Stating what may be the best thing to do and constructing an arbitrary moral code backed by legislation that says this is what yu must do are two very different things. The whole point of morality is that it comes from conscience not from enforced duty.
You might say that this is an ethical argument not moral and ethics do come under duty.
Well then that would oblige the one who sets the standard to at least be equal to that standard, clearly the HCPC has deceived both the public and and its registrants and have not only not owned up to the mistake (assuming it was a mistake, which seems unlikely) but actively engaged in covering up their mistakes.
Further, as I pointed out earlier, it is a legal precedent that one has the right not to say anything or say anything that might be self incriminating. It seems that Mr Guthrie and the HCPC have the view that they are a higher authority and can rewrite legal precedent.
On top of that you have the implications that apply to insurance - if you go around admitting,
without consideration of the whole case and circumstances, that 'it was my fault' then its likely the insurance company will not pay out or support you in a case.
Here's some quotes giving legal advice about not admitting liability
"Immediately after the accident, the best thing you can do is gather as much information as possible. While it may be obvious who is at fault, you will need to provide your insurance company with clear evidence if you want their support."
Even if you feel that you were responsible for the accident, you shouldn?t make an admission at the scene. A driver is not legally obliged to admit that they are liable, so make sure you?re not pressured into doing so, and avoid pressuring other drivers into doing so even if you feel they are at fault.
"Most car insurers will advise you not to admit liability at the scene as it could invalidate the policy. Even if you think it is the right thing to do, it?s still better to let the police investigators and insurance companies consider all the evidence first to decide who was at fault and take an appropriate course of action."
you can't go around willy nilly admitting liability until you and the proper authorities have considered all the evidence otherwise you circumvent all the correct procedure and proceed straight to jail - do not pass go, do not collect ?200 - as Mark found out to his cost. (and I know Mark didn't go to jail but the principle is the same, once you've admitted liability it's hard to withdraw undamaged.)
I would say that it is probably illegal to pressure someone into admitting liability (even when it is their fault) such as this HCPC legislation tries to do i.e. it enforces you to admit liability, which is contrary to legal precedent.
Regards Dave
Click to expand...