A doctor who had his name erased from the medical register for deficient professional performance has had an application to restore his licence refused by a Medical Practitioner’s Tribunal.

Dr Syed Shah, who practised in Blackburn, was struck off the register in September 2016.

Dr Shah qualified in 2002 and at the time of the events that led to his erasure he was undertaking his foundation year two training at East Lancashire Hospital NHS Trust.

He was referred to the General Medical Council by the Trust on August 1, 2011, due to concerns that, in his training programme, he had not completed the General Practice or Psychiatry placement, nor had he obtained a clinical supervisor’s report from General Surgery.

A decision was made by the Foundation Programme Directors at the Trust not to sign Dr Shah off for his foundation year, and they raised the following concerns about him:

  • Lack of satisfactory completion of any placement evidenced by the clinical supervisors’ report.
  • Deteriorating 360-degree appraisal forms over the year.
  • Failure to complete a clinical audit.
  • More than one month off on sick leave.
  • Issue of a warning following his late return from a holiday after being told not to take holidays at the start of his psychiatry placement.

The also found that while being followed by assessors, he referred to female patients as ‘sweetheart’ and also used jargon when trying to give answers.

Concerns were raised over his ability to provide and arrange treatment, miscalculating the amount of paracetamol an overdosed patient had taken.

The GMC wrote to Dr Shah on December 20, 2011, to inform him the registrar had determined an assessment of his professional performance was required.

He underwent an assessment on June 26, 2012, where his professional performance was found to be unacceptable.

At a tribunal in 2014, the panel determined his performance was deficient in many of the core areas of clinical practice and the standard of his work was found to be unacceptable in relation to the assessment and treatment of patients and the maintenance of Good Medical Practice dated 2013.

The panel also found the quality of his communication with patients was a cause for concern and it was determined Dr Shah’s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of his deficient professional performance.

As a result, conditions were imposed on his registration for a period of two years, including the requirement for his day to day work to be closely supervised.

A review in 2016 found he’d breached his conditions and determined it was necessary to impose an immediate order of suspension Dr Shah’s registration.

After this, Dr Shah went to work in Pakistan, however, following an application to restore his licence in 2022, a further tribunal panel found because he’d been out of practice in the UK for several years, he lacked the skills to enable him to return to work and practice as a doctor safely.

There was also no evidence provided to show the panel just what kind of work he had been doing, or to support any relevant training.

The report read: “Just because Dr Shah was working at consultant level and practising in Pakistan now does not relieve him of the obligation to provide sufficiently detailed evidence to reassure the tribunal he could safely practice medicine in the UK without restriction, and doing so would be in accordance with the overriding objective.”

Dr Shah submitted his fitness to practise was no longer impaired and he should restored onto the medical register, saying he was no longer the same person as 10 years ago.

However, the tribunal was of the view Dr Shah had not provided sufficient objective evidence to support that he had gained significant experience and knowledge in the medical field.

The report read: “His statement, witness statements and certificates provided, at best, very limited detail.”

The report also noted while Dr Shah had provided certificates of online courses he had completed, those equated to only 23 hours of online learning, 17 hours of which was completed over a period of two days.

The 23 hours had been completed in 12 months (2020/2021) over a total of seven days.

The tribunal was of the view there was a risk to patient safety if Dr Shah was to be restored to the Medical Register.

The report went on: “Since Dr Shah was erased from the Medical Register, he has provided very limited evidence as to what he has been doing, and the tribunal have no objective evidence as to his medical skills or any objective assessment of his medical knowledge, which in 2012 was found to be below the minimum acceptable standard.

“The previous tribunal noted a period of deskilling prior to their last hearing and this hearing can only conclude that the deskilling has continued.

"The tribunal notes Dr Shah was asserting he was operating at a level which would not put patients at risk of harm, however Dr Shah had not evidenced this.

“The tribunal therefore determined that Dr Shah was not currently fit to practise without restriction.

“Accordingly, it determined Dr Shah’s name should not be restored to the Medical Register.”