Doctor reinstated after suspension

Wigan Infirmary
Wigan Infirmary
Share this article

A FORMER Wigan Infirmary doctor who was suspended from the medical register after not returning £35,000 paid to him by mistake by an NHS trust has been reinstated.

Dr Ammar Haydar was suspended from the General Medical Council’s register for a year after a panel found he was guilty of serious misconduct in relation to several accusations meaning his fitness to practice was impaired.

Amongst the allegations found proven by the GMC was that Haydar was dismissed from his part-time role in the Occupational Health Department at Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust after lying about investigations into previous posts he held with other trusts.

Haydar failed to disclose to WWL that he had been dismissed from Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust after he was found guilty of gross misconduct.

He also knowingly ignored letters from NHS Manchester about the overpayment in his salary but did not pay it back.

An incident where he was found to have carried out an indequate consultation in 2009 and then requested a copies of a patient’s medical notes without any clinical need were both considered serious misconduct in their own right.

Haydar appeared again before a GMC panel earlier in November for a review hearing into his suspension.

A report into the hearing read: “The panel in May 2014 determined to suspend your name from the Medical Register for a period of 12 months.

“The panel felt that this period would reflect the seriousness of your misconduct, safeguard the public interest and allow you to engage in a period of reflection and build on your insight.”

GMC representation Janet Ironfield argued that Haydar’s fitness to practise remains impaired by reason of misconduct and he had failed to demonstrate that he had gained an appropriate level of insight.

But Haydar requested the panel lift the suspension without restrictions so that he could return to waork as soon as possibel but the panel felt to take no action would not be appropriate.

The report read: “The Panel determined that in view of the concerns it has regarding there being no objective evidence as to how you have addressed the behavioural and conduct matters identified by the previous panel and your limited insight into the case involving Patient A.

“This taken together with the fact that you have not been in clinical practice for five years or more and the panel’s findings in relation to your continuing professional development, it would not be appropriate to conclude the matter by taking no action and allowing you to return to unrestricted practice.”

The panel lifted Haydar’s suspension but imposed conditions on him returning to work, including that he allow the GMC to exchange information with any person involved in monitoring your compliance with his conditions and be directly supervised in all posts by a clinical supervisor.

The panel concluded: “Having considered all the matters before it the panel has determined that imposing conditions on your registration is the appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case.”