Vet has disciplinary decision deferred in fraudulent insurance claim case

A vet who made fraudulent insurance claims worth more than £13,000 to fund a gambling addiction has had a decision on his future practice suspended for two years.

In an “exceptional” move, an RCVS disciplinary committee deferred sanctioning Donal Johnston in return for continuing efforts to seek support and repay the monies obtained.

It also warned he should be “under no illusions” about the likely consequences if those efforts do not continue.

The case relates to insurance claims made by Dr Johnston between February and April 2019, when he was working at a practice in Banbridge, County Down.

Falsified records

The claims were connected to four animals, two of which the practice had no record of and two others that were owned by its receptionist.

When the claims were made, monies were paid into an account controlled by Dr Johnston rather than into the practice’s own account.

The issue only came to light after the receptionist received written confirmation that the insurer for one of her animals had made a payment to the practice which the practice had not received.

Dr Johnston, who left the practice in April 2019, admitted four separate charges relating to the submission of the claims, and the preparation of false clinical records to support some of them, during an initial hearing in the spring.

Compulsive gambler

Dr Johnston also admitted that his behaviour had been dishonest and amounted to serious professional misconduct.

The case was then adjourned for reports which suggested Dr Johnston had been suffering from a “recognisable psychiatric compulsive addiction” when the insurance claims were made and they would not have been submitted otherwise.

The committee also heard Dr Johnston had completed two 12-week counselling programmes, was attending weekly support meetings and had not gambled at all since the summer of 2020.

The report said he had further repaid around half of the money obtained and expected to keep making regular repayments for the next six or seven years.

‘Exceptional course’

The committee said: “In reaching this conclusion, the committee wishes to make it clear that it has taken an exceptional course in this case.

“Ordinarily, conduct of the type covered by the charges which this respondent has accepted will merit the imposition of a sanction of removal from the register or a period of suspension from the register.”

The committee stressed it would reconvene if Dr Johnston failed to comply with the undertakings he had made, adding: “The respondent should be under no illusions about the almost inevitable course that would be taken in such an eventuality.”