Fylde coast doctor banned from working in medicine for eight months after conviction

Dr Kevin Ross dodged prison for lying about his working hours during a bankruptcy claim, but has now been stripped of his ability to work in medicine following a disciplinary hearing.

He was found guilty last year of making a false statement and, then aged 45 and living in Station Road, St Annes, was handed a three-month suspended jail term and ordered to pay £5,000 costs within a year.

The family doctor had signed a record of an interview declaring he worked eight hours a week, earning around £800, and said it was the minimum required to maintain his professional status, Preston's Sessions House Court was told.

Despite claiming the information was "true to the best of his knowledge and belief", records showed he worked 124 hours one month and 176 another, the court was also told.

A panel from the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) launched a three-day hearing in Manchester earlier this week, and was due to "inquire into the allegation" that Dr Ross was convicted, documents showed.

But the facts were "admitted and found proved" prior to it starting, papers released to the media showed.

The panel could have imposed conditions that restrict Dr Ross's ability to practise medicine, suspended him for up to a year, or struck him off the register entirely.

It could also have decided to take no further action.

"The tribunal has determined to imposed an 8-month period of suspension on the doctor’s registration," a spokeswoman for the MPTS said today.

Dr Ross, who qualified at the University of Nottingham in 1997, denied the charge of knowingly and wilfully making a false declaration but did not give evidence at his trial.

There are “real obligations” placed on those declaring bankruptcy and a duty to be “full and frank” so official receivers can make proper enquiries and properly scrutinise the information so the circumstances can be properly understood, the court heard.

Prosecutor Louise Cowan said Dr Ross’s statement was “palpably untrue”.

She said: "Kevin Ross is a doctor. He must understand the importance of the careful analysis of documents and he had signed the note following the interview as a true and accurate record of that interview.

"He knew the significance of that statement. He was given time to consider, correct it, amend it - but he has signed it as being true and accurate."

Defending, Bruce Stuart said: "This case is based on a complete misconception of what the law actually is."

He suggested an insolvency worker who gave evidence in the trial was not credible because she didn't have a clear recollection of his interview.