Mohammed Qasim Hussain
Introduction
Mohammed Qasim Hussain is a paramedic who was given a two-month suspension from the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) register in July 2026, after a conduct panel found he had dishonestly submitted a mentorship portfolio containing a colleague’s forged signatures, a statement falsely attributed to her, and unverified practice hours. The panel found the dishonesty admitted and proved, but accepted significant insight and remediation, found no current personal impairment, imposed the suspension on public-interest grounds alone, and expressly refused an interim order. He is not the same person as Mukhtar Hussain, whose case appears on this site and is unrelated. At a review that September the panel found him no longer impaired and allowed the suspension to lapse on its own expiry. The decisions appear on MedicWatch, which lists the case among its suspensions records.
Background Information
Hussain was working as a paramedic while completing a mentorship qualification, and the dishonesty arose from coursework rather than front-line practice. To complete the portfolio he forged the signature of a colleague — referred to as Colleague A in the determination — on more than one document, attributed a statement to her that she had not written, and recorded practice hours that had not been verified. The panel found the fabrication spanned a few weeks rather than a single act, but accepted it was aimed at getting a piece of coursework completed, with no evidence of any generalised tendency to dishonesty. References to a second colleague were removed from the allegation where no evidence supported them.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Admitted portfolio forgery; impairment found on public interest only. Hussain admitted the amended facts and the dishonesty, and the panel found misconduct on that basis.
At the substantive hearing, held from 13 to 16 July 2026, the panel found the forged signatures, the falsely attributed statement and the unverified hours proved, and found the dishonesty amounted to misconduct. Its aggravating findings were that patient harm was possible had the forgeries not been detected, that a degree of thought and planning went into the acts, that Hussain denied his actions during his employer’s internal investigation before admitting them to the panel, and that he showed a lack of regard for the impact on Colleague A, whose identity his forgery borrowed. In mitigation the panel accepted that he had been open with it, had shown genuine remorse and good insight, had undertaken targeted learning and built a meaningful action plan, and that his health and his difficulty juggling coursework with work — a fear of falling behind — had contributed to his decision-making.
The panel found no current impairment on the personal component: it judged the risk of repetition low on the evidence of his insight and remediation. It nevertheless found the public interest required a regulatory mark, because forged mentorship documentation strikes at the verification system on which paramedic training depends, and imposed a two-month suspension to run from 13 August 2026. It expressly declined to impose any interim order, finding necessity not established.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The case is one of the shorter suspensions on the record for dishonesty, and the panel’s reasoning explains the difference: the dishonesty was admitted early at the hearing, was confined to coursework, caused no identified patient harm, and was met with demonstrable remediation — the combination its mitigating findings catalogue. What it could not overlook was the forgery itself and the initial denial during the internal investigation, which is why a suspension was imposed at all rather than a caution or conditions. The determination is published on MedicWatch’s public record of regulator decisions.
Current Status
At the review hearing on 14 September 2026, held before the two-month order had even begun to run, the panel found Hussain’s fitness to practise no longer impaired on either the personal or the public component. It accepted the evidence of insight, remediation, remorse and changed behaviour and directed that the suspension should be allowed to lapse on its own expiry on 13 October 2026, rather than being extended or converted into conditions. In practical terms Hussain’s restriction ended on 13 October 2026; the July determination and the September review both remain part of his permanent public record.
Impact on Their Career/Life
Hussain’s exclusion from registered practice lasted only the two-month term, and the September review’s no-impairment finding means he returns to practice with the regulator’s own conclusion that the risk has gone. The forged-signature finding nonetheless stays on the public register indefinitely, and any future employer conducting a routine registration check will find both determinations. The case illustrates the panel-side cost of getting ahead of that record: the order he received was short precisely because the insight was real, but the public record of the dishonesty is permanent.