The Alliance of Private Sector Chiropody & Podiatry Practitioners

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

{ADMIN NOTE: Part of this message has been removed}

It states on the Companies House website (Company's register with Companies House) that on the 19th June 2008 the ALLIANCE OF PRIVATE SECTOR PRACTITIONERS LIMITED changed their name to THE ALLIANCE OF PRIVATE SECTOR CHIROPODY & PODIATRY PRACTITIONERS LIMITED.

Does this mean that the Foot Health Practitioners completing a course at that college are been registered under the name THE ALLIANCE OF PRIVATE SECTOR CHIROPODY & PODIATRY PRACTITIONERS LIMITED. If so, does anyone know if this allowed, afterall the title Podiatrists/ Chiropodists are protected by law and regulated by the HCPC?

Companies House show that both names of the business are active.

I'm confused:wacko:

 

This poster is now the subject of a formal complaint to the HCPC.

 

Why ?

This poster is asking a perfectly reasonable question and the information quoted is in the public domain

regards

Catfoot

 

You will notice that part of the original post has been removed.

In any case the OP could simply have called the HPC at 9.00am this morning to ask their question. Instead they chose to ask on an open international forum - hmmmmmm.

I'm watching this thread with my Mods hat on. Any nonsense and it will be closed.

 

Out of interest, to whom does one address a formal complaint to regarding those not registered with the HPC?

 

Whoever stipulates their Code of Conduct, usually their professional/training body. If they do not belong to a prof body then a personal claim for misconduct/unprofessional behaviour can be made against their insurance. Apparently.

 

Or the person themselves if not insured.

 

Aww, sheesh, really?

We don't know what was removed but was it really so bad that it deserves an HPC complaint all by itself? Was it personnally offensive? Slanderous?

I can't help thinking that this whole HPC reporting thing is in danger of getting out of hand. I have a question Johnpod. Why did you feel the need to tell the world that a complaint had been made about the post, so quickly and so very publically?

Because whatever the was there before what is left there now is a perfectly reasonable and relevant concern, followed by a rather instant announcement of formal proceeding.

Is this about protection of the public and maintainance of professional standards or is it about using the HPC to protect business interests?

 

Do you have any vested interest in the Alliance, David?

 

Absolutely not. Nor in SMAE/BCPA. I see my name has now been removed from the Ed Committee of the SMAE magazine.

 

See my post no 4 Rob.
This deserves to be on TFS rather than Pod Arena.

I have no axe to grind regarding the Alliance, or protection of same. But at the same time I don't like someone bashing a legitimate UK professional body under the guise of protecting the public.
That's what the original post seems to be to me.

 

This raises an interesting set of questions: if we start a company, lets call it "podiatrists r us" and have two names on the company register neither of which are registered as podiatrists with the HPC, then there would appear to be a case of violation of using the term "podiatrist". If one of the names listed was on the HPC register as a podiatrist would this then be acceptable? What if neither of the people on the company register were podiatrists, but the company employed HPC registered podiatrists? What if the company's customers were HPC registered podiatrists?

 

Thats fair comment and I wasn't for a moment suggesting you did David. You know I wouldn't do that.

But this is a discussion forum. We hear LOTS of stuff we don't like, and we usually manage to discuss it, criticise it, even flame it without recourse to the HPC!! Personal attacks beyond a certain threshold are one thing. Negative opinions of a business are quite another. Two wrongs don't make a right...

 

Anyone can own a company employing registered professionals, without being a professional themselves. It's only an offence to use a protected title when not entitled to.
eg. You can set up the 'Goodbody Medical Practice' and run it as a business employing Registered Medical Practitioners.

 

Of course, and I agree that threatening to involve the HPC in this case is a little over the top.

I see this topic is now being discussed by at least one person (could be two - who knows?) on TFS. It may not degenerate into the usual UK podopolitical discussion on here after all.....

 

DavidH,
You said

I agree, and I am wondering what the substance of the complaint would be as the OP hasn't posted any damaging information, only information that is freely available to anyone. Such a complaint IMO is a total waste of registrants money and the HPC's time

You also said

which is also, IMO, also OTT as it effectively stifles any meaningful discussion.

Rosherville has very succintly answered the OP's question so I trust everyone is now happy?

regards

Catfoot

PS I thought you never visited TFS DavidH ???

 

What about the revere situation, I as a registered podiatrist set up a company and call it "podiatry". The signage on the clinic says "podiatry" but then I have non-registered clinicians working for me?

 

Why on earth would you think that?

I notice the OP hasn't been back.........

 

SS,
I checked this out with the HPC some time ago.

As long as there is one HPC registered Chiropodist/Podiatrist working on the premises it can be called "Joe Blogg's Podiatry Clinic".

If the owner has non-regulated clinicians (as well as regulated) providing footcare services then it must be made very clear to potential clients what level of service they are purchasing and from whom, but that is another issue.

regards

Catfoot

 

That is where it becomes a nonsense. I know of three individuals who have been struck off the HPC register and who continue to practise and advertise under an assortment of titles - professional foot care services, chiropodologist, podologist, etc. HPC registration is no indication of clinical proficiency of course, but it is hardly surprising that people get confused when it comes to our profession.

 

I'm not surprised! Came for a discussion, left with an hpc complaint!! Or at least the threat of one.

 

`What about the reverse situation, I as a registered podiatrist set up a company and call it "podiatry". The signage on the clinic says "podiatry" but then I have non-registered clinicians working for me` ?

