Sandeep Selvaraj
Introduction
Sandeep Selvaraj is a registered adult nurse who was suspended for twelve months by the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) on 14 August 2026, after a Fitness to Practise Committee panel found he had shown a lack of competence in medication administration, record keeping and wound care over about three years at Ulster Hospital — and had acted dishonestly on four occasions to conceal failures in patient care, including forging a colleague’s signature on a medication record. The panel found his fitness to practise impaired and imposed the suspension with a review before it ends .
Background Information
The competence allegations covered 5 January 2021 to 16 May 2024 — more than three years as a Band 5 nurse. Charge 1 alleged he failed to demonstrate the standards of knowledge, skills and judgment required to practise without supervision, including not recognising that 30ml of local anaesthetic had been drawn up, incorrectly documenting swab sizes, failing to administer medication, record fluid balances, complete patient notes or provide wound care appropriately on scheduled dates, completing flowcharts retrospectively, and inaccurately documenting a patient’s mobility .
The dishonesty allegations clustered around specific cover-ups: a painkiller that was never given but signed for, a patient’s deterioration score that went unescalated, skin checks recorded but not performed, and a training course claimed but never passed .
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated (regulatory). The findings below were made by an NMC panel on the balance of probabilities — a civil standard, not a criminal conviction. Several charges were admitted; the rest were found proved after evidence.
Charges 2 to 4 formed the forgery cluster: a failure to administer Tapentadol, then forging a colleague’s signature to state it had been administered, then denying the error to a colleague — dishonesty in seeking to cover up a failure to provide patient care. Further charges alleged failing to escalate a NEWS score of 5 — a deterioration score at which escalation is mandatory — stating a patient’s skin had been checked when it had not, recording paracetamol as administered at 14.00 when it had not been given and leaving it unsafely in the patient’s room, stating a resuscitation course had been passed when it had not, copying and pasting information into patient notes, and stating that analgesia had been offered and refused and that fluid output had been measured when neither had occurred, each with associated dishonesty charges .
The findings were extensive. Charges 1a, 1d, 1e, 1f, 1g, 1j, 2, 3a, 3b, 4 and 12 were proved by admission; charges 1c, 1i, 6 in part, 7, 8a, 8b, 9, 13a, 13b and 14 were found proved; charges 1b, 1h, 5, 10 and 11 were found not proved. The panel found the charge-1 facts amounted to a lack of competence — “an unacceptably low standard of professional performance across a fair sample of work over approximately three years” and across different clinical settings, despite prolonged supervision and capability processes .
The combination mattered to the outcome: competence failures alone, with supervision and engagement, often end in conditions of practice. Dishonesty that forges a colleague’s signature to hide a missed drug dose moves the case into suspension territory, because the record can no longer be trusted to show what actually happened to the patient .
Public Reaction and Consequences
The sanction is a twelve-month suspension with a review before it expires. The hearing itself was long — it began on 5 May 2026 and concluded on 14 August, more than three months — reflecting the number of charges spread across dozens of clinical incidents over three years.
The case appears in the NMC’s 2026 suspension list. No public statement from the Belfast trust or from Selvaraj appears in the fetched record beyond the determination; the visible consequences are the proved charge sheet and the suspension .
Current Status
Selvaraj is a suspended nurse. The twelve-month suspension was imposed on 14 August 2026, with a review scheduled before the order ends. His fitness to practise was found impaired on the combination of the competence findings — sustained under-supervised underperformance — and the four occasions of dishonesty the panel proved, including the forged signature. What the review will weigh is whether either half of the findings has been credibly addressed .
Impact on Their Career/Life
Three years into what should have been a supported early nursing career, Selvaraj leaves the register on suspension with the regulator finding he could not practise safely without supervision and then lied to hide it — the forged signature being the single act most likely to define his record.
The career math is stark. The competence findings alone were remediable; the panel said the panel process exists to supervise exactly that. But each dishonesty finding — the forged signature, the false resuscitation-course claim, the records of care never given — is the kind of finding that survives every future job application, because employers cannot verify honesty retroactively. Unless the review sees genuine, evidenced remediation, the twelve months is the pause before a final answer rather than the end of one .