- About us
- Approved courses
- Concerns & complaints
- SignVideo VRS
21st May 2019
|Professional Discipline||Sign Language Interpreter|
|Date Complaint Received||21.05.2019|
|Date Complaint Closed||15.10.2020|
|Origin of Complaint||Registered Sign Language Interpreter|
|Registered or Trainee||Registered|
|Nature of Complaint||Complainant raised concerns around the Registrant's conduct during an assignment running over several weeks. Allegations included that the Registrant's lack of social skills made team working difficult and created a hostile environment, that the Registrant was aggressive, unprofessional and made comments that the Complainant perceived as a threat, that the Registrant refused to communicate with the Complainant, interrupted the Complainant during active interpretation, became hostile when corrected and refused to make eye contact or speak to the Complainant. In addition, allegations were made that the Registrant had shown a pattern of behaviour which the Complainant felt was victimisation and bullying.|
|Summary||Investigation conducted into potential breach of Section 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2, 6.1, 6.2, 7.2 and 7.3 of NRCPD's Code of Conduct.
Numerous witness statements, character references and extensive supporting documentation was provided by both the Complainant and Registrant during the investigation. This resulted in additional enquiries being undertaken by NRCPD and delays in progressing the investigation.
Case Examiners decided based on the evidence provided, that there was a realistic prospect of finding an impairment of fitness to practice (of Code 6.1 and 7.3), but that it was not in the public interest to refer the case to a Complaints Committee.
The Case Examiners decided in this case, that a warning be given regarding future conduct or performance and that this remained on the Registrants record for a period of one year.
The Case Examiners provided advice and recommendations within the warning, including responses to any future concerns about the Registrants' behaviour and treating such concerns with respect, revisiting the Code of Conduct around professional conduct when co-working, and a CPD requirement around co-working.
Further comments were made by the Case Examiners, including that the behaviour of the Registrant had caused a considerable amount of stress and upset to the Complainant and that the Registrants' response revealed an inability to be a reflective practitioner whilst working with others.
PLEASE NOTE - this is a summary only, not an exhaustive or comprehensive outline of the allegations or Case Examiner decision.