factual language and confirm process-specific advice.

Written reasons requested

Findings distinguished from recommendations

Action plan or sanction

Appeal deadline

Effect on GMC, appraisal or health support

Action summary

What must happen today?

Which adviser will I contact, for which process?

Which restrictions and deadlines have been independently confirmed?

Do not let one route obscure another

An internal grievance or appeal does not normally stop an external legal deadline. A regulatory adviser does not automatically represent an employment claim, and a wellbeing service does not provide legal advice.

Sources and disclaimer

Use the current GMC, MPTS, national NHS, Acas or Labour Relations Agency source and the correct local policy before acting. Processes, time limits and service eligibility change.

GMC: how concerns are investigated

MPTS: hearings and decisions

Acas: current tribunal time limits

Independent general education

This workbook does not calculate a deadline, assess credibility, predict a regulatory outcome or replace individual legal, employment, regulatory or clinical advice.