- About us
- Approved courses
- Concerns & complaints
- SignVideo VRS
12th Nov 2019
|Professional Discipline||Sign Language Interpreter|
|Date Complaint Received||12.11.2019|
|Date Complaint Closed||03.03.2020|
|Origin of Complaint||Service user|
|Registered or Trainee||Registered|
|Nature of Complaint||Complainant raised concerns around interpreting provision provided during a networking conference. It was alleged that the Registrant was unable to voice over effectively, lacked understanding, that vocabulary in interpreting was poor and many signs were out of context. Furthermore, the Complainant alleged that inappropriate conversations were initiated by the Registrant, and comments were made by the Registrant, which the Complainant felt were inappropriate. The Complainant stated that as a result, they found themselves relying more on the secondary Sign Language Interpreter present.
Witness statements were obtained by a third-party colleague of the Complainant present during the networking conference, along with the co-working Sign Language Interpreter.
|Summary||Investigation conducted into potential breach of Sections 3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4, 4.1, 6 and 6.1 of NRCPD's Code of Conduct.|
|Outcome||Case Examiners decided based on the evidence provided, that there was not a realistic prospect of finding an impairment of fitness to practice, and that it was not in the public interest to refer the case to a Complaints Committee.
The Case Examiners stated that significance should be given to the co-worker's statement, in which it was stated that the co-worker did not witness or experience any practice that gave rise for concern. The Case Examiners state that the evidence suggested effective co-working and support. Furthermore, the Case Examiners state that the Registrant exhausted all steps in preparing for the assignment, by requesting preparation materials and meeting with the co-worker prior to, and after the assignment. Case closed.