Nur Hotaki

Introduction

Dr Nur Hotaki is a London GP who founded and ran his own private cosmetic clinic and who has been struck off the medical register after a Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service panel found he pursued an improper sexual relationship with a patient he knew was vulnerable. The tribunal heard that Hotaki kissed the patient — identified only as Patient A to protect her anonymity — asked her to send him explicit images, slapped her bottom while saying words to the effect of “woo hoo,” texted her that “you really turn me on,” and offered what the panel found was sex framed as a “VIP treatment” at his Central London clinic. The MPTS, alerted to his conduct in late 2023, wrote to him telling him not to treat female patients unattended pending hearings; he continued to do so anyway, and was reported again. The tribunal concluded his misconduct was “deplorable,” that he had “taken advantage” of a patient with significant mental health difficulties, and that erasure was the only proportionate outcome.

Background Information

Hotaki qualified as a GP in July 2012 and worked one or two days a week as a locum GP while building a private practice. In September 2019 he set up Hotaki Cosmetic Dermatology in Central London as founder and sole owner — a clinic where he controlled the premises, the bookings, and the treatment room, with no hospital hierarchy above him. Patient A first attended the clinic in 2021, and the pair subsequently entered into an improper relationship at some point thereafter, the tribunal found. She was married and had a family. She suffered significant mental health difficulties for which she was taking medication — difficulties the tribunal found Hotaki was fully aware of. Exact dates were removed from the MPTS judgment to protect Patient A’s anonymity.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Struck off by the medical tribunal. The MPTS found Hotaki’s sexual misconduct toward a vulnerable patient proved and ruled that erasure from the medical register was the only proportionate outcome.

The tribunal was read emails Hotaki wrote to Patient A. One said: “I don’t want to recommend any other clinics to look after you the way I was and it does hurt and upset me for you to attend any other clinic…I must also say that I do miss you.” Another read: “I am so happy you are coming back. Let me know please what treatments you wanted to have apart from your VIP treatment so I can prepare everything. We will need plenty of time to do everything.” The “VIP treatment” was, in one sense, a real service Hotaki offered high-end clients — but Patient A told the tribunal that in her case, “he was offering to have sex with me.” Hotaki argued otherwise; the panel found she was telling the truth. He described her to her face as a “woman of class,” telling her: “I like the way you dress, because you are a woman of class.”

The tribunal also found proved allegations about the messages and the physical conduct. The two exchanged explicit messages for a period, and Hotaki — in an effort to hide the conduct — texted her: “Make sure you delete these messages.” He sent her messages saying “you really turn me on” and “I am really looking forward to seeing you again,” and the panel found he sent messages asking if she liked anal sex and discussing masturbation and erections. At an appointment in 2023 he kissed her “passionately on the lips” and later gave her a “peck on the lips” while she was on the treatment couch; he claimed she had initiated the kisses, but the tribunal found it likely he reciprocated. On another occasion he “slapped her bottom quite hard and said words akin to ‘woo hoo’ as he did so” — an account the tribunal said had “the ring of truth.”

When the MPTS was alerted and wrote to Hotaki in November 2023 telling him that, pending official hearings, he must not treat female patients unattended, he continued to do so — conduct that was itself reported to the regulator. The panel concluded that Hotaki “had failed to make the care of Patient A his first concern and had instead sought a sexual relationship with her,” that his misconduct “fell seriously below the standards expected of a registrant,” that fellow practitioners would find it “deplorable,” and that he had taken advantage of a vulnerability he knew about. It was “satisfied that erasure is the only proportionate outcome in this case.”

Public Reaction and Consequences

The Independent’s report of the case recorded the tribunal’s findings and Hotaki’s own words in his defence — his denial of the “VIP treatment” meaning sex, his claim the patient initiated the kisses — against the panel’s conclusions rejecting both. The regulator’s sanctions ladder in the case had two rungs: first the November 2023 interim instruction not to treat female patients unattended, which he breached; then erasure, the permanent sanction, imposed after the hearings. The case is part of a run of doctor-striking-off decisions reported in November 2026, and its published judgment rests on the tribunal’s explicit finding that the patient’s mental-health vulnerability was known to Hotaki and exploited by him.

Current Status

Hotaki has been erased from the medical register, ending both his GP practice and his ownership role at Hotaki Cosmetic Dermatology in any licensed capacity. The tribunal’s findings — the sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient, the explicit messages, the deletion instruction, the kisses, the physical misconduct, and the breach of the interim order — stand as the regulator’s public account of his conduct. No appeal against erasure was reported in the coverage.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Hotaki spent a decade building the two-part career the tribunal has now closed: NHS locum GP work and the private cosmetic clinic he founded in 2019. Erasure removes him from the register that both parts of that career require, and the published judgment — quoting his own messages, including the instruction to delete them — documents an attempt to conceal the relationship once the regulator appeared. The panel’s findings that he breached the interim order by continuing to treat female patients unattended converted a suspensible misconduct case into one the tribunal concluded could end only with erasure. His name is now attached to a public finding that he sought a sexual relationship with a patient he knew was taking medication for significant mental health difficulties.

Sources

• The Independent, “GP slapped vulnerable patient’s bottom ‘while saying woo hoo’.” source