That`s not a reversed situation. However, provided your unregistered are not claiming to be otherwise, there`s nothing wrong; as you could be providing 'podiatry'.

There are NHS Chiropody departments sending out unregistered on DOMs, should they be called to account ?

 

I think they should be. They could easily give the option/refer/recommend the services of their regulated colleagues in private practice for housebound pts.....igs:

 

Good point Bel.

 

Right, well we have subsequently discovered that it is not necessary to have training to be a Foot Health Practitioner because the title is not protected by law and their profession is not regulated.

Wonder how much money those private institutions training Foot Health Practitioners must be making .... I forgot I can check up on Companies House website.



.

 

Well, the registered Directors of The SMAE Institute (according to Companies House) are not Podiatrists, (ran the names through the HCPC and they did not come up) yet the SMAE Institute have at least one HCPC Podiatrist training the Foot Health Practitioners at the SMAE Institute. (referring to the content of the SMAE website)

If that is of any help.:bash:

 

Well Lovefeet, you must have information that I don't have, as according to my search of the Companies House records and also here,


http://companycheck.co.uk/company/02690497


the SMAE Institute is no longer trading under that name. Can I ask where you obtained your information from?

In any event it is all quite legal.

regards

Catfoot

 

Hi Catfoot,

Click on the Companies House website, the click on the Access Webcheck icon (its bright yellow). Now type in the the company name - The SMAE Insitutute. It will then come up with loads of companies names, and will highlight the The SMAE Institute. Click on the company number registered with the SMAE Insitute (02690497). It states the company is dormant, but not dissolved and has not had its name changed. Now click on the icon half way along the page (its bright yellow), it states "order informtion on this company" click on that icon. The company is still active and stuff was done on it, including updating the Directors details, in March 2012. However, there is no mention of a name change.


Yes, I am sure it is quite, legal except the change of company name is not yet registered iwth Companies House.

Catfoot, do you know what the new name is for The SMAE Institute?

Thank you

 

Hi Catfoot,

One of the Directors for The SMAE Institute is also is the registered accouting firm for The SMAE Institute (refer to the SMAE address on Companies House), which states that on accounting firm website that they have two clients - The SMAE Institute and a residential care home. The other Director of the SMAE Institue is also the Director of the Residential Home. The accounting firm person is also the Director of a compnay for supplies of Podiatry stuff. This same Director (of accounting firm) is also the Director for a non-life insurance brokerage based in Maidenhead.

As mentioned before this information is freely available on the interenet (public domain).

Hope this helps you.

 

Sorry Lovefeet,
I have no idea what name the SMAE Institute is now trading under

regards

Catfoot

 

Lovefeet,

Could I ask you to stick to topic please?

SMAE have nothing to do with the Alliance. Perhaps you should approach SMAE direct if you want information about them?

 

David, my apologies...........I thought I could mention the SMAE or Training4Feet Ltd (they a "branch" of SMAE) because according to The Alliance, if foot health practitioners completed an approved Foot Health Practitioner course, then they could become full members of The Alliance. So I had assumed I could mention The SMAE under this topic.

But now that I am on the subject of The Alliance....Did you know that according to Companies House, one of the Directors of The School of Foot Health Practitioners is also the Director of The Alliance...The other Director of the The School of Foot Health Practitioners is the President. Presidents of companies are elected and not registered with the Companies House....:dizzy:

Let me know if there is anything else I must look into.....

 

David,,,,just want to say that I was not aiming to be cheeky when I posted my last post, if it comes over like that.....I was just trying to get my point across.

Hope you enjoyed your luch and your wine..:drinks

 

What's your point? You join Pod Arena and post a series of infantile messages that frankly have been debated tirelessly for the past 40 years. Nothing has changed. The evidence.is that nothing will as long as you take the same approach. The only way it does is to get functional closure which not only inhibits those who you clearly have a problem with - but also those who are struck off from the register and who pose a real threat to the public in continuing to practise under a different name. Nothing you have written or suggested has been constructive or positive. Like many of the other anonymous contributors who take a similar line all your pointless whinging will secure nothing except self gratification which is fine - but do us all a favour and change the batteries and turn off the PC because it's really quite boringly repetitive.

 

Mark,
Have I just stumbled into a hardware store, because I can see some pots and kettles here?

Has it never occurred to you that many of us are also sick of your continual pie-in-the-sky half-baked notions about "uniting the profession" under a "general podiatry council"? igs:

You have just pilliored Lovefeet for your own similar actions.


Catfoot (ready for catnap)

 

And your continual speaking on behalf of the masses is becoming more than irksome, IMO.

 

[/FONT]Hi Blinda and Mark,

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Everyone also has a choice of what they want to read.

I am sorry if my postings do not suit your type of reading material. However, I do feel that there are Podiatrists out there who would want to read the information and be a little more informed (if they are not already).

CatFoot, it is nice to know there is a HCPC Podiatrist out there who is supportive of the HCPC registration, hope you enjoyed your catnap

 

Lovefeet, I have no idea why you addressed me. I have not commented upon nor replied to any of your posts.

 

Sorry BLinda....

So just to summarize so far....

Foot Health Practitioners may join The Alliance as full members, but it is not necessary because the title Foot Health Practitioner is not protected by law. This means that you do not even have to undertake any form of training to be a Foot Health Practitioner.

Foot Health Practitoners are not trained by the NHS and the courses are not recognised by the NHS.

Private businessmen/ women (with their private dosh) are the driving force behind the training of Foot Health Practitioners, etc.

.....what next......:empathy: