Kim Louise Ramsay
Introduction
Kim Louise Ramsay was a registered nurse with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), registration number 15I1079S, whose fitness-to-practise case ended in erasure — being struck off the register — at the second review of her case on 7 April 2026. The underlying charges concerned failures to carry out observations and complete records after a resident fell at Crossgate Care Home in July 2019, and incomplete admission records for another resident in January 2019. A panel had found those charges proved by her own admission in 2022 and kept her on a conditions of practice order; the reviewing panel struck her off after finding she had not engaged with the process .
Background Information
Ramsay was registered with the NMC as a nurse, specialising in adult nursing, under PIN 15I1079S . She was employed at Crossgate Care Home, the setting for the events later put before the regulator . Beyond her name, registration number, specialty and the outcome of her case, the public pages published by MedicWatch contain little biographical detail: they record no date of birth, no training history and no earlier regulatory findings . Her profile page carried a “registration status not yet verified” notice and directed readers to the official NMC register for current registration details .
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated vs. alleged. The findings in this section come from a Nursing and Midwifery Council fitness-to-practise panel determination, which decided the charges on the balance of probabilities. Charges found proved are regulatory findings, not criminal convictions; Kim Louise Ramsay was found NOT proved on no charges — the substantive panel recorded every charge as proved on 1 April 2022, by her own admission. Panels do not convict; nothing here is a criminal record unless the determination itself states one.
The charges were brought while Ramsay was employed at Crossgate Care Home. Charges 1 to 9 concerned events on or around 26 and 27 July 2019, following a fall by a resident identified only as Resident A: that she failed to undertake or record neurological observations, including touch and pain response checks; failed to complete a Falls Risk Record, a Risk Assessment, an accident/incident form in multiple sections, a daily record of care and a separate Body Map / Evaluation of Injury form; and failed to notify Resident A’s family or next of kin. Charge 10 alleged that on 5 January 2019, when admitting Resident B to the home, she failed to complete admissions records, undertake adequate observations, or notify Resident B’s family or next of kin. By reason of the above, her fitness to practise was alleged to be impaired by reason of misconduct .
The case then moved through several regulatory stages. At the original substantive hearing on 1 April 2022, the panel found the charges proved by Ms Ramsay’s admission and imposed a conditions of practice order for 12 months. At a review on 23 March 2023, that order was extended for a further 36 months. The second review took place on 7 April 2026, with the hearing starting and the decision falling on the same day. The panel found that Ramsay had not engaged with the NMC, had not complied with the recommendations of the previous reviewing panel, and had provided no evidence of strengthened practice or developed insight. It determined that her fitness to practise remained impaired on grounds of public protection and public interest, concluded that no lesser sanction would be sufficient, and struck her name off the register .
MedicWatch’s plain-English summary of the determination reads: “The NMC found that Kim Ramsay, a registered nurse, did not carry out required observations or complete the proper records after a resident at her care home fell in July 2019, and did not complete admission records for another resident in January 2019. She had been subject to a conditions of practice order since 2022 but did not engage or show any retraining. At a review meeting, the panel decided to strike her name off the register.”
Public Reaction and Consequences
The consequence recorded in the determination was the loss of her registration: the panel directed erasure at a review stage because the charges had been admitted in 2022 and the question before it was her engagement with the order that followed. Neither the determination page nor the practitioner profile records any press coverage, public statements or online campaigns connected with the case; both confine themselves to the regulator’s findings and links to the underlying decision . MedicWatch, which describes itself as an independent record service aggregating publicly published decisions of UK healthcare regulators, added the case to its record on 25 April 2026 . The panel’s stated reasoning for the outcome was her non-engagement with the NMC, non-compliance with the previous reviewing panel’s recommendations, and the absence of any evidence of strengthened practice or developed insight .
Current Status
Ramsay’s most recent recorded outcome is erasure — struck off the register — decided on 7 April 2026 by the NMC at a review hearing that began the same day . MedicWatch’s explainer notes that the regulator directed removal from the register in this decision, that the decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions, and that readers should check the official NMC register for the practitioner’s current registration status . Her profile page carried the “registration status not yet verified” notice rather than a live confirmation of her position on the register .
Impact on Their Career/Life
The erasure removed Ramsay from the register on which her status as a registered nurse depended, closing a regulatory history that ran from the 2019 events through a 2022 conditions order, its 36-month extension, and the 2026 review. The determination records that she had been subject to the conditions of practice order since 2022 without engaging with the NMC or showing retraining, and the reviewing panel found no evidence of strengthened practice or developed insight . The determination page gives no information about her subsequent employment or personal circumstances, and the profile page records no later regulatory decisions .