HASTINGS PARAMEDIC WHO WORKED WHILE SICK CAUTIONED

The HPC's Conduct and Competence Committee heard that Trevor Izzard-Wicks had worked at the Stadium on four days while claiming sick pay and benefits and had put riders "at risk" by doing so when he was unfit to carry out the task.

He had also signed statements confirming he had not worked three times whilst claiming sick pay, all between April and May 2004, the Committee was told.

Philip Major, a NHS Local Counter-Fraud Specialist, told the hearing that he became aware that Mr Izzard-Wicks had been working at Arlington Speedway while he was signed off sick from his employment with Sussex Ambulance Service NHS Trust, suffering a suspected dislocated collarbone.

Investigations revealed that he had been on sick leave from 31 March 2004 but had been seen dressed as a paramedic outside his home on 3 April 2004.

It was also confirmed by the Speedway promoter that he had worked at Arlington Speedway on four dates in April 2004.

Officials had gone to the speedway on 3 April to investigate whether the information was correct and saw Mr Izzard-Wicks wearing a dark coat over what looked like green uniform trousers. He was not wearing a sling to support his arm.

Mr Izzard-Wicks was found guilty of gross misconduct by Sussex Ambulance Service Trust and his employment was terminated.

Giving evidence, Mr Izzard-Wicks said he was signed off work for nine weeks following a fall from his motorbike on 30th March 2004.

He told the committee he had gone to the Arlington Speedway, where he had worked at race meetings since 2002, to return his bags of equipment.

However, because the speedway could not operate without a paramedic, he had allowed himself to be persuaded to continue to act as Chief Medical Officer.

He regarded himself as acting in primarily an advisory role but he accepted that he would not have been able to provide effective treatment to any injured riders because of his own injury. There were no injuries suffered at any of the meetings held on the four days he worked.

In its findings, which have just been published, the committee said that, having sustained an injury to his shoulder on 30 March 2004, Mr Izzard-Wicks was told he should "refrain from work" from 5 April 2004 for a total of nine weeks. As a result, it concluded, he was unfit to work.

They expressed "concern" that, in his role as Chief Medical Officer, Mr Izzard-Wicks was the principal healthcare professional in attendance at the Speedway on those four dates.

"If there had been an accident, Mr Izzard-Wicks would have been looked to, to provide immediate assistance in accordance with the standards expected of a registered paramedic," it said.

"However, given that Mr Izzard-Wicks had been advised to refrain from work and that he had self-certified that he was unfit to carry out the normal duties of his employment as a paramedic, the panel was concerned that Mr Izzard-Wicks apparently took the view that the same considerations did not extend to carrying out the duties of a paramedic at the speedway.

"That being the case, it followed that Mr Izzard-Wicks' inability to function fully as a paramedic put anyone injured at the speedway at risk."

Imposing the caution, the panel said : "The allegations against him demonstrate a question about his integrity and judgement.

"He had given misleading answers to questions put to him by officers of SAST about his role at Arlington Speedway and at that time, he appeared to have changed his story to fit the circumstances as they unfolded.

"He had signed certificates that he had not been working when in fact he had been working, albeit in an occasional part-time job which had been disclosed previously to his employers.

"The panel accepted that Mr Izzard-Wicks had viewed his work as being advisory but that he had accepted that, had he been called upon to carry out his duties as a paramedic, he might not have been adequately fit to do so."

Accepting that "undue pressure" had been put on him by the management at Arlington Speedway to act as Chief Medical Officer in order to avoid race meetings being cancelled, the panel noted Mr Izzard-Wicks' acknowledgement of a serious error of judgement on his part in this regard.

It said that Mr Izzard-Wicks "fully accepts responsibility for his conduct and its consequences and has demonstrated insight into the nature of what he had done".

It continued: "He has expressed his remorse for what had happened and for the effect which his actions have had on his professional work, his family and his life in general.

"The panel was impressed by his genuine remorse and accepted that this was likely to have been an isolated lapse, and also took into account the fact that he had had admitted the misconduct and that that no one had suffered as a consequence of his actions."