Matthew Izett

Introduction

Matthew Izett is a radiographer whose name stood on the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) register under number RA65199. On 13 August 2026, at the close of a substantive hearing that had started on 4 August 2026 and ended on 13 August, a Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS) panel found his fitness to practise impaired and ordered him struck off the register. The charge before the panel was of “Attempting to film three colleagues changing without their knowledge on separate occasions in May 2021, June 2021 and June 2024, with sexual motivation”. The panel “found each alleged attempt and sexual motivation proved, assessing the evidence for each incident separately”, and ordered striking off, with a separate interim suspension covering the appeal period subject to a maximum of 18 months.

Background Information

The published record identifies Izett only as a radiographer; it does not name his employer, his employing trust, or the places where the three incidents happened. Each incident involved a colleague — Colleague A, Colleague B and Colleague C in the determination’s numbering — and the panel stressed that all three complainants had entered a space they believed to be private. The incidents were not one lapse but a pattern spread across more than three years, from May 2021 to June 2024. Before the substantive hearing the case already carried interim restrictions: an interim orders review on 29 January 2026, heard by the Conduct and Competence Committee, confirmed an interim suspension which the order section records as having been imposed on 31 January 2025. The determination sets out no allegation about his clinical treatment of patients; the case is entirely about his conduct towards colleagues.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated vs. alleged. The findings below come from an HCPTS panel determination, which decides allegations on the balance of probabilities. They are regulatory findings, not criminal convictions. There were no unproved or dismissed particulars in this case: the panel found each of the three attempts, and the sexual motivation attached to each, proved.

The panel found serious misconduct and “impairment on both personal and public components”. On insight it was blunt: “There was no demonstrated acceptance of the deliberate conduct, meaningful insight or remediation, and a significant repetition risk.”

Its aggravating factors chart the escalation. First, repetition: the behaviour “was repeated with regard to Colleague B a short time after Colleague A expressed concern, and repeated with Colleague C against a background of both Colleagues A and B having expressed disquiet”. Second, breach of professional boundaries: “All three of the complainants had gone into what they believed to be a private space in order to remove their clothing. To that extent they were vulnerable.” The panel acknowledged that the behaviour “was not predatory as defined in paragraph 110 of the Sanctions Policy”, but judged it predatory in that it was “premeditated and undertaken for his own sexual gratification”. Third, the sexual motivation itself. Fourth, actual harm to the complainants, each of whom was affected by his behaviour, alongside the potential for service-user harm identified in the panel’s impairment reasoning. The record states that the complainants went into those spaces to remove clothing, and that each was affected by what he did.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The published record contains no press coverage of the hearing and no public statements from Izett, the complainants or any employer — the determinations record the panel’s conclusions, not any surrounding response. The concrete consequences are the striking-off order itself and the interim suspension that accompanies the appeal period. MedicWatch, which maintains the practitioner-facing record of the decision, aggregates regulator outcomes and states it does not editorialise the regulator’s findings. Its summary records that the panel found serious misconduct and continuing impairment, “with no demonstrated insight or remediation and a significant risk of repetition”.

Current Status

Izett is struck off the HCPC register, the erasure having been decided on 13 August 2026. A separate interim suspension covers the appeal period and, if appealed, the appeal’s determination, for a maximum of 18 months — the record presents this as distinct from the striking-off order, which takes effect under the applicable appeal arrangements. The interim suspension long predated the substantive hearing: it was imposed on 31 January 2025 and confirmed at the 29 January 2026 interim order review before the Conduct and Competence Committee. His MedicWatch profile records his registration status as not yet verified and directs readers to the official HCPC register for current status. The published record shows no appeal.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Striking off ends Izett’s ability to practise as an HCPC-registered radiographer in the UK unless a future restoration application succeeds. The panel’s findings — three sexually motivated attempts to film colleagues changing, repeated after concerns were raised and again after disquiet was expressed, with no demonstrated acceptance of the deliberate conduct — record why it considered the risk of repetition significant. The case also shows how the process ran: colleagues’ concerns led to an interim suspension more than eighteen months before the substantive panel convened. The published record contains no information about his circumstances beyond the case, and nothing on this page should be read as going beyond it.

Sources

• *MedicWatch, “Radiographer ordered struck off over attempts to film colleagues changing”, 13 August 2026 — source
• *MedicWatch, “Matthew Izett — Interim restrictions imposed · 29 January 2026” — source
• *MedicWatch, “Matthew Izett — Struck off the register | Health and Care Professions Council RA65199” — source