The College says that its new WhatsApp channel will give alerts of upcoming RCVS events, feature articles, blogs, videos and podcasts.
To follow the RCVS on WhatsApp, you would normally click 'Updates' at the foot of the app and search for "Royal College of ...", but as of today, the channel is still so new, it is not yet listed in the search results.
Until it is, you can follow the RCVS on WhatsApp using this link: https://www.whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb78yutE50UlFWxf4h07
The College's relaunched podcast will start with a news segment before going on to a more in-depth discussion on a specific topic.
The first episode - ‘Research with Purpose: An RCVS Perspective’ - discusses the integral role of research in supporting veterinary professionals in the workplace, as well as busting some common workforce myths.
Listening to the podcast can also count towards your CPD requirements.
Ian Holloway, RCVS Director of Communications, said: “We understand how busy veterinary professionals are and how challenging it can be to stay up to date with College updates – particularly for those working in settings with limited access to emails.
"By reintroducing our podcast and launching a WhatsApp channel, we aim to make information more accessible, giving professionals and animal owners alike new and more flexible ways to engage with us in a way that suits them.”
The RCVS Honours and Awards programme recognises veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses and laypeople, both in the UK and overseas, who are carrying out exemplary work across the breadth of veterinary endeavour.
This year, there's a new Collaboration Award to recognise best practice in collaboration – whether that’s bringing together veterinary professionals working in different organisations or disparate fields, or veterinary professionals working with human medics, scientists, lawyers, or law enforcement to improve the health of people, animals and the environment.
In addition to the Collaboration Award, the RCVS awards for which nominations can be made this year are:
The deadline for submitting a nomination for the 2026 RCVS awards is Wednesday 7 January 2026.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/how-we-work/rcvs-honours-awards
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/forms/honours-and-awards-2026
Harper & Keele Veterinary School is a collaboration between Harper Adams University in Shropshire and Keele University in Staffordshire, and the BVetMS is the first UK veterinary degree to receive RCVS accreditation since the University of Surrey’s in 2019, as well as the first based in the West Midlands region.
Professor Tim Parkin FRCVS, RCVS President and Chair of the Education Committee (pictured right), said: “We would like to congratulate the staff at Harper & Keele Veterinary School for their hard work in ensuring that the school’s veterinary degree met our stringent accreditation standards, and welcome Harper & Keele graduates to their membership of the Royal College.
“Our accreditation panel found some very commendable aspects to the school, such as a commitment to inclusion and widening participation, how it supports students in finding non-clinical and clinical placements, and its use of innovation to support learning.
"We look forward to continuing to work with Harper & Keele over the coming months and years to ensure that high standards continue to be met.”
Professor Matt Jones MRCVS, an RCVS Council member and Head of School at Harper & Keele (pictured left), said: “We are delighted to receive the accreditation decision, which recognises our innovative approach to veterinary education and the huge commitment from our colleagues and partners that underpins it.
A Recognition Order to recognise the university’s degree will now be put before the Privy Council and, if it approves the Order, this will then be laid before Parliament.
If the Order is approved by both the Privy Council and Parliament, Harper & Keele’s degree will enter the cyclical RCVS accreditation process and be subject to annual monitoring.
RCVS President Tim Parkin said: “The aim of our brand review was to make it easier for people to understand our purpose and the unique role we have as a Royal College that regulates.
“Our new strapline – ‘Inspiring confidence in veterinary care’ – looks to maintain animal health and welfare at our heart and to connect veterinary professionals and animal owners to that purpose.
“I’m delighted to see our new livery now in place around this fantastic new building, along with a number of different artworks that illustrate the College’s heritage and impact on society, and reflect all those with whom, and on whose behalf, we work.”
The College’s new look is has a contemporary feel, but features a shield device based on the original coat of arms granted to the RCVS in 1844, a nod to its history and heritage.
Updates to its overall visual identity include new logos, iconography, typography and colours, although the main blue and gold will remain.
These elements will be used together but in different ways to denote the College’s different initiatives, in order to make it easier for people to recognise the College’s different services.
The full rollout will take place over the coming months, with the design approach also applied to the RCVS Academy later this year and RCVS Mind Matters in 2026.
Branding for the Practice Standards Scheme (PSS) will remain unchanged at least until after the current PSS review has concluded.
RCVS CEO Lizzie Lockett, said: “Our previous look and feel had been in place for over 14 years and had served us well, but the modern, largely digital, communications landscape has evolved significantly in that time.
“We now also undertake a wider range of activities and initiatives and, against the current backdrop of the Competition and Markets Authority review and potential legislative reform, we may need to adapt to further changes ahead.
“It is therefore essential that our visual identity remains fit for purpose now and flexible for the way we work, both now and in the future.”
PSS accredited practices are required to nominate an Appointed Senior Veterinary Surgeon, and under the RCVS Guidance, the College expects all veterinary service providers to do likewise.
Senior Veterinary Surgeons are responsible for making sure practice standards, policies and procedures are compliant with the Code and that legislation and guidance in areas such as veterinary medicines, consumer choice and professional autonomy are being met.
The new course outlines the roles and responsibilities of the appointed senior veterinary surgeon, with examples and scenarios drawn from the supporting guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct.
Clare Paget, RCVS Registrar and Director of Legal Services, said: “The role of appointed senior veterinary surgeon is an absolutely crucial one in the veterinary clinical practice setting.
"Having an appointed senior veterinary surgeon ensures that veterinary teams are working under the guidance and direction of a senior clinical figure and that there is someone who has overall accountability for standards at a practice.
"The appointed senior veterinary surgeon also has the important role of ensuring that the clinical judgement of the veterinary team is paramount over, for example, any commercial pressures.
“This course outlines the roles and responsibilities of the appointed senior veterinary surgeon and will help members of the vet team identify who they are within their organisation and, if relevant, recognise and implement the responsibilities of the role.”
The course takes around 30 minutes to complete, is free to access via the RCVS Academy, and counts towards annual continuing professional development (CPD) requirements for both veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses.
academy.rcvs.org.uk
Ms Hickman was charged with leaving three dogs, two of which had undergone surgery the day before and one of which was in for monitoring, unattended for more than three hours on 8th November 2022, after falling asleep.
She was then charged with falsifying clinical records to suggest she had made the relevant clinical checks and offered them water when in fact, she'd been asleep.
The final charge was that her actions in falsifying the records were dishonest and misleading.
At the start of the hearing, Ms Hickman admitted all of the charges.
As the charges had been admitted, the Committee considered whether they amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In doing so it noted sections of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses that relate to making animal health and welfare a veterinary nurse’s primary concern, the need to provide veterinary nursing care that is appropriate and adequate, and the need to keep clear, accurate and detailed clinical and client records.
Dr Kathryn Peaty MRCVS, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee was in no doubt that the respondent’s failure to monitor properly three patients in an overnight ward in a hospital and the subsequent creation of false records to suggest that appropriate monitoring had taken place amounts to disgraceful conduct in a professional respect.”
Having found serious professional misconduct, the Committee then went on to consider the most appropriate sanction, taking into account both aggravating and mitigating factors.
The Committee found that an adverse health condition had influenced the conduct that had led to the disciplinary hearing – including that she had unintentionally fallen asleep while she should have been monitoring the animals – and so considered this a mitigating factor.
Also, by way of mitigation, the Committee considered that Miss Hickman had fully appreciated the implications of her conduct and expressed remorse at the impact it could have on the public’s trust for the veterinary nursing profession.
It also took into account positive testimonials from current and previous employers, her hitherto unblemished career, and the fact that there was no longer any risk of repetition.
However, in terms of aggravating factors, the Committee took into account that it was a case involving dishonesty, and dishonesty which had not been admitted to the RCVS at an early stage.
In addition, it noted that the conduct involved a risk of injury to animals and a breach of trust towards the owners of those animals.
Dr Peaty added: “The Committee was satisfied that a significant period of suspension would properly reflect the gravity of the respondent’s disgraceful conduct, serve to maintain the reputation of the profession and promote and maintain proper standards of conduct.
"The Committee considered that a period of suspension of six months was sufficient to satisfy this public interest.”
Miss Hickman has 28 days from the sanction being announced to appeal the Committee’s decision.
www.rcvs.org.uk/disciplinary
The DC heard how, in December 2022, a labrador called Bella had been stolen from its owner.
That same month, someone who was involved in the theft presented Bella to Dr Kashiv, according to news reports telling him they'd taken the animal because it had been abused.
Dr Kashiv performed surgery to remove her microchip, so she could be re-homed without being traced.
Although there was no suggestion that Dr Khashiv had been involved in the theft, it was alleged that he knew the animal had been stolen.
In January 2024, after pleading guilty, Dr Kashiv was convicted of removing the microchip, contrary to section 5(3) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006, at Stevenage Magistrates’ Court.
He was sentenced to a community order with an unpaid work requirement of 50 hours to be completed within 12 months, and ordered to pay a surcharge to fund victim services of £114 and costs of £85.
Dr Khashiv faced four charges at the RCVS disciplinary hearing, the first being that his conviction rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon.
The second charge was that in July 2024, at Stevenage Magistrates’ Court, Dr Kashiv had been made subject to a 5-year Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) for failing to keep dogs he owned under control and failing to comply with previous orders.
The third charge was that Dr Kashiv’s conduct with regard to the microchip was dishonest, in that he removed it to conceal the labrador’s identity.
The final charge was that Dr Kashiv failed to keep adequate clinical records for the labrador and his conduct was thereby i) misleading and/or ii) dishonest.
From the outset, Dr Kashiv admitted charges one and two and some aspects of charge four.
However, he initially denied that his conduct was at any stage misleading or dishonest and did not accept that his conviction rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon or that the admitted charges amount to serious professional misconduct.
In a later submission, Dr Kashiv no longer disputed that his conviction rendered him unfit to practise, or that his behaviour in charges two, three and four amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee considered that in respect of his conviction, Dr Kashiv had breached paragraphs 1.1, 1.3, 6.1, 6.4 and 6.5 of the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons.
It then took into account mitigating and aggravating factors.
The Committee found no mitigating factors but found the following aggravating factors:
The Committee was satisfied that this conduct fell far below the standard expected of a registered veterinary surgeon and that this rendered him unfit to practise.
In deciding on whether his conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct, the Committee again took into account submissions made both by representatives for the College and for Dr Kashiv, as well as the fact that Dr Kashiv no longer disputed the assertion that his conduct amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee found that Dr Kashiv had breached paragraphs 2.4, 2.5, 6.1, 6.4 and 6.5 of the Code in relation to charges two, three and four.
The Committee again did not find any mitigating factors but found the following aggravating factors:
With regards to charges three and four, Dr Kashiv performed a prohibited procedure on a labrador which was unjustified and resulted in a criminal conviction.
The Committee found that in carrying out the procedure he had acted dishonestly – he had removed the chip in order to conceal the identity of a pet that he knew had been taken from its home.
The dishonesty with regards to not completing any formal clinical records also related directly to his practice as a veterinary surgeon, as part of a cover-up so that nobody would know what had happened to the labrador at the practice.
The Committee was satisfied that Dr Kashiv’s conduct in relation to the labrador amounted to serious professional misconduct.
On deciding on a sanction, the Committee took into account all evidence and documents provided as well as testimonials together with submissions made on behalf of Dr Kashiv and matters of personal mitigation.
In terms of aggravating factors, it found all those already listed in findings for fitness to practise and serious professional misconduct, as well as previous convictions and adverse findings of the College and the fact that Dr Kashiv showed limited insight into his actions.
In terms of mitigating factors, it considered:
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee was of the view that the nature and seriousness of Dr Kashiv’s behaviour, which led to the conviction, was fundamentally incompatible with being registered as a veterinary surgeon.”
He added: “In light of these conclusions, the Committee decided that the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case was removal from the Register.
"This would not be the case if the Committee were considering the CBO matter alone, when a lesser sanction would have been appropriate.
"However, his actions with regard to the labrador, his limited insight and the fear that he could repeat such behaviour meant that removal was necessary in this case.
“In reaching this decision the Committee recognised the negative impact this would have on Dr Kashiv.
"The Committee had considered with great care all the mitigating factors and the positive statements made about him in the testimonials provided.
"However, the need to protect animal welfare, the reputation of the profession and thus the wider public interest, outweighed Dr Kashiv’s interests and the Committee concluded that removal was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15069309/Vegan-vet-Animal-Rebellion-activist-steal-pet-dog.html
The College says the course breaks down the supporting guidance to the Code of Professional Conduct into clear, practical advice that can be easily applied in daily practice.
It covers areas such as advertising, endorsing products and services, and using social media in a way that upholds professional standards, including:
The course begins with a short test to assess your current understanding of the topic, followed by three bite-sized modules and a final reflection section.
The course takes about an hour to complete and counts towards your CPD requirements.
With four sessions having taken place throughout May and June this year, the autumn sessions will focus on:
RCVS Director for the Advancement of the Professions, Angharad Belcher (pictured), said: “We recognise that change cannot happen without collaboration – no one organisation can solve as complicated and multi-factorial an issue as the workforce challenge on their own.
"We hope to welcome you to these sessions to share your insights and contribute to the ongoing conversation around this important topic."
The webinars are free, last an hour and 15 minutes and count as CPD.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/events/workforce-ambitions-sessions/
Dr De Armas Jimenez faced four charges against him, that:
On or around 22 April 2022 or 23 April 2022, in relation to a cat, he a) failed to obtain informed consent to sedate/anaesthetise the cat and/or did so without the owner’s consent (admitted), b) failed to take adequate steps when the cat required emergency attention (admitted), and c) failed to provide adequate details to the owner following the cat’s death (admitted).
On or around 22 April 2022 or 23 April 2022, he a) failed to record adequate clinical record details of the cat’s sedation/anaesthetic (admitted), b) recorded when the cat became cyanotic, that i) a tube had been passed in order to intubate (proved not to have occured) and ii) chest compressions had been given when this was not the case (not proved that it did not happen), and c) failed to make adequate clinical records in relation to differential diagnoses and proposed treatment plan (not proved).
That his conduct in relation to charge 2(a) and/or 2(b) was a) dishonest and/or b) misleading. (Admitted his conduct was both dishonest and misleading in relation to 2(a), and the Committee found proved that his conduct was dishonest and/or misleading in relation to 2(b)(i)).
Between 22 April 2022 and 23 April 2022, he failed to have any professional indemnity insurance in place (admitted).
Dr De Armas Jimenez admitted most of the charges again him.
The Committee found that his actions had breached a number of sections of the RCVS Code of Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons and amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In deciding on a sanction, the Committee took into account the aggravating factor that Dr De Armas Jimenez had caused actual harm to the animal.
Mitigating factors included that he had no previous disciplinary history, that he had been working for eight years as a veterinary surgeon in the UK without complaint, that he admitted most of the charges, that he'd made subsequent efforts to avoid repetition by no longer working night shifts or locuming, and finally that the incident related to one animal.
The Committee also noted that he'd shown appreciable insight and remorse, and took into account positive character references.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Whilst the misconduct in this case involved breaches of the RCVS Code, caused serious harm to both the cat and the client, and involved dishonesty which was concealed, the Committee decided that a lengthy suspension could take account of the seriousness of these matters and meet the wider public interest.”
He added: “In deciding on this period of suspension, the Committee took into account both mitigating and aggravating factors and the mitigation Dr De Armas Jimenez had put before it.
"It was not persuaded that a shorter period of suspension would properly reflect the seriousness of the proven misconduct.
"It concluded that this period of suspension had a deterrent effect and sent a signal as to how serious the Committee had found the misconduct to be.
"It also took into account Dr De Armas Jimenez’s remorse and insight.
“However, in order that the wider public interest was upheld and to reflect the Committee’s view regarding the seriousness of the proven misconduct, the Committee determined that the proportionate sanction and period of suspension should be a suspension order of eight months.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings/
The College wants more vets to come and share their ideas and insights into how the role of the veterinary nurse can be strengthened within the team, particularly in the light of data gathered from the RCVS’s 2024 VN Vision workshops which showed that many nurses believe their skills and capabilities, and the scope of tasks that can be performed within the current legal framework, are not fully used.
The first two events, in South Wales and Belfast, were well-attended by veterinary nurses, but only about 10% of attendees were vets who arguably have the most to gain by sharing ways of enabling nurses to perform a more central role and relieve some of their workload.
There are four more events coming up:
RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing, Julie Dugmore, said: “Last year’s VN Vision events focused specifically on veterinary nurses and resulted in some truly inspiring insights. Now, in this new series of events, we’re taking the next step, and need to get the wider practice team involved in order to understand how strengthening the VN role will feed into team dynamics and the professions as a whole.
“Our latest VN Vision events will play a key role in helping us to define long term goals, identify the practical steps needed to achieve them, and determine how success will be measured and shared with the wider public. To make it happen, we need voices from vets, practice managers, support staff, and VNs alike.”
The VN Vision workshops are free to attend, informal, informative and made up of small groups.
Supper will also be provided for the evening sessions, and lunch for the London day workshops.
https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/vet-nursing-vision-events-3253639
The RCVS Regional Question Time sessions give members of the profession a chance to learn about College projects and initiatives directly from the RCVS Officer team, Council members, and senior staff.
There is also an opportunity for open dialogue, where any queries can be raised with the RCVS, in a friendly, informal environment.
Both events will begin with supper and drinks at 6.30pm.
The College says discussion topics will be audience-led but are likely to cover current important topics including workforce issues, the benefits of a new Veterinary Surgeons Act, extra-mural studies (EMS), governance reform, the impact of VetGDP, the Practice Standards Scheme (PSS), and the Competition and Markets Authority investigation.
RCVS President, Tim Parkin, said: “It’s an exciting time for me as I embark on my presidential year, and I’m truly looking forward to engaging with members of our wonderful professions about the issues that matter most to them.
“As I mentioned previously at Royal College Day, we’re currently facing some significant and ongoing challenges – from the CMA investigation and workforce issues, to the critical need for a new Veterinary Surgeons Act.
“Now more than ever, it's essential that we recognise the need for change and commit to engaging with one another in a clear, compassionate, and respectful way.
"Please do come and speak with us at either event – meaningful change cannot happen in silos; we must work together to make progress and your input is key.”
https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/rcvs-question-time-4465993
Mr Seymour-Hamilton was originally struck off in 1994 after his Kent practice was found to be unhygienic and unsterile with poor record keeping.
However, he has always maintained that the reason his premises were unhygienic and unsterile was because they were closed.
As in previous applications, he said his reason for applying for restoration was to help him gain recognition for his alleged herbal and natural remedy discoveries and that he had no intention of going back into general practice.
As with previous applications, the Committee said that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has shown no real insight into the conduct underlying the original findings and nor has he shown insight into matters identified by previous restoration hearings.
The Committee also considered that Mr Seymour-Hamilton has been off the Register for some 31 years and would therefore need prolonged, intensive, formal retraining to ensure that he was now fit to practise, without which he might pose a risk to animal welfare.
Mr Seymour-Hamilton's case was not helped by the fact that he indicated that he had practised veterinary surgery while off the Register – including conducting two spay procedures in Calais, France, and treating two of his own dogs for cancer.
He also referred to having cultured faecal bacteria in a witness’ kitchen.
The Committee felt it was concerning that Mr Seymour-Hamilton thought these things were compatible with being on the Register and upholding the professional standards expected of a veterinary surgeon.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “Mr Seymour-Hamilton still lacks an understanding as to why he has not been restored in the past.
"Apart from additional CPD, he has not set about effectively addressing any of his shortcomings.
"He relies passionately on his research, yet he does not support that research with any peer-reviewed publications, indeed all his attempts to gain recognition have been rebuffed.”
He added: “The Committee is firmly of the view that after such a prolonged period of failing to be reinstated as a veterinary surgeon, Mr Seymour-Hamilton has to face the reality that his continued applications, taking up time, resources and expense (which is ultimately borne by all those veterinary surgeons who are on the Register), are vexatious and ultimately unlikely to succeed.
“Whilst the College cannot prevent him from continuing to apply to be restored to the Register, Mr Seymour-Hamilton should by now realise that this is not a good use of the College’s finite resources.
"He is now 86 years old and has not practised for over thirty years and in fact has now been off the Register for longer than he was on it.
"This is now the twelfth time he has been found to be not fit to be restored to the Register.
"The Committee hopes Mr Seymour-Hamilton will now take time seriously to reflect and take into account the impact to all concerned of his continued applications, before deciding to submit any more.”
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/concerns/disciplinary-hearings
Mr Ng faced seven charges:
Mr Ng admitted some aspects of the charges against him, including that he had deleted two patient records and that this was dishonest and misleading.
The Committee then determined the facts of the rest of the charges after hearing evidence from witnesses and Mr Ng himself, as well as expert witnesses.
Having considered all the evidence, it determined which elements of the charges were proved, and which were not.
The Committee then considered whether the admitted and charges found proved amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In doing so it considered that the charges against Mr Ng fell into three broad categories – deficiencies in clinical care, deficiencies in record keeping, and dishonesty.
In respect of all three, it found the admitted and charges found proved amounted to serious professional misconduct.
In terms of aggravating factors, the Committee found that Mr Ng’s conduct had directly caused harm to animals and also created risk of further harm, and noted that there were three instances of dishonesty.
Paul Morris, chairing the Disciplinary Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee noted that there were three instances of dishonest behaviour in relation to clinical records.
"The amendment of the clinical record in the labradoodle’s case was particularly serious.
"This alteration was made at a time when the respondent knew that the owner was dissatisfied with the treatment the dog had received and was complaining about the lack of therapeutic intervention.
"The alteration presented a false account of the owner’s attitude towards immediate therapeutic intervention.
"Conduct of this kind was liable to damage trust in the profession.”
In mitigation, the Committee took into account the sense of pressure Mr Ng felt following a financial dispute with his relative in respect of the veterinary practice, his long career as a veterinary surgeon and the high regard with which he was held by those who provided testimonials on his behalf.
The Committee acknowledged Mr Ng’s assertions that he now understood his failings and his expressions of remorse for the harm he had caused and that these indicated the beginnings of insight.
However, in respect of the clinical deficiencies, the Committee found that various aspects of Mr Ng’s approach to treating conditions such as diabetes and cherry eye were inadequate and out-of-date, and that there was little in his continuing professional development (CPD) record or his statements to suggest he had attempted to improve these deficiencies.
Ultimately, the Committee found that Mr Ng’s conduct was so serious that removal from the Register was the most appropriate sanction.
Paul Morris added: “The Committee has concluded that the respondent’s behaviour was fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon.
"In view of the nature and gravity of the Committee’s findings in this case, removal from the Register is necessary to ensure the protection of animals and the maintenance of public confidence in the profession and the regulatory process.”
The College points to data gathered from its 2024 VN Vision workshops which showed that many nurses believe their skills and capabilities, and the scope of tasks that can be performed within the current legal framework, are not being fully used.
This new project aims to gather insights and empower nurses to play a more central role in the sector by promoting greater involvement in:
Session dates, times and locations are as follows:
Julie Dugmore RVN, RCVS Director of Veterinary Nursing, said: “Informed by conversations with professionals across the sector and a deep understanding of current practice, this new project recognises that achieving meaningful change requires a fundamental cultural shift.
"Clear guidance, structured support and open dialogue will be key in empowering veterinary teams to adapt to a new way of working.
“An additional crucial focus will be on enhancing public understanding of the Registered Veterinary Nurse (RVN) role, alongside support for developing stronger interprofessional and public-facing communication.”
Jill Macdonald RVN, VN Futures Lead, added: “These interactive sessions will play an important role in this new branch of VN Vision work, helping to define long term goals, identify the practical steps needed to achieve them, and determine how success will be measured and shared with the wider public.
“We were honoured to have so many fantastic nurses come together last year to help shape the future of the profession, and we’re looking forward to many more engaging conversations with vet team members this time around.
"This is more than just a conversation though – it’s a national effort to strengthen the RVN role through collaboration, clarity and confidence.”
The ‘A vision or a necessity: strengthening the role of veterinary nurses in team-based veterinary healthcare’ workshops are open to all practice team members, including, but not limited to, veterinary nurses, veterinary surgeons, practice support staff, directors, managers, and practice owners.
Workshops will be informal, informative and made up of small groups.
Supper will also be provided.
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-views/publications/vn-vision-the-future-of-team-based-veterinary-healthcare/
Stephen was recognised for his services to veterinary education and animals in science.
He served as RCVS President from 2017 to 2018 and has been actively involved in the work of the College for many years, serving a total of 19 years as a Council member, both as a vet school-appointee and an elected member, before retiring in 2024.
During his time on Council, he led the Legislative Reform Working Group which developed the Legislative Reform Proposals, as well as the Graduate Outcomes Project, out of which the Veterinary Graduate Development Programme was developed.
Kulin was recognised for his services to animal health and international trade.
RCVS President, Linda Belton MRCVS, said: “Huge congratulations to both Professor May and Dr Patel on this outstanding achievement.
"Thank you both for your extraordinary contributions to the veterinary profession during your careers, for which I would like to extend my appreciation on behalf of everyone at the RCVS.
“I would also like to extend congratulations to all those mentioned in the King’s Birthday Honours List for contributions to the veterinary world, animal health and welfare, and to the One Health concept more generally.
"We could not do the work we do without vital stakeholder collaboration, and it is fantastic to see outstanding individuals in the field being recognised for all they have contributed to our society.”
Mr Kane was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months in September 2024.
He was also disqualified from driving for two years until he had passed an extended driving test, and was ordered to undertake 200 hours of unpaid work within 12 months, and to pay a victim surcharge of £187.
It was alleged that the conviction rendered Mr Kane unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
From the outset, Mr Kane admitted the facts contained in the charge, but did not accept that this rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
After the criminal proceedings, Mr Kane wrote to express his deepest regret for his actions and the pain and guilt they had caused, stating that there was not a single day that had passed that he had not thought about the family that was affected by his actions, and the lifelong consequences that they now face.
He went on to express that he understood that as a member of a trusted profession, his conduct must reflect not only his clinical competence, but also his integrity and accountability.
He also noted that he had sought to recognise and address the consequences of his actions and that he is determined to make a positive contribution to society and to the profession.
The Committee found the charge proved on the basis of Mr Kane’s admission and the Certificate of Conviction.
The Committee found a number of factors relevant to the case:
The question for the Committee was whether Mr Kane’s conviction of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, when put into proper context, rendered him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
This was not a conviction in any way linked to his practise and there was no suggestion that he represented any sort of a risk to animals in his care.
The Committee was not, therefore, concerned with any issues arising out of the need to protect animals, but rather with whether a finding of unfitness to practise was needed to uphold standards of conduct and behaviour in order to maintain public confidence in the profession.
Kathryn Peaty, Chair of the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee took into account the public interest which includes maintaining public confidence in the profession and the regulator and upholding proper standards in the profession.
"The public interest also includes allowing an otherwise competent veterinary nurse to continue in practice, where appropriate.
“Agreeing with the judge that this was indeed an exceptional case, the Committee did not consider that Mr Kane’s conduct was liable to have a seriously detrimental effect on the reputation of the profession and concluded that the public, in full knowledge of the circumstances of this particular case, would not expect a finding that the conviction renders him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
"Rather, the public would recognise that whilst the consequences were appalling and tragic for the family involved, in terms of Mr Kane’s culpability this was a momentary piece of dangerous driving, categorised by the judge as a ‘mistake’ rather than anything more blameworthy.
“The Committee therefore concluded that Mr Kane’s conviction does not render him unfit to practise as a veterinary nurse.
"This is not to in any way detract from the catastrophic consequences for the family, but rather is to reflect the context, exceptional circumstances and level of culpability in this case.”
For the research, Which? conducted an online poll of 1,009 pet owners who had had an issue with their vet in the past two years.
It also conducted qualitative interviews with 14 owners who had complained.
The most common reasons for complaint were:
Of the 1009 pet owners who had experienced some kind of problem with their vet, 57% did NOT make a complaint, 33% because they did not want to fall out with their vet.
Pet owners who wish to complain about veterinary services have three options: to complain directly to their practice, to use the voluntary Vet Client Mediation Service (VCMS), or to raise a 'concern' with the RCVS.
The Which? report found that of those who did complain to their practice, 35% were not happy with the outcome and 31% with the way it was handled.
Which? found that although the VCMS reported a high resolution rate of 84% in 2022-23, its interviewees had found it a bit hit or miss.
Finally, Which? found the process of complaining to the regulator flawed by the fact that the threshold for the College to progress a 'concern' is set so high, because College has no jurisdiction at a practice level, and because it has no sanctions to use in enforcing consumer law.
The report recommends that:
Full report: https://www.which.co.uk/policy-and-insight/article/complaints-and-redress-in-veterinary-services-a5z611X9tZzf
CommentI loved the regal response from the RCVS to The Guardian about the case studies in the Which? report: “the facts presented in the case studies do not completely align with those reported to us”.
That aside, surely the big issue here is not so much that consumers have little way to complain effectively.
That is important, of course, but isn't it more important to consider what they are complaining about, which in the main is MONEY.
Driven by the advances in veterinary medicine, the innate desire of vets to provide the best possible care, anthropomorphising pet owners saying they want 'the best' for their fur baby (without necessarily having the wherewithal), corporatisation and society's changing expectations about working conditions, prices have been going up at a rate far outstripping inflation.
Increasing prices have of course been accompanied by an increase the standards of care and the range of clinical equipment.
But the question everyone must ask is at what point the cost of veterinary care for a dog outstrips the benefits of owning one?
These complaints are the canary in the coalmine.
The theme for the symposium this year is ‘Advancing veterinary mental health research: learning from the past, considering the present, and looking to the future’.
The day will consist of a variety of oral presentations and poster presentations, and there will be a number of exhibitors, including charitable organisations and wider animal health and welfare organisations.
The College is inviting all those interested in the field of veterinary mental health to attend the day.
RCVS Council member and Chair of the Mind Matters Initiative, Dr Louise Allum, said: “Our symposium presents a fantastic opportunity for knowledge exchange in the veterinary mental health sphere so that, together, we can continue to foster a compassionate environment and build a solid evidence-base for veterinary mental health research to grow and evolve.
“This is an inclusive event open to all with an interest in veterinary mental health including vets, nurses, students, practice managers, academics, healthcare professionals, policy makers, mental health advocates and everyone in between.”
MMI Lead Rapinder Newton added: “We have come a long way in developing our understanding of mental health in veterinary professionals over the past ten years but still have a way to go.
“Only through continued collaboration with mental health researchers, and learning from other allied professions, can we efficiently work towards our shared goal of enhancing mental health and support within the veterinary professions.
“This is why events such as our symposium are so important.
"Veterinary mental health is a small but growing field. Creating environments for open discussion and networking are key to advancing our understanding of where the challenges lie.
"By extension, this also plays an invaluable role in learning how research can be applied in a practical manner to help improve the lives of veterinary professionals which, ultimately, aids in upholding animal health and welfare too.”
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/mind-matters-initiative-research-symposium-2025-tickets-1247144485729
The six-floor building, which the College bought for £22.3m in 2022, was originally a warehouse.
Over the years it has been home to a range of businesses from leather manufacturers and papers makers to lithographic plate makers and shoe upping manufacturers, before becoming an office space.
The building remained tenanted until 2024, when £5.8m worth of renovation work to convert the building into a space suitable for a royal college began.
In addition to the working areas for RCVS and RCVS Knowledge staff, the building also has:
RCVS CEO, Lizzie Lockett, said: “After a few years in a rented co-working office space, we’re delighted to have moved into our new home, designed not only to meet the needs of College staff, but to support the broader ambitions of the RCVS as a whole.
“Our new strategic plan has collaboration at its heart – the idea of being stronger through working together – and our new building will help us to achieve that.
“Whether attending events, exploring RCVS Knowledge’s archives, using the members' area and meeting rooms, or benefitting from the outputs that the new space enables, the building has been developed with members and associates as a central focus.”
RCVS President, Linda Belton, added: "It’s great to see what’s been achieved through this project and my thanks go to the team who have managed the refurbishment and move.
“The new premises are equipped to ensure that the voice of the veterinary professions remains integral in assuring animal health, welfare, and public health in the UK, allowing for those all-important stakeholder conversations essential to setting, upholding and advancing veterinary standards.
“We look forward to welcoming members, associates, students and stakeholders alike in the coming months and years.”
Mr Wood faced three charges, all relating to allegations of misconduct over a laboratory test for an alpaca while he was working at a practice in South Oxfordshire.
The charges alleged that in September 2023, Mr Wood told the alpaca’s owner that it had tested positive for Johne’s disease when in fact, the animal had not been tested.
He then allegedly sent a letter confirming a positive test result for the test that had not taken place, and then created a false test result report in the name of a veterinary surgeon colleague and sent it to another colleague by email.
He later told the alpaca's owner that he had given her the wrong result by mistake and that the test result was actually negative.
Then in October 2023, he emailed the laboratory saying that a member of his practice’s administrative staff had written the false report.
In November he told the managing partner of his then employer on three occasions that he was investigating the false report in order to find out who sent it.
Finally, he sent a misleading and dishonest email to a veterinary surgeon colleague falsely indicating that a member of the practice’s staff had manufactured the false report, when that was not the case.
At the outset of the hearing Mr Wood admitted the facts of all the allegations against him.
Having found the facts proven, the Committee found that the charges amounted to serious professional misconduct, something which Mr Wood himself also admitted.
The Committee identified a number of aggravating factors in Mr Woods' conduct, including his lack of honesty, probity and integrity, the fact the conduct was premeditated, that it involved a breach of the client’s trust, the abuse of his professional position, the fact the conduct was sustained and repeated over a period of time, and that his conduct contravened advice given by the RCVS.
The mitigating factors included positive testimonials from professional former colleagues and client farmers, the fact that he had engaged in some remediation in order to avoid repeating the dishonest behaviour, and that he showed significant insight into his misconduct.
Dr Neil Slater MRCVS, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “The Committee recognised that the serious repeated dishonesty, which was to conceal wrongdoing, made the respondent’s misconduct particularly serious.
“It therefore gave consideration as to whether his conduct was fundamentally incompatible with being a veterinary surgeon and whether removal was the only appropriate and proportionate sanction in this case.
“The Committee considered that this was a particularly difficult case to reconcile, as, on the one hand the misconduct was so serious whereas on the other hand, the respondent had demonstrated significant insight; the risk of repetition was low; the evidence of his professional achievements was strong and the testimonials from client farmers and professional colleagues were impressive.”
He added: “The Committee considers that suspension is sufficient in the circumstances of this case to satisfy public confidence in the profession and to uphold proper professional standards of conduct and behaviour.
"The Committee therefore imposes a suspension of 18 months on the respondent.
"In determining this length, the Committee considered that this was the least period necessary in order to meet the significant public interest considerations in this case.”
Underlying the strategic plan are what the College says are its four updated values of compassion, collaboration, clarity and courage.
The plan lays out four strategic ambitions, each focused on one of its stakeholder groups, each one under the banner of 'Stronger Together'.
Veterinary professionals: "The RCVS will help veterinary professionals meet high standards and champion accessible, team-based veterinary care, delivered in settings that support professional autonomy and leadership."
This includes reviewing the Code of Professional Conduct and supporting guidance, achieving new veterinary legislation and ensuring that educational standards and career pathways meet the diverse needs of society.
Animal owners and keepers: "The RCVS will support animal health and welfare and public health by enabling access to veterinary care informed by the needs of consumers and service users."
This includes supporting and informing the public in how to get the best from veterinary professionals, with increased transparency, agency and choice.
Society at large: "The RCVS will champion the role that veterinary professionals play in One Health and public health, take a leadership role on environmental sustainability and biodiversity, and continue to look at how it can play a role in the global veterinary professions."
This includes leading the conversation on issues such as the cost of veterinary care, building enthusiasm for veterinary work in the minds of the next generation of potential professionals and ensuring veterinary professionals responsible for public health are well supported with robust standards and safeguards.
Staff team and governance: "The RCVS will attract and retain the diversity of talent and skills to deliver what’s needed now and anticipate what might be next and build a culture that allows people to thrive."
This includes developing an infrastructure for success, including the new RCVS headquarters, and underpinning structures for finance, communications and digital, creating a working culture with sound values and supportive management.
Lizzie Lockett, RCVS Chief Executive Officer, said: “The overall theme of the plan recognises that there are many other individuals and organisations that have a stake in our mission to inspire confidence in veterinary care and protect the public interest by ensuring animal health and welfare, and public health, are advanced through thriving world-class veterinary professions.
“This is where the ‘stronger together’ comes in, recognising that, in our role as a royal college that regulates, we are very well placed to bring people and organisations together to meet our common purpose of improved animal health and welfare and public health in a collaborative, proactive way.”
www.rcvs.org.uk/strategy25
Mr Georgescu faced three sets of charges:
The first was that in April 2024 at Newcastle Magistrates’ Court, he pleaded guilty to driving a car when the proportion of the controlled substance Benzoylecgonine (the main metabolite of cocaine) exceeded the specified limit contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988 and the Road Traffic Offenders Act.
He was disqualified from driving for 20 months, fined £634, ordered to pay £254 victim surcharge and £150 costs.
The second and third charges were that he was misleading and/or dishonest with the RCVS when he was asked to provide information about the circumstances leading to his conviction.
In correspondence with the College, he claimed that the incident happened on his day off, when he was in fact due to work that day.
He also submitted – or allowed to be submitted – a false staff rota for the day of his arrest.
The Disciplinary Committee found the charges against Mr Georgescu proven on the basis of the certificate of conviction and his admission, prior to the hearing, that he had given false information.
The Committee then considered whether the three charges amounted to serious professional misconduct.
The Committee considered the fact that Mr Georgescu was driving, and intending to work, while he was seven times over the prescribed proportion of Benzoylecgonine allowed to be in in his bloodstream.
Paul Morris, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said: “With regard to the impact this conduct would have on right thinking members of the public, Dr Georgescu himself said, when cross examined, that were he standing in the shoes of an owner of an animal he was going to treat that day with the knowledge that he had in his blood more than 7 times the prescribed limit of a prohibited drug he “would not be comfortable for sure” and would cause such persons to “lose trust”.
“Having regard to the above facts and matters the Committee has no hesitation in concluding that the facts relevant to his commission of the offence in Charge 1 were so serious and presented such prospective risks to other road users that it renders the respondent unfit to practise as a veterinary surgeon.”
Charges 2 and 3 were considered together, with the Committee again finding serious professional misconduct on the basis that Mr Georgescu had set out to lie to the RCVS and had continued and repeated the lie for a period of six months.
The Committee identified a number of aggravating features in his conduct including the fact it was premeditated, entailed sustained and repeated dishonesty, involved wilful disregard for the role of the RCVS as the veterinary regulator and that admissions were only made when he realised he couldn’t sustain his falsehoods any longer.
Finally, having found that all charges were proven and amounted to serious professional misconduct, the Committee decided that suspending Mr Georgescu from the Register of Veterinary Surgeons would be adequate to protect the welfare of animals, maintain public confidence in the profession, and declare and uphold proper standards of conduct.
Paul Morris added: “The misconduct of the respondent is serious but his misconduct falls short of being fundamentally incompatible with remaining on the Register.
"He does have insight into the seriousness of his misconduct and there is, in the judgement of the Committee, no significant risk of repeat misleading behaviour.
"The Committee also considers that the respondent will be fit to return to practice after the period of suspension in question.
“The Committee did consider striking the respondent from the Register but determined that this sanction would be unduly punitive and deprive the public and the profession of an otherwise competent veterinary surgeon.
“The Committee has reflected carefully on the question of how long the period of suspension should be and has determined that it should be a period which is not so long that it will result in the loss of the respondent to the profession which he professes to love and in which his referees assert he is a capable and caring veterinary surgeon.”
The VetCompass database now holds millions of anonymised veterinary clinical records collected from primary practices and referral centres across the UK.
The records allow researchers to investigate a range and frequency of companion animal health problems and identify important risk factors for the most common disorders.
This research can then be used by veterinary professionals in clinical practice to help improve education and outcomes related to animal welfare.
Dan’s nomination included recognition for VetCompass operating under non-profit and open-access principles and embedding mandatory welfare pathways into all studies.
VetCompass was also recognised for having supported more than 140 research papers supporting broad welfare initiatives spanning breed-related health, extreme conformations, welfare scoring, specific disorders, oncology, disease surveillance, prescribing practices, and more.
Dan said: “I am truly humbled to receive this recognition from the RCVS.
"When I moved from clinical practice to the RVC 15 years ago to develop VetCompass as my PhD project, I could only dream of the untapped potential for practising veterinary surgeons and veterinary nurses to contribute to cutting edge science and welfare.
"And now the amazing VetCompass team at the RVC have made that aspiration to redefine the clinical evidence base on companion animal welfare a reality.
"I now need to reset even higher animal welfare dreams for the next 15 years.”
https://www.rvc.ac.uk/vetcompass/about/overview
The advice in the new help section has been designed to highlight the shared responsibilities of animal owners and their vet teams, and to support practices by giving this advice for pet owners in a clear and easy-to-read way.
It explains what pet owners can expect from their vet team - and what is expected of them - throughout the different stages of pet ownership.
The information is split into ten sections:
The content in the new resource was informed by the views of the RCVS’s Public Advisory Group (PAG), whose members comprise owners/keepers of companion animals, equine and production animals, as well as other users of veterinary services.
Veterinary surgeon and Chair of the RCVS PAG, Louise Allum MRCVS (pictured), said: "The PAG has performed an essential role in helping to inform the content creation for our animal owner help and advice resource, highlighting the need for greater transparency and support, particularly around veterinary fees, treatment options, and what to expect from vet practices.
"Veterinary professionals work tirelessly to provide the most appropriate care for their patients, and we want to support this by ensuring pet owners have access to clear, accessible information about their rights, responsibilities, and the role of veterinary teams to ensure that expectations are managed.
“We are calling upon veterinary professionals to share this resource with clients far and wide, to help owners understand more about veterinary practice and how they can build a successful partnership with their vet team, ultimately leading to better outcomes for pets, their owners and veterinary professionals alike."
The RCVS will be expanding its help and advice section to include further information for equine and livestock owners in due course.
www.rcvs.org.uk/owner-advice